For Moslem Apologists

[Nadir Shah]

Ever since the rise of Global Islamic Terrosrism, the common discourse has been that those who perpetrate these terrible crimes against humanity (9/11, 7/7, Madrid Bombings, Mumbai Bombings, Taliban regime, Al Qaeda and other such monster organizations) are a minority and they base their actions on a wrong and hateful interpretation of the Islamic faith and Islamic scriptures. The discourse also holds that these people, organizations and actions do not represent the Islamic faith and that a majority of the Islamic people are 'moderate' and 'benign' beings. Some other apologists say that these actions and organizations are a result of the occupation and suppression of the Islamic peoples by the West.

The following questions arise:

1 The people who perpetrate these crimes are not a minority. In fact, The majority of the so-called 'moderate' Moslems have this hypocritical practice of benefiting from the West but calling the West Dar-Al-Harb or Infidels and are infact not loyal to the constitutions/statutes of the states they live in. These moderates are also guilty of being with the extremists due to their silence and due to the lack of any concerted and focused action against the extremists.

2 About interpretations: Why is it that only the Qoran is interpreted in a hateful way? Why is it that only the Qoran can be made to look like condoning the killing of innocents and non-combatants. This, I think, applies to other religions as well but why does the main theoretical justification for terrorism come from the Qoran and/or other Islamic texts?

3 About occupation: Other peoples and societies have faced brutal subjugation and occupation. Why is it that the religious and more specifically, Islamic, inspired organizations are more inclined to terrorism and suicide bombings. For example, the modus operandi of the Tibetian Movement in China and the East Turkestan Islamic Movement are poles apart and there are no prizes for guessing which is the terrorist movement.
I understand that there is a certain factor of political and geo-strategic 'correctedness' involved here, but that cannot be held as a bulwark against the overwhelming evidence.

I think it would be pertinent to discuss the issue of the mosque in vicinity of the 9/11 grounds. Despite being for the right of religious freedoms, If I were an American, I would not want a centre in my neighborhood where it is taught that non-Muslims are dirty and that it is okay to physically harm your wife or that offensive foreign policy against non-Moslems is justified or that killing non-combatants in the Holy Cause are justified. Americans should be alarmed. A centre where such profoundly inhumane ideas are preached and propagated is a danger to the secular and free civilizations of the West.

[Wrayun]

Nadir Shah,

Dear x-Moslem Pathan,

Maybe you are not aware, but Islamic terrorism as we know it wouldn't have been possible without the support and nurturing it received by the "civilized" world during and pre Cold War era. The Taliban, Al-Qeada, 9/11 and any other event/entity you can possibly point to is either a direct or indirect result of the foreign policies of corporatocracies that rule most "civilized" nations. Within these nations, there are scholars, writers, journalists and researches that aren't as gullible as you come off to be. Unlike you, they don't address the symptoms, rather the causes of these symptoms which correlates with the policies of global powers and their interests ever since World War 1. Would Al-Qeada exist if the British hadn't created Saudi Arabia? Would the Taliban exist if the British hadn't created Pakistan? Would religious extremism exist midst Pukhtoons if the British and their then ally Pakistan hadn't suppressed non-violent MOSLEMS like Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan and his teachings?

Dar-Al-Harb, Dar-Al-Falafil, Dar-Al-Babaganosh etc. are concepts that are geo-political divisions mostly derived from non-scriptural sources and little to do with "QORAN" (its spelled Quran btw). They have little or no Quranic backing and are perpetuated by certain sects within Islam, but not by the whole of Islam, in pursuit of their political global ambitions.

Majority of the Muslims, don't even know what Dar-Al-Harb means, let alone conspire against it. These colorful scholarly terms were once used by Islamic expansionists who no longer matter, and today by arrogant Islamaphobes who judge all Muslims of today by referring to institutions of the past.

The Quran is not the only scripture to be interpreted in a hateful way. The Bible was and is used by the colonizing Europeans and their descendants to bring enlightenment to "infidels" (the word infidel being their invention) to save them from eternal damnation. You should look up the history of colonization of the Americas, Africa, and Australia before spewing your arrogance on a public platform. Even in modern day Iraq and Afghanistan, Bible verses were found on weaponry belonging to Western forces. Bush wars wouldn't have been possible without the support of the "Christian Belt", and the leader of the "civilized" coalition used the word "crusade" (JEHAD) on more than one occasion.

If you think that all of this is about the hate which is present in the Quran, you my friend are grossly misinformed or are shamelessly dishonest. The religion of Islam, and the Quran, are just spiritual tools and layman means to deal with powers beyond their scope that are constantly interfering in their affairs by supporting dictators and political regimes friendly to their interests, physically invading their lands, cultural and moral invasion by the use of soft-power, supporting separatists and political dissent, carving out borders creating buffers and proxies etc. etc. etc. the list is huge.

This is something that all true, genuine, balanced historians and scholars agree to.

As for the Tibetian Movement in China and the East Turkestan Islamic Movement, guess what, both are supported by the civilized West against the heathen Godless socialist Chinese. Just like the "mujahideens" of Chechnya against the Russians. Where does the indoctrination, training, financing come from? Whatever may the reason be, but we know who the backers are. Hint, its all OIL money.

I think it would be pertinent to discuss the issue of the mosque in vicinity of the 9/11 grounds. Despite being for the right of religious freedoms, If I were an American, I would not want a centre in my neighborhood where it is taught that non-Muslims are dirty and that it is okay to physically harm your wife or that offensive foreign policy against non-Moslems is justified or that killing non-combatants in the Holy Cause are justified. Americans should be alarmed. A centre where such profoundly inhumane ideas are preached and propagated is a danger to the secular and free civilizations of the West.

Mr. Pathan, the irony is that majority of the people that oppose the Islamic Centre are religious zealots from the Christian and Jewish background. While those who are standing by the Muslims in this matter are secular humanists, many of them, atheists.

The rest of your argument is hogwash rubbish. The people who are responsible for it are anything but your typical non-Moslem hating extremists. These are the Muslims that should be supported to fight against radical extremism. This is why they are receiving much support, even from the mayor of the city. Your personal bigoted presumptions don't equate to facts. Fortunately.

[Dust]

I am not for or against anything you have said, but I would like to pinpoint logical fallacies in your thinking, for I think that you are bias. My comments are only meant to be taken as constructive criticism.

Ever since the rise of Global Islamic Terrosrism, the common discourse has been that those who perpetrate these terrible crimes against humanity (9/11, 7/7, Madrid Bombings, Mumbai Bombings, Taliban regime, Al Qaeda and other such monster organizations) are a minority and they base their actions on a wrong and hateful interpretation of the Islamic faith and Islamic scriptures. The discourse also holds that these people, organizations and actions do not represent the Islamic faith and that a majority of the Islamic people are 'moderate' and 'benign' beings. Some other apologists say that these actions and organizations are a result of the occupation and suppression of the Islamic peoples by the West.

The above is a fair summary!

The following questions arise:

1 The people who perpetrate these crimes are not a minority. In fact, The majority of the so-called 'moderate' Moslems have this hypocritical practice of benefiting from the West but calling the West Dar-Al-Harb or Infidels and are infact not loyal to the constitutions/statutes of the states they live in. These moderates are also guilty of being with the extremists due to their silence and due to the lack of any concerted and focused action against the extremists.

Have you ever spoken against Western imperialism and colonialism? If so, what have you done that has benefited the world, and why is it that people have not changed. If no, then you should also be tried at the ICC for not stopping war-crimes from happening.

2 About interpretations: Why is it that only the Qoran is interpreted in a hateful way? Why is it that only the Qoran can be made to look like condoning the killing of innocents and non-combatants. This, I think, applies to other religions as well but why does the main theoretical justification for terrorism come from the Qoran and/or other Islamic texts?

Have you ever studied humanities or social sciences in a secular post-secondary institution, or for that matter did you know that there are many sects within Islam? If so, then you would know that everything is based on interpretation. If not, then the onus is on you to educate yourself and understand how texts are studied.

3 About occupation: Other peoples and societies have faced brutal subjugation and occupation. Why is it that the religious and more specifically, Islamic, inspired organizations are more inclined to terrorism and suicide bombings. For example, the modus operandi of the Tibetian Movement in China and the East Turkestan Islamic Movement are poles apart and there are no prizes for guessing which is the terrorist movement.
I understand that there is a certain factor of political and geo-strategic 'correctedness' involved here, but that cannot be held as a bulwark against the overwhelming evidence.

Have you ever studied King Leopold? If not, then please do. It will shed a lot of light into how modern acquisition of power is conducted. If so, then you are intellectually dishonest.

I think it would be pertinent to discuss the issue of the mosque in vicinity of the 9/11 grounds. Despite being for the right of religious freedoms, If I were an American, I would not want a centre in my neighborhood where it is taught that non-Muslims are dirty and that it is okay to physically harm your wife or that offensive foreign policy against non-Moslems is justified or that killing non-combatants in the Holy Cause are justified. Americans should be alarmed. A centre where such profoundly inhumane ideas are preached and propagated is a danger to the secular and free civilizations of the West.

First off, the center has not been built yet and no teaching has started, so we don't know what might happen. Secondly, you should go and voice your opinion and then allow a majority vote. Civil societies work as such, not the way your approach is. In fact, you are breeding hatred and bigotry.


ps
you should get out more and sit with Muslims. I have, and I find them to be helpless that their religion has been hijacked. Just as the Congolese were helpless and are still helpless, so too are Muslims. Sitting with the average Muslim is a great treat to the ears and eyes and the heart. They are very hospitable and caring. As Wrayun mentioned, religion to them is a way of making sense of this world. Word of advice: Don't put all of your eggs in one basket.

[Baygham]

Wrayun,

Dear Moslem Pathan:

Whether derived from scripture or non scripture makes no difference to putrid smell that emits from the resultant decay so gloriously evident in Watan.

Nadir Shah's points are valid and have been raised by others. It does concern some of us who never got habituated with the putrid smell.

As for your preoccupation with 1400 year old folklore I will just share what I saw this weekend on the walls of the Jefferson Memorial.

[Wrayun]

^Cool story.

Maybe Mr. Jefferson should have done away with the barbarous principles of his ancestors when it came to owning, selling, working over 600 negro slaves. He should also have given his illegitimate offspring a sense of self worth by accepting them as his own instead of forcing them to work with the rest of the child workers in his factories.

Compared to the 6th century "bedouin" Mohammad, this 19th century Jefferson was far from a saint. One man hero is another mans slave master. Ahh yes massa!


Those who have accepted the religion of the Prophet
Are heaven-bound; both the sinner and the righteous.
Muhammad is the guide of the stray,
A cane for the blind.

- Rehman Baba

To you your baba, to me my own ancestral forefather baba.

[Dust]

Baygham, is there anything in the Quran that you like. Let us start from here.

[Baygham]

^Cool story.

Maybe Mr. Jefferson should have done away with the barbarous principles of his ancestors when it came to owning, selling, working over 600 negro slaves. He should also have given his illegitimate offspring a sense of self worth by accepting them as his own instead of forcing them to work with the rest of the child workers in his factories.

Compared to the 6th century "bedouin" Mohammad, this 19th century Jefferson was far from a saint. One man hero is another mans slave master. Ahh yes massa!


Those who have accepted the religion of the Prophet
Are heaven-bound; both the sinner and the righteous.
Muhammad is the guide of the stray,
A cane for the blind.

- Rehman Baba

To you your baba, to me my own ancestral forefather baba.

LOL , yes thats why the salafis, recently burned rehman baba's ziarath. Now he is your baba. LOL


18th century jefferson is a criminal on todays standards and todays evolved human thought and understanding and so is MO. Plain and simple you said it better yourself.

That was the exact point Nadir was trying to convey. Yesterdays heroes and morality is barbarous by todays standards, you amply pointed that out in case of Jefferson, now apply it to Mo as well. Otherwise you are an appologist like Nadir said.

P.S. you dont have to be all pure to say something pure, thats another myth of the believer. With that criteria you should stop listening to all.

[Baygham]

Baygham, is there anything in the Quran that you like. Let us start from here.

Yes I like the decorations on the side, which you see when it is nicely tugged away in a corner, closed and doing no harm.

Humor aside, there is nothing wrong with any book, its with the ones reading it, if you make a bomb from a chemistry manuel and then blow up your neighbourhood with it, is it a fault of chemistry or the manuel. Similarly if you derive all morality and rationallity from the Quran you will only blow yourself and your neighbourhood up (come see afghanistan and pakistan).

On the other hand if you read it in the morning to soothe the nerves and recite it to calm your self than whats wrong with that. Better treatments for anxiety are available but modern medicine may not have reached all corners of humanity so nothing wrong with some snake oil in the interim.

[Wrayun]

LOL , yes thats why the salafis, recently burned rehman baba's ziarath. Now he is your baba. LOL

Salafis? I iz = Wrayun, not Shamla/Sangar saib. Nice try though.

18th century jefferson is a criminal on todays standards and todays evolved human thought and understanding and so is MO. Plain and simple you said it better yourself.

That was the exact point Nadir was trying to convey. Yesterdays heroes and morality is barbarous by todays standards, you amply pointed that out in case of Jefferson, now apply it to Mo as well. Otherwise you are an appologist like Nadir said.

P.S. you dont have to be all pure to say something pure, thats another myth of the believer. With that criteria you should stop listening to all.

Like I said, Kewl story.

[Wrayun]

there is nothing wrong with any book, its with the ones reading it

and then,

Similarly if you derive all morality and rationallity from the Quran you will only blow yourself and your neighbourhood up (come see afghanistan and pakistan).

lulz hahahahahahahaha jezuz!