colormyworld
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2005
- Messages
- 1,172
Danish Embassy in Lebanon Burned
- Thread starter AGBF
- Start date
- Status
Rank Amateur
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
- Messages
- 1,555
blodthecat
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2005
- Messages
- 805
I have to disagree with you on this.
There is absolutely NO excuse for violence.
My religion is personal to me. If someone condems it, then so what! It doesn''t give me the right to burn down a building.
I live in the UK, where there is a very large muslim community. This kind of ''extremist activity'' casts a shadow on Islam...which is sad because 99.9% of muslims are very religious peaceful people.
Just my 2c
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
You can say that again.
A good friend of mine is Muslim and you wouldn''t believe the crud he puts up with right here in the U.S.
He dislikes Hamas with a passion they have corrupted his religion.
The sad fact is that Europe has allowed large numbers of them to move there but when they get there they are held back and treated differently.
Even the hard working, honest ones who just want a better life have a very hard time of it because they are looked down on, and believe it or not that''s what the majority of them are.
In those situations you have a powder keg waiting to go off.
Intentionally smack them in the face and they will go off.
In my book there are 4 sure ways to start a fight:
insult someones mom
insult someones wife/husband
insult someones religion
mess with someones guns.
They knew what was going to happen when they published them.
It would anger millions of people and give support to the radicals, yet they did it anyway.
The results were expected and that is why it was done.
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Date: 2/6/2006 9:39:10 PM
Author: AGBF
In my opinion, a religious group can live and thrive despite insults. When they are to burned at the stake or sent off to gas chambers, maintaining their existence becomes harder.
Does that mean I would knowingly insult someone else''s religion? No. It is just that in the study of history one finds so much worse done by one religious group to another, that an insult pales in comparison.
Deborah
So your saying that its ok for people to be put down because of their religion because it makes them stronger and worse has happened in the past?
just to be clear and for the 20th time, I dont support a lot of the actions in the protest. But I understand why it happened. This is not as simple as they burned a building over cartoons
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,161
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
Date: 2/7/2006 10:19:44 AM
Author: AGBF
No.
Deb
honestly didn''t think you were :}
There is 2 sides to this story and I think people should think of both sides and not just say well what do you expect from #%#%@!%!%#!%!%%$#@^.
At one of our clients the other day someone who should know better said exactly that with a derogatory comment in place of the #%#%.
I just shook my head and said what would you think if someone said that about all Christians based on the ira bombers actions.
That went over like a ton of bricks of course.
cinnabar
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2004
- Messages
- 386
From wikipedia''s article on Saudi Arabia:
"The exit and entry visa cards ask applicants for their religious affiliation and officially bans entry to atheists, Israelis or anyone with an official stamp from the State of Israel."
"Islam itself derives from the same monotheistic roots as Judaism and Christianity, and traditionally Muslims generally regarded other religions with respect. Jews and Christians are considered fellow People of the Book. However the public practice of Christianity, the presence of churches and open possession of Christian religious materials are outlawed in Saudi Arabia."
Before they start complaining about intolerance towards them in the West, Muslims might look at their own side and see if any improvements could be made. There appears to be wiggle room if they''re serious about negotiating towards a more global acceptance of their culture in countries where they aren''t the majority.
"The exit and entry visa cards ask applicants for their religious affiliation and officially bans entry to atheists, Israelis or anyone with an official stamp from the State of Israel."
"Islam itself derives from the same monotheistic roots as Judaism and Christianity, and traditionally Muslims generally regarded other religions with respect. Jews and Christians are considered fellow People of the Book. However the public practice of Christianity, the presence of churches and open possession of Christian religious materials are outlawed in Saudi Arabia."
Before they start complaining about intolerance towards them in the West, Muslims might look at their own side and see if any improvements could be made. There appears to be wiggle room if they''re serious about negotiating towards a more global acceptance of their culture in countries where they aren''t the majority.
rainbowtrout
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 2,105
The Saudi''s are a special case.
They practice Wahabism which is basically the Puritan Southern Babtist sect of Islam....most of the Arabs I know mock them *endlessly* for being so uptight and then going to SE Asia to buy and abuse women before going back to the wives they keep cloistered in their homes.
Seriously, the chair of our Arabic department has been repeatedly asked to visit Saudi and speak (he is pretty well known) and he will not go bc he has two daughters and many women friends in the Muslim world and thinks the Saudi''s are preaching a corrupt version of Islam.
They practice Wahabism which is basically the Puritan Southern Babtist sect of Islam....most of the Arabs I know mock them *endlessly* for being so uptight and then going to SE Asia to buy and abuse women before going back to the wives they keep cloistered in their homes.
Seriously, the chair of our Arabic department has been repeatedly asked to visit Saudi and speak (he is pretty well known) and he will not go bc he has two daughters and many women friends in the Muslim world and thinks the Saudi''s are preaching a corrupt version of Islam.
rainbowtrout
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 2,105
RE: the visa stamp. This is pretty common is Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi, etc.
Israel is a complicated case, and I learn something more about how screwed up it is the longer I study the Middle East and live with an observant Jew whose cousin died in a suicide bombing....
What the Palenstinians are doing they are doing because they are hungry, none of the Arab countries would take them in when they needed them, and because Britain royally f*&$#ed up when it handled Palestine. they promised both sides the land. To many people in the Middle East, they see Israel as a bunch of Westerners who flooded their land, settled it, and then Europe announced that these people had a RIGHT to what had previously been the Palestinian''s land...
And seriously, don''t give me the "turning the desert green" shit or the arguement that the Israelis "took a land with no people for a people without a land." There WERE people, and they were not farmers for a damn good reason. There is not enough WATER. The Israelis have drained the water table in the region almost dry and in the next forty years will have to deal with the reprecussions of "turning the desert green" when there was a REASON pastoralism had worked so well on that land even to the time of their own Hebrew ancestors (archeological evidence indicated they were goatherders, etc)
what people forget is that prior to the creation of Israel the Arab world was THE place for Jews to live. They were among the most tolerant people and had strong ties to the Jewish community. Sadly this has all changed. But there was a time when anti-Semisitsm was not rife in the Muslim community.
On the other hand, I cannot support the violence and anti-Semitism against Israel. Israel is there now, however Britain screwed up, and they are there to stay. After WWII the European countries and America were too lily-white to take the refugees in so it was OK to offload them on the MIddle East...in the same way the Arab countries refused to take in the Palestinian refugees.
It has become a way for the Muslim community to avoid fixing their own problems--it is always "the Jews fault." This happened in Jordan recently--something was bombed by Islamic fundamentalists and the Jordanians decided it muse have been an Israeli plot. The governments are so deep in denial they can''t see daylight.
Israel is a complicated case, and I learn something more about how screwed up it is the longer I study the Middle East and live with an observant Jew whose cousin died in a suicide bombing....
What the Palenstinians are doing they are doing because they are hungry, none of the Arab countries would take them in when they needed them, and because Britain royally f*&$#ed up when it handled Palestine. they promised both sides the land. To many people in the Middle East, they see Israel as a bunch of Westerners who flooded their land, settled it, and then Europe announced that these people had a RIGHT to what had previously been the Palestinian''s land...
And seriously, don''t give me the "turning the desert green" shit or the arguement that the Israelis "took a land with no people for a people without a land." There WERE people, and they were not farmers for a damn good reason. There is not enough WATER. The Israelis have drained the water table in the region almost dry and in the next forty years will have to deal with the reprecussions of "turning the desert green" when there was a REASON pastoralism had worked so well on that land even to the time of their own Hebrew ancestors (archeological evidence indicated they were goatherders, etc)
what people forget is that prior to the creation of Israel the Arab world was THE place for Jews to live. They were among the most tolerant people and had strong ties to the Jewish community. Sadly this has all changed. But there was a time when anti-Semisitsm was not rife in the Muslim community.
On the other hand, I cannot support the violence and anti-Semitism against Israel. Israel is there now, however Britain screwed up, and they are there to stay. After WWII the European countries and America were too lily-white to take the refugees in so it was OK to offload them on the MIddle East...in the same way the Arab countries refused to take in the Palestinian refugees.
It has become a way for the Muslim community to avoid fixing their own problems--it is always "the Jews fault." This happened in Jordan recently--something was bombed by Islamic fundamentalists and the Jordanians decided it muse have been an Israeli plot. The governments are so deep in denial they can''t see daylight.
widget
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2004
- Messages
- 4,255
rainbowtrout
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 2,105
widget
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2004
- Messages
- 4,255
rainbowtrout
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 2,105
Well, it depends how much information you want.
The basic text I read just to get a historical sense is called "A History of the Arab Peoples" by Albert Hourani. It''s widely read and a decent read, if very long. it also isn''t overly biased in one directon or another.
It''s avaliable in paperback, I think? There''s also an Arab equivalent of Herodotus if you are interested in older "history"
The basic text I read just to get a historical sense is called "A History of the Arab Peoples" by Albert Hourani. It''s widely read and a decent read, if very long. it also isn''t overly biased in one directon or another.
It''s avaliable in paperback, I think? There''s also an Arab equivalent of Herodotus if you are interested in older "history"
strmrdr
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 1, 2003
- Messages
- 23,295
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
good posts on page 2, rainbow and storm.
the way i see it, these cartoons were the straw that broke the camels back for many muslims. tired of being downgraded in and out of their own countries, and perhaps having bought into the far right of their religion, they''ve had enough. we''re talking years of bulild up.
doesn''t make it right. but it does help to understand it.
movie zombie
the way i see it, these cartoons were the straw that broke the camels back for many muslims. tired of being downgraded in and out of their own countries, and perhaps having bought into the far right of their religion, they''ve had enough. we''re talking years of bulild up.
doesn''t make it right. but it does help to understand it.
movie zombie
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
i agree with you, f&i. but sometimes people aren''t sitting back being rational: they''re reacting from their emotions.
and like what was stated above: there are muslims that do NOT approve of the direction many muslim sects have gone. the same can be said within the christian community but the agreement has been to tolerate those differences. it would be no different within the the muslim community.
and there is violence within the christian community: some sects sanction the bombing of abortion clinics and the killing of doctors that perform said abortions. there is the above mentioned continued violence in Northern Ireland. and i distinctly remember the oklahoma bombing: immediate reports stated that it was thought to be the work of dark skin male arab/muslims.....however, when the dust settled, it was not reported as the work of ''white skinned christians''.
i''m not condoning the violence. i think trying to understand it includes taking a harder look at how we stereotype ''the other''.
movie zombie
and like what was stated above: there are muslims that do NOT approve of the direction many muslim sects have gone. the same can be said within the christian community but the agreement has been to tolerate those differences. it would be no different within the the muslim community.
and there is violence within the christian community: some sects sanction the bombing of abortion clinics and the killing of doctors that perform said abortions. there is the above mentioned continued violence in Northern Ireland. and i distinctly remember the oklahoma bombing: immediate reports stated that it was thought to be the work of dark skin male arab/muslims.....however, when the dust settled, it was not reported as the work of ''white skinned christians''.
i''m not condoning the violence. i think trying to understand it includes taking a harder look at how we stereotype ''the other''.
movie zombie
FireGoddess
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2005
- Messages
- 12,145
I've spoken with my husband (who is Muslim, and formerly from the Middle East) about the whole reaction to the cartoon and what the big freaking whoop was, and he tried to explain that in their culture, any likeness of Mohammed is strictly prohibited. No one is allowed to depict him visually in any way, and to do so (regardless of whether the content of the cartoon or item is offensive in other ways or not) is prohibited and offensive in and of itself. I'm sure it was even more offensive coming from non-Muslims. I still don't understand why resorting to violence was the answer, because we are certainly agreed that it doesn't solve anything. I sorta wonder if it's the gut reaction of a people who feel they have no power, no impact, no say. I hesitate to compare it to the LA riots in the time of Rodney King but it reminds me of that for some reason - desperation of a people who feel an injustice has been done and they feel they have no other recourse to lash out at it.
I read "Islam for dummies" when we were dating and at it's core, is much like Christianity - the reasons it may be confusing for some of us are the same reasons Christianity may be confusing for some others. As with Christianity there are sects and religious zealots that take the Koran and manipulate the words to suit their own agendas...so in a way, it's much like Christianity. We don't 'get it' because instead of trying to understand the actual tenets of the religion, we try to understand the actions of zealots....and there is nothing to be understood there in terms of what the religion itself truly means.
I read "Islam for dummies" when we were dating and at it's core, is much like Christianity - the reasons it may be confusing for some of us are the same reasons Christianity may be confusing for some others. As with Christianity there are sects and religious zealots that take the Koran and manipulate the words to suit their own agendas...so in a way, it's much like Christianity. We don't 'get it' because instead of trying to understand the actual tenets of the religion, we try to understand the actions of zealots....and there is nothing to be understood there in terms of what the religion itself truly means.
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
this was my exact reaction.
also, this guy also has it right: http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20060207/wl_nm/religion_cartoons_norway_dc
freedom of speech includes the right to offend....otherwise, there would be no speech, much less freedom of speech.
movie zombie
cinnabar
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2004
- Messages
- 386
According to this:
questions about Islam
it is more of a tradition than an actual prohibition; the reason for the ban on images is specifically to prevent idolatry by Muslims, not to prevent caricature by non-Muslims.
The Koran doesn''t have anything relevant to say on the subject, as far as I can see.
This appears to be more of a cultural issue than a religious one (I''m just trying to understand it, not diss it).
FireGoddess
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2005
- Messages
- 12,145
I'm not sure if you're directing the reply at me or just quoting me, but I know it is more a cultural thing, which is why I wrote the highlighted phrase above...nor did I specifically say the Koran has anything particular to say about banning images of Mohammed, since I am not a scholar of the book.
A coworker told me today that there is some talk of cartoon-retribution...that a cartoon depicting something about the Holocaust was discussed. My initial reaction was of course disgust, but then I thought, well....maybe Mohammed with a bomb-turban gets the same reaction out of them. And if that's the way they chose to respond....I can accept that more than I can burning buildings with or without the intent to harm the people inside.
ETA: Here is the CNN link about the holocaust cartoon.
rainbowtrout
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 2,105
Rank Amateur
Brilliant_Rock
- Joined
- Feb 26, 2003
- Messages
- 1,555
When you have a culture rife with false-macho gesticulations eventually it breeds into over-the-top absurd childish actions to "back it up".
The irony of it is that the world thinks less of them for it rather more. The world is not moved or impressed. They should be ashamed and embarassed of themselves, making no excuses for their (or their brothers'') actions. I don''t need to read any primer on Islam to know a stupid act when I see one.
It''s a good thing that these clowns don''t have more power or run more of the world than they do.
The irony of it is that the world thinks less of them for it rather more. The world is not moved or impressed. They should be ashamed and embarassed of themselves, making no excuses for their (or their brothers'') actions. I don''t need to read any primer on Islam to know a stupid act when I see one.
It''s a good thing that these clowns don''t have more power or run more of the world than they do.
cinnabar
Shiny_Rock
- Joined
- Nov 29, 2004
- Messages
- 386
Firegoddess, I''m sorry if I sounded like I was arguing with you. That was definitely not my intention.
I was just continuing the discussion in the direction you were going; sorry if it came across as sounding combative, I didn''t mean it to. I quoted you because it was your words that were interesting and led me to research the origin of the Mohammed-in-pictures/Koran thing.
I was really trying to say it wasn''t necessarily purely religious as some were making out earlier in the thread, and agreeing with you (if that was what you were saying) that it was more of a larger cultural thing.
I was just continuing the discussion in the direction you were going; sorry if it came across as sounding combative, I didn''t mean it to. I quoted you because it was your words that were interesting and led me to research the origin of the Mohammed-in-pictures/Koran thing.
I was really trying to say it wasn''t necessarily purely religious as some were making out earlier in the thread, and agreeing with you (if that was what you were saying) that it was more of a larger cultural thing.
FireGoddess
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 25, 2005
- Messages
- 12,145
I don't think that's what's going on here though.
Who is 'they?' I know many Muslims who condemn the form the protests have taken. The point is that you shouldn't group all Muslims into the category of those that acted out violently in protest. I'm not saying that you are...but the "I don't need to read any primer" comment is a little over the top. I don't need to read the Bible to know that Catholic priests raping young boys is wrong either. But from a layman's perspective, my point was that some people DO equate Islam with these people and their actions, and that is WRONG.
ETA: Cinnabar, no apology is necessary - I just wanted to know if you were directly commenting to me or not. I tend to find that in these threads (political as opposed to jewelry based) that the tone or intent is sometimes not easily interpretable, and I didn't want my words to be misinterpreted!
movie zombie
Super_Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Jan 20, 2005
- Messages
- 11,879
change "Islam" to "Christianity" and you may have the few point of the Arab and Muslim world re the actions of the US in Iraq in the name of 9/11. and perhaps the reason they're 'over reacting' to the cartoons.
movie zombie
eta: my point is that both sides make sterotypical assumptions about 'the other'.
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,161
- Joined
- Jan 26, 2003
- Messages
- 22,161
Date: 2/7/2006 2:14:55 PM
Author: rainbowtrout
What the Palenstinians are doing they are doing because they are hungry, none of the Arab countries would take them in when they needed them, and because Britain royally f*&$#ed up when it handled Palestine. they promised both sides the land.
I think you are on the right track, but that this is oversimplified. The period after World War I (the Mandate Period) was one of growing nationalism throughout much of Europe and the Middle East. The promises made by the British were partially a response to this nationalism which, even without the British and French presence, would have manifested itself. There were no "Palestinians". There were Arabs (and Jews) living within the British Mandate and Arabs (and fewer Jews) living within the French Mandate.
To many people in the Middle East, they see Israel as a bunch of Westerners who flooded their land, settled it, and then Europe announced that these people had a RIGHT to what had previously been the Palestinian''s land...
There is definitely an element of truth in the belief of the Arabs that Westerners (i.e. persecuted Jews) flooded into the Middle East after World War II. The land had never belonged entirely to Arabs, however, since Jews had always resided there as well. During the British Mandate, Jews and Arabs were both ruled by the British. Prior to that both were all subjects of the Ottoman Empire. There were no "Palestinians".
And seriously, don''t give me the ''turning the desert green'' shit or the arguement that the Israelis ''took a land with no people for a people without a land.'' There WERE people, and they were not farmers for a damn good reason. There is not enough WATER. The Israelis have drained the water table in the region almost dry and in the next forty years will have to deal with the reprecussions of ''turning the desert green'' when there was a REASON pastoralism had worked so well on that land even to the time of their own Hebrew ancestors (archeological evidence indicated they were goatherders, etc)
I am not sure why it would matter whether Israel was turned green by the Jews or not (for the purposes of this discussion). I think a discussion of this now is irrelevant to the issue I want to pursue: the history of the area.
what people forget is that prior to the creation of Israel the Arab world was THE place for Jews to live. They were among the most tolerant people and had strong ties to the Jewish community. Sadly this has all changed. But there was a time when anti-Semisitsm was not rife in the Muslim community.
Unfortunately, the Middle east was NOT the place for Jews to live. Many, many Jews lived in Europe...where they were exterminated by Hitler during his regime (1933-1945). The Ottoman Empire WAS, however, very tolerant of both Christians and Jews. The Ottomans Turks, while Muslim, were not Arabs. The Ottoman Turks ruled the entire Middle East, including areas with Christians, Jews, Arab Muslims, and non-Arab Muslims.
On the other hand, I cannot support the violence and anti-Semitism against Israel. Israel is there now, however Britain screwed up, and they are there to stay. After WWII the European countries and America were too lily-white to take the refugees in so it was OK to offload them on the MIddle East...in the same way the Arab countries refused to take in the Palestinian refugees.
Since this is an opinion, I will not comment on it!
It has become a way for the Muslim community to avoid fixing their own problems--it is always ''the Jews fault.'' This happened in Jordan recently--something was bombed by Islamic fundamentalists and the Jordanians decided it muse have been an Israeli plot. The governments are so deep in denial they can''t see daylight.
Again, this is opinion, so I will not comment on it. I am only trying to discuss history!
rainbowtrout
Ideal_Rock
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2005
- Messages
- 2,105
- Status
300x240.png)