Islam vs. the Western World: off-topic posts from a Religion thread

[hypewaders]

Yes thanks for thoughtful posts from you both. As for the Baron:

Baron Max: "First you applaud the American people for being so fuckin' smart and knowledgeable to elect [Obama], now you're turning it all around and calling that same group of Americans ignorant and stupid enough to be susceptible to propaganda."

Our collective awareness is specialized: It varies by subject. USAmericans are much better-informed in some subjects than others. On the subject of Israeli zionism and apartheid,on the subject of the Muslim and Arab worlds (to name a few related issues) a majority of Obama's most ardent supporters, and certainly US opinion as a whole still suffer a crippling collective blind-spot.

"Which is it, Hype? Are Americans smart for electing what's-his-name"

We were smart enough not to elect McCain, because a majority had recognized that "neoconservatism" was ruining us. That doesn't make us infallible, and it doesn't mean that Obama has sufficient influence and wisdom to dispel all illusions. You're making a false dichotomy.

"...or are they stupid and ignorant?"

On the separate subject of coexistence in the Mideast, we (USAmericans as a nation) are still behaving stupidly and with ignorance, because we've been sorely misled and misinformed for a long time now. Until a majority comes to understand that zionism is against our national (and moral) interests, we're going to face harder and harder lessons. Major media, and the present US majority would not accept it if our President were to chasten Israel for her crimes. If Obama did so before a majority of US opinion could follow the reasoning, he would be swept away in the high emotion we've been programmed to respond with in defense of zionism.

Most USAmericans remain woefully unpreprepared to rationally question the zionist ideology we've taken up without examination. Simplistic notions of "Chosen Ones" (cast in idealistic likenesses) against "Terrorists" (portrayed as our common and monolithic enemy) will persist until a majority learns differently-- Either through painstaking education, or by neglecting affairs until deeper crisis... until US sacrifice upon the zionist altar becomes too clear and too dear.

Israel's most ruthless enemies know that it is the USA that props up the separatist cause, and have learned how to use the illusion in their favor too. Our programming is played upon, accelerating our overextension for the sake of zionism. Before the bitter end of this dead-end road, it is my hope that most USAmericans will wake up, eyes open to the imperative for a new direction. But there's still a lot of learning necessary for the majority of USAmericans still clinging to simplistic illusions about the costs of our unquestioning support for zionism in relating with the rest of the world, particularly with the populous and rising societies of the East and of Islam.

 

[Zakariya04]

Oh man, Zak and Max made me laugh so much today with their pathetic posts.

How dare you call my post pathetic???????

this is completely unacceptable espically when reading on a monday morning..

Of course most of my posts are aboslute nonsense, but why highlight the issue!!!

 

[TW Scott]

Yeah. Who armed the militants to the tune of $2 billion dollars? Who destabilised the society?

Actually we armed the resistance of a Soviet invasion, geez forgive us for finding a less invasive way iof keeping your country free to decide it's own agenda.

Afghanistan has been a pawn in the US cold war and now in whatever new shebang they are cooking up. The Afghans are pawns who have been killed since the 1980s because they are in the way of the American greed for resources.

Our greed for resources? We weren;t the ones trying to invade you back then. And honestly even during the COld War russia sold us tons of stuff for competitive prices so it is not like we would have lost anything.

Who would believe that in the 1970s, this was a peaceful socialist state?

Nobody, mainly becuase even there there were rumbles of disquiet.

People getting their knowledge of Muslims from the likes of Salman Rushdie, Daniel Pipes and Christopher Hitchens is not an intellectual tradition. Its the same kind of intelligentsia that operated in Germany before WWII.

I think you meant OPPOSITE the type of intelligentsia. Rushdie, Pipes and Hitchens produce works based on modern day realities and paint a vivid picture of the reality of modern day extremist islam. Now if the rest of Islam would get up off their complacent asses and denounce the extremists then perhaps Islam would deserve some respect.

 

[copernicus66]

Arsalan, I'd like to say your posts are spot on, and represent a real understanding of the ground realities in Afghanistan and Iraq. The other posters here, including myself, can learn much from Arsalan.

Regarding Salman Rushdie. I have made it rather blunt that no one should talk about this book, especially those defending it, if they have not read it. So atheists, please go to the store or read online, whatever, find the book and read it, then you will be able to understand why some people may have a problem with it. It's filled to the brink with racist stereotypes, gibberish nonsense, overly sexist in nature (at one point claiming women are only good for one thing, I will not go any further), and offensive not only to Muslims, but all intelligent people.

If you are bent on defending it, go find the book and read it. Otherwise, I don't want to hear any more of this nonsense.

Who is defending the book? What is being defended is an author's right to publish a work of art without the fear of censorship or having fatwas issued against them.

The fact of the matter is that Rushdie wrote a work of fiction, and your barbaric Muslim comrades went berserk and made death threats, and actually followed up on them in regards to several individuals associated with the publishing of the book. Un-fucking-believable. That's the sort of shit that happened during the Inquisition, where people who published 'heretical' works were condemned to death by the Church. Your Muslim friends are 800 years behind the times!

This is precisely why non-Muslims and progressive Muslims need to stand united against mainstream Islam. Radical Islam isn't some fringe group. Quite the contrary, it is the core of the Islamic community, a poorly concealed festering mass that would like nothing more than to lash out at the infidels.

 

[Arsalan]

Who is defending the book? What is being defended is an author's right to publish a work of art without the fear of censorship or having fatwas issued against them.

The fact of the matter is that Rushdie wrote a work of fiction, and your barbaric Muslim comrades went berserk and made death threats, and actually followed up on them in regards to several individuals associated with the publishing of the book. Un-fucking-believable. That's the sort of shit that happened during the Inquisition, where people who published 'heretical' works were condemned to death by the Church. Your Muslim friends are 800 years behind the times!

This is precisely why non-Muslims and progressive Muslims need to stand united against mainstream Islam. Radical Islam isn't some fringe group. Quite the contrary, it is the core of the Islamic community, a poorly concealed festering mass that would like nothing more than to lash out at the infidels.

And this is exactly the kind of simplistic response you expect from someone who hasnt read the book and or doesnt know the history. Moreover, its the same type of generalization.

 

[Arsalan]

How dare you call my post pathetic???????

this is completely unacceptable espically when reading on a monday morning..

Of course most of my posts are aboslute nonsense, but why highlight the issue!!!

I just thought it was funny

 

[copernicus66]

And this is exactly the kind of simplistic response you expect from someone who hasnt read the book and or doesnt know the history.

Have you read the book? Come to think of it, did the many Muslims who rattled sabres at Rushdie actually read the book?

I have read a synopsis of the book, but that's beside the point. Issuing a fatwa over a work of fiction is barbaric and plain retarded. The fact that you attempt to pay lip service to the notion of freedom of speech by defending the behaviour of your Muslim brethen is just laughable.

Let me just repeat: Muslims attempted to kill people over a work of *fiction*. Just think about it, Arsalan. Instead of mindlessly trying to defend your moronic comrades, try to grasp just how retarded and pathetic it is that a number of people from your religious group would feel so outraged over a work of *fiction* that they would kill because of it.

Religion of peace my ass!

Moreover, its the same type of generalization.

*gasp* HE CRITICISED ISLAM!!111111 WELL, ACTUALLY, HE JUST SORT OF ESPOUSED HERETICAL BELIEFS IN A WORK OF FICTION, BUT STILL... KRUSH, KILL AND DESTTROOYYY!

 

[Arsalan]

Have you read the book? Come to think of it, did the many Muslims who rattled sabres at Rushdie actually read the book?

I have read a synopsis of the book, but that's beside the point. Issuing a fatwa over a work of fiction is barbaric and plain retarded. The fact that you attempt to pay lip service to the notion of freedom of speech by defending the behaviour of your Muslim brethen is just laughable.



*gasp* HE CRITICISED ISLAM!!111111 WELL, ACTUALLY, HE JUST SORT OF ESPOUSED HERETICAL BELIEFS IN A WORK OF FICTION, BUT STILL... KRUSH, KILL AND DESTTROOYYY!

So you yourself havent even read the book. Thats typical of his most ardent of supporters. Have you read his other books? Have you read my post on the last page about why there was a reaction? Have you read what I wrote about him getting a play cancelled because he was too offended by it? Please, Im not some idiot youre dealing with and neither are the other Muslims on here. This simplistic view of "BARBARIC MUSLIMS KILL OVER FICTION" just goes to show what an idiot you are. The man himself admitted it wasnt fiction and so did other writers who wrote about it. He knew very well what he was doing, as did his publishers who were recommended time and time again to not publish it.

 

[copernicus66]

So you yourself havent even read the book. Have you read his other books?

Have you? Did any of the Muslims who issued fatwas?

Have you read my post on the last page about why there was a reaction?

Yes. Some Muslims such as yourself interpreted a work of fiction as some sort of insiduous action on your religious beliefs. That's paranoia on your behalf. But even if Rushdie was attempting to engage in some underhanded belittling of your religion, guess what, it doesn't matter. In the civilised world, we don't issue death threats because someone holds opinions we feel to be abhorrent. I understand that one who belongs to a religious group which tends to be primitive and barbaric in nature might have trouble grasping such an enlightened concept, but don't fret. You might come around after living in a Western society for a decade or two, although I'm not going to hold my breath.

Please, Im not some idiot youre dealing with and neither are the other Muslims on here.

No, but you are a Muslim. And I've found that most Muslims (witness S.A.M, Diamond, and yourself) will go to great lengths to try and justify and/or mitigate the barbaric actions of their brethen. It is them vs. the West, and they won't budge from the position that Muslims are the always correct underdogs, and the West are the tyrants who are always in the wrong.

 

[Arsalan]

Have you? Did any of the Muslims who issued fatwas?

Actually, yes.

Yes. Some Muslims such as yourself interpreted a work of fiction as some sort of insiduous action on your religious beliefs. That's paranoia on your behalf. But even if Rushdie was attempting to engage in some underhanded belittling of your religion, guess what, it doesn't matter. In the civilised world, we don't issue death threats because someone holds opinions we feel to be abhorrent. I understand that one who belongs to a religious group which tends to be primitive and barbaric in nature might have trouble grasping such an enlightened concept, but don't fret. You might come around after living in a Western society for a decade or two, although I'm not going to hold my breath.

No ones agreeing with the fatwa (Which, Id be surprised if you even know what it means) from the Ayatollah who doesnt hold that much power anyway. If you think the resulting reaction was because of the fatwa, then youre wrong. It was because his arguments had been presented over and over and were part and parcel of the Western imperialism that ruled them for a long time and under which they suffered. Ask yourself: why were there only such denunciations when Rushdie wrote his book, and not when all those other Orientalists, Rodinson and Watt among others, wrote their books? Fact of the matter is that around 90% of Muslims do not listen to the Ayatollahs or see them as a credible authority, and from the remaining 10% only a handful really cared about Rushdie. The protests we saw was in reaction to Rushdie plus centuries of oppression.

No, but you are a Muslim. And I've found that most Muslims (witness S.A.M, Diamond, and yourself) will go to great lengths to try and justify and/or mitigate the barbaric actions of their brethen. It is them vs. the West, and they won't budge from the position that Muslims are the always correct underdogs, and the West are the tyrants who are always in the wrong.

So, when did Sam say it was ok to kill? or Diamond? or me? Stop putting me in the same basket as a handful of people. what we are saying is that Rushdie is an opportunistic liar, an egotistical bastard who knew very well what he was doing and the only people he is fooling by disguising his book as fiction is those people that have not read it, or are not familiar with what Western imperialism actually meant to the people that were colonised.

 

[(Q)]

Read it. And i've probably also ead any other links you might think I need to read.

Your posts would belay that, so I doubt you have read it, or anything else I might provide. Clearly, I'm wasting my time with another intellectually dishonest Muslim pushing Islamic propaganda.

 

[(Q)]

Arsalan, I'd like to say your posts are spot on, and represent a real understanding of the ground realities in Afghanistan and Iraq. The other posters here, including myself, can learn much from Arsalan.

Thank you DH, I find your posts very informing as well

Well, at least you managed to convince each other.

 

[iceaura]

Gee, I don't know. I guess Western intellectual traditions just make no sense in this context.
”
What intellectual tradition? You see the support of anti-Muslim sentiments as an intellectual tradition? Its all grist to the mill of the Israel lobby and Middle East policy.

People getting their knowledge of Muslims from the likes of Salman Rushdie, Daniel Pipes and Christopher Hitchens is not an intellectual tradition.

And people who confuse the writings of Rushdie, Pipes, and Hitchens, would greatly benefit from the Western intellectual tradition of inviting people they don't agree with to present their case. Especially serious intellectual types, whose case is made so effectively as to incite riots among its opponents (note - not its supporters).

The support of some "anti-Muslim sentiments" would be a very valuable intellectual tradition for the Muslim world to adopt.

I don't expect you or any of his other supporters to understand why the reaction was the way it was.Somehow, it seems, his strongest supporters are those who haven't even read the book, yet put him on the highest of pedastals.

Now I'm supporting Rushdie?

I'm not supporting Rushdie. I'm attacking you guys. People put a contract out on his life for writing a novel, because they found it offensive. They murdered people for merely being associated with its translation and sale. The reaction from you and the general run of Muslims of my acquaintance is that I needed to understand the depth of the offensiveness of that novel. I'm sorry, but you are badly missing the point. You need to understand that there is something wrong with the reaction - your reaction - to Rushdie's novel; that reaction is a symptom of a serious problem, and according to you and everybody that tells me about what I have to understand, it's centered on the Muslim religion as it exists in the real world.

And Rushdie's strongest supporters are people like Juan Cole, or quadrophonics here. People who have read the book, who have read all of Rushdie's books, and often people familiar with Islam and the Islamic world. You have it backwards - it's the people doing murder and putting out hit contracts who are reacting to the books without having read them.

{long description of the evils of Rushdie and his writings}

One word: So?

You do realize that your description of Rushdie's novel there reinforces every prejudice and knee-jerk bigotry I have about Islam, right? That is your defense of the reaction to Rushdie's novel, and it is itself basically the same reaction I've been subjected to for years now. That kind of reaction, among Western Muslims in my general community, is what first indicated to me that there was a serious and systemic problem with the intellectual influence of the Muslim religion as a whole, similar to but potentially even more dangerous than the familiar versions of my local Christian fundamentalisms.

From the Western point of view, if the Muslim reactions to the Rushdie affair show nothing else, they definitely point to a need for a few Rushdies, in the Islamic world. You guys do yourselves no favors, by banishing his writings.

 

[S.A.M.]

People put a contract out on his life

One person, which no one is supporting here. I think "people" are allowed to protest against his writings if they so wish.

 

[iceaura]

One person, which no one is supporting here.

The head of a state with millions of followers worldwide, unrepudiated, counts as "people".

And no one here objects to anyone criticizing (or protesting against) Rushdie's writings.

 

[spidergoat]

Actually you do. If you want to make it big, all you have to od is claim to be from a Muslim background, then write a "fictional" book attacking Islam. See how fast youll rise...

That only applies to sales and publicity, not literary merit, which Rushdie has in plenty. You see, some people won't be bullied by fundamentalist censorship. Why was "Islam insulted"? Because the Quran too is a work of historical fiction, and Muslims cannot handle the truth, that their saviors were not angels, but regular flawed human beings who might have been motivated by less than angelic motives.

 

[Arsalan]

And people who confuse the writings of Rushdie, Pipes, and Hitchens, would greatly benefit from the Western intellectual tradition of inviting people they don't agree with to present their case. Especially serious intellectual types, whose case is made so effectively as to incite riots among its opponents (note - not its supporters).

The support of some "anti-Muslim sentiments" would be a very valuable intellectual tradition for the Muslim world to adopt.

Anti-Muslim sentiments have been present in Muslim countries ever since Islam was established. There are still now a great number of anti-Islamic writers busy in countries with a large Muslim population, and yet, no protests such as we saw during the Rushdie affair. Fact of the matter is that Pipes and Hitchens have nothing on the real intellectuals that are actually present in Islamic countries and engaged in active debate with Muslims and vice versa. Hitchens and Pipes have repeatedly shown their attitude and are therefore even hated by a large number of non-Muslims.

Now I'm supporting Rushdie?

I'm not supporting Rushdie. I'm attacking you guys. People put a contract out on his life for writing a novel, because they found it offensive. They murdered people for merely being associated with its translation and sale. The reaction from you and the general run of Muslims of my acquaintance is that I needed to understand the depth of the offensiveness of that novel. I'm sorry, but you are badly missing the point. You need to understand that there is something wrong with the reaction - your reaction - to Rushdie's novel; that reaction is a symptom of a serious problem, and according to you and everybody that tells me about what I have to understand, it's centered on the Muslim religion as it exists in the real world.

So who heres supporting something that was revoked in 1998? Seriously? Who? All im saying that its typical for people that havent read his book to defend the book under freedom of speech. That I find ridiculous. 90% of Muslims do not see the Ayatollah as any authority. The protests we saw during the Rushdie affair was because of the long history of oppression those countries suffered and this was seen as a continuation of those assaults. That s the crux of the matter and something which you wont understand, since it wasnt your people that were being oppressedd and slaughtered and colonised. Nor will you understand what Rushdie said and how he said it because A) you havent read the book and B) you know nothing about what he has tried to dusguised under "fiction". But then again, where was all this hoopla when the Hindus got offended, burned his books and threatened to kill anyone related to the book when Rushdie wrote against them? Nowhere. Thats just another one of the thing that is so frustrating. Fact of the matter is that no one is condoning any fatwa (Which you probably dont even know the meaning of), no one is supporting any killing of him, yet we keep getting labelled that way when we say the reaction was understandable. Are you going to label Roald Dahl as well because he said the reaction was inevitable and Rushdie knew it? Hell no. Are you going to wonder why Rushdie jeered the judges and the winner when one of his books didnt win a prize? Are you going to ask yourself why it is that Rushdie got a play cancelled because he was offended by it? Are you going to ask yourself why a film was banned, even is now, for blasphemy that came out right after Rushdies book? Are you going to ask yourself why so many books, films and games arebanned in the West? Are you going to ask yourself why there have been 7-8 isntances of book bunings in the West AFTER the Rushdie affair? No, you arent. But when a handful of people that happen to be Muslim, but also hail from the countries that were colonised and oppressed, do such a thing, suddenly it exposes some vague pattern in the Muslim world. Get real.

And Rushdie's strongest supporters are people like Juan Cole, or quadrophonics here. People who have read the book, who have read all of Rushdie's books, and often people familiar with Islam and the Islamic world. You have it backwards - it's the people doing murder and putting out hit contracts who are reacting to the books without having read them.

A lot of people read it and a lot of people understood the reaction, even though they did not condone the killings in any way.

One word: So?

You do realize that your description of Rushdie's novel there reinforces every prejudice and knee-jerk bigotry I have about Islam, right? That is your defense of the reaction to Rushdie's novel, and it is itself basically the same reaction I've been subjected to for years now. That kind of reaction, among Western Muslims in my general community, is what first indicated to me that there was a serious and systemic problem with the intellectual influence of the Muslim religion as a whole, similar to but potentially even more dangerous than the familiar versions of my local Christian fundamentalisms.

From the Western point of view, if the Muslim reactions to the Rushdie affair show nothing else, they definitely point to a need for a few Rushdies, in the Islamic world. You guys do yourselves no favors, by banishing his writings.

Ofcourse it will reinforce that, since everything Rushdie attacked means absolutely squat to you. Thats just it. That is the whole point of my posts. You will not understand the reaction, ever, because you do not know the reasons behind it. You havent even read the book. All you will see, when you read it, is some fictional novel with mystical sounding names and places and stories

 

[Arsalan]

The head of a state with millions of followers worldwide, unrepudiated, counts as "people".

And no one here objects to anyone criticizing (or protesting against) Rushdie's writings.

If millions of people worldwide agreed with the fatwa, or saw it as authoritative, rushdie would have had a lot more problems. At the moment, he is fine and dandy, trying to get some more attention.

 

[Arsalan]

That only applies to sales and publicity, not literary merit, which Rushdie has in plenty. You see, some people won't be bullied by fundamentalist censorship. Why was "Islam insulted"? Because the Quran too is a work of historical fiction, and Muslims cannot handle the truth, that their saviors were not angels, but regular flawed human beings who might have been motivated by less than angelic motives.

It wasnt just Islam and it went beyond insulted. Muslims dont need saviors, we arent Christians. And neither do we believe that Angels were in any way human.

But youre right: some people wont be bullied. They want to disrespect other people. Thats fine, go ahead. But dont expect them to respect you either. Numerous books have been written in response to Rushdies books. Thats how the majority of Muslims replied. And fortunately, a lot more people are waking up and seeing exactly what kind of an attentionwhore and hypocrite Rushdie really is.

 

[spidergoat]

No one cares if Rushdie is an attention whore. People should be free to speculate that Mohammed was a dick, or whatever, not that Rushie was even doing that. Mohammed probably was smoking hashish when he dictated his insane ramblings. The most common manifestation of schizophrenia is excessive religiosity (and delusions of grandeur).

I will believe Muslims care about respect when they reject the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.