...please post it on my blog.
I couldn't be more thrilled by the discourse that is taking place on this humble forum and I see I have hit a nerve with several readers. If I offended some people with my last two posts or made some new friends in the blogosphere, then that's great. I'm not here to make nice or pussyfoot around my beliefs. As an American, as a gay man, as a human being, I feel threatened by fanatical Islam.
Those young, modern "Muslims" who don't go to Mosque and are more concerned with downing Cristal and sleeping around (per one reader's comments) don't count in my "ranting." If you're bowing five times a day on a rug facing Mecca chances are you're out for my blood.
Having been raised a Christian I am very familiar with the Scripture that reads "friendship with the World is enmity with the Lord." Islam has a similar precept and in seeking their God's favor they have declared war on the world. And speaking of Christians, I know too well about the Inquisition, the Crusades, the Holocaust and more recent ethnic conflicts in Rwanda and the Balkans. But here and now, Islam is the biggest threat to the safety of the world.
I have been challenged by some of my readers to do more homework on the history of Islam. I'm not an idiot and am familiar with the basic principles of the faith and the origins of some its customs; but having an interest in history and world events as I do, I would like to know what books I should be reading to either assuage my fears or at the very least form a more air-tight foundation for my arguments.
So, if I've really really upset you, please point me in the direction of some books you think would be of benefit to me and I promise to report on at least two of them by the end of the summer.
Fair enough?
49 comments:
Excellent posting.
It's a conundrum. As a non-practicing Catholic, I find myself occasionally upset at nonsensical Catholic bashing, all the while knowing that some practicing Catholics are my spiritual and temporal mortal enemies.
I'd feel better about someone bashing my childhood spiritual sanctuary if they'd bash because it's stuck in B.C.E. mythology and metaphor, not because they "worship statues." So I think Anonymous' complaint is understandable.
If Anonymous looks at the picture Sullivan posts about the incipient hanging of two of his fellow gays or reads about the new Somali leader's assertion that non-practicing Muslims should be put to death or that gays should be put to death, and doesn't "get" the very real danger some aspects of his religion, there's probably nothing anyone can say to assuage his upset.
Until all religions of "the book" cull the original contextual appeals to nomadic tribes which are dangerous out of the writings, we gays all have two jihads: our personal one and one for the betterment of the "religions."
I second your call for excluding ad hominem attacks.
Grt, you are an apologist for bigotry. Anonymous wasn't commenting on the real danger of some aspects of Islam (as you state), he was commenting on sweeping mass generalizations that are statistically false. Two very different things, and by linking the two, you show your true stripes.
To Gay Conservative Liberal, or whatever you are, re your comment:
"If you're bowing five times a day on a rug facing Mecca chances are you're out for my blood"...tens of millions of pious Muslims pray 5 times daily, from Kuala Lumpur to Casablanca. Yea, a small percentage would be out for your blood, what what percentage? Answer that question. But before you do, hire a body guard, and go visit Marrakeh, Istanbul, Cairo, Dubai, Jakarta and Kuala Lumpur (millions of Westerners visit these cities every year, so what are you scared of?) Go do your homework yourself so at least you can sound somewhat creditable, rather than protest how you went to some college in the u.s. and thus read some history books.
Islam has not suddenly declared some new war. The problem is intepretations of Islam that, since the early 20th century, have manefested themselves progressively more violently and fanatitically, when mixed with the chemicals of geo-politics and failures of other utopian ideals like marixism or communism of Arab nationalism. You don't need a book on Islam any more than you need a book on christianity, which as you point out, in fundamentalist terms at literal reading, are not too dissimilar. You need a book on why radical Islam has evolved and is now manefesting itself the way it is today. Before there were islamic suicide bombers, there were japanese and sri lankan ones. In Cairo in the 1960s, you'd rarely see a woman in a headscarf....today you would rarely see a woman without one. You need a book that explains why these changes have happened...think about it Mr. Educated, Worldy and (supposidly) Intelligent.
What's up, anonymous? Thanks for your posts; I appreciate the thought you put into them.
That said, I am actually planning a trip to Dubai for 2007 and will definitely be reporting on it. If you read my travel blog you'll see I'm more friendly and open minded than I seem. Note: Thanks for the tip on hiring a bodyguard.
Islam, as I see it, has been roiled in a battle for its piece of the Holy Land since the Crusades. For you to cite geopolitics and the failure of Marxism as a new cause for the abhorrent behavior of terrorists is just ridiculous, though. If that were the case, then Vietnamese citizens who sought refuge here in the states would have killed us off already, unless the Cubans or Colombians or even the Liberians beat them to it.
I am not denying the complicity of past and current U.S. administrations in fueling the ire of extremists, but the fact remains that something about Islam sets it apart from other faiths that just grin and bear the brunt of global politics -- you have to agree on that.
Also, what do geo-politics have to fo with Shariah, where rape victims in Kenya and Pakistan can be stoned for seeking help? What about the new Aghani government who is the biggest benefactor of Christian values (for better or worse) wanting to kill a man for converting to Christianity? Is the threat to Islam so great that clerics feel they must kill their own?
Just like the Christians were the terrorists of the world in the dark ages and trough the discovery of the new world, so has Islam now emerged as the world's new menace.
That's my final argument on the matter.
You still don't get it. What does geo-politics have to do with headscarves emerging over the past 30 years when they weren't on the streets of progressive Arab capitals in the 1960's? Its but one factor, in a conflence of variables and causes and events that are unique in their configuration. But you'll never get that, since, as you betray yourself, your views are coloured by the crusades, and battle for the holy land, which has little to do with the rise of violent Islam (the protestations of naive Muslims to the contrary who cite Palestine as the greivance causing the rise of Islamism...funny how you're in the same camp).
If there was something in Islam, as you claim, then that should be a consistent throughout history. Further, stoning of rape victims and converts...some perspective, how many days a week does this occur in each Muslim country from Morocco to Malaysia (haven't check the data, but I would guess far fewer times than Women in the U.S. get raped in the absolute).
And here's my final observation, since you both lead with the comment that betrayed you (the fight for the holy land), further reinforced by the posting of the Palestine flag among your images of Islamic terrorism (thus hard to draw an image other than your obsession with the fight for Palestine): the fight for Palestine has been hijacked by Islamists. You may be interested to learn, however that the Palestinian cause's most dedicated servants were/are Christian Palestinian, from the intellectual (Edward Said) to the terrorists (founders of each of the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine and Democratic Front for the Liberation of Palestine), politicians (successive mayors of Bethlehem...Palestinian birthplace of Jesus) to media darlings (Hanan Ashrawi).
...checked your travel blog by-the-way...so you've been to Bogota, B.A. and Montreal. Wow. How worldly. I'm mean, I'm blown away! And soon Dubai, probably your first foray into the Middle East...I'm in awe at how adventurous and curious you are about the Middle East, its culture and history....which mall do you plan to visit while in Dubai, and do you plan to Ski at the Mall of the Emirates?
I want to add something else.
It is factually true that Muslims are anti-gay, and the more religious Muslims tend to be even more anti-gay. Pretending otherwise means closing your eyes to reality.
And as you said, it is factually true that Christians in Africa not to speak of Christians in Utah) are also anti-gay. To pretend otherwise is to reinforce your selective bigotry..quite ironic for a gay person
Of course African Christians are anti-gay. But they are not looking to behead gay people for being gay. That's unique to Islam.
And I am not a gay person, I am a fag hag. You need to get your facts straight - I said so publicly on this blog.
oh, a fag had. ok, well at least i can admit when i made a factual mistake.
...and there are many more christian than just african that are anti-gay...you are amazingly selective in your pejorative references
I am quite aware of the bigotry towards gays that Christians exert. I do not advocate this or think it's right.
But it is nowhere on the level of Muslim bigotry. It just isn't.
I want to add I am not gay, I am a fag hag. Please get your facts straight, as I have said this repeatedly.
Oh okay, you corrected yourself re: my being gay.
I am quite aware of those Christians who are anti-gay. I only mentioned Africa, because this is where Christians COULD advocate gay beheadings if they want to, but DON'T.
how many days a week does this occur in each Muslim country from Morocco to Malaysia (haven't check the data, but I would guess far fewer times than Women in the U.S. get raped in the absolute).
Women aren't judicially raped in the U.S., nor is civilian rape condoned by law.
As for Miss R.
Of course African Christians are anti-gay. But they are not looking to behead gay people for being gay.
No, but being gay can still get you thrown in jail, and in a number of African countries, gay rights organizations are banned, as is public support for gay rights.
Islam kills gays.
Christianity kills gays.
Religion kills gays.
I've never managde to comprehend why gay people still seek spirituality since it's antithetical to everything we are.
As far as I'm concerned, spirituality and religion are all about sexual repression, first and foremost. Anything else is secondary.
kittynboi:
Agreed on religion, but all I am saying is that it is one religion in particular nowadays that is MOST intolerant towards gays: Islam.
I happen to be atheist, so you are preaching to the choir re: religion itself being intolerant.
Agreed on religion, but all I am saying is that it is one religion in particular nowadays that is MOST intolerant towards gays: Islam.
Ok, so now we can have a pecking order of who, today, is more intolerant toward gays:
1. Islam
2. African christianity
3. Chinese authoritarianism
4. Fundamentalists in Utah
...and precisely what is the implication of this pecking order? all homophobia and persecution of gays is bad...so what do we do with the above information some are bad, and others are badder...whats the policy prescription that arises from this hierarchy of homophobia?
Given the bipolar world we live in today, it seems that the solution is to try to encourage tolerance and acceptance domestically within the US, while supporting the US when it fights terror abroad and domestically. (assuming it does so while obeying constitutional norms and human rights)
That is my strategy.
In short, I am anti-Bush but pro-war against Islamofacism. I was against the war in Iraq when fought, but I am for the continuous of American/coalition presence until the job is done. I also am extremely pro-Israel.
The problem is that few Dems take a strong stand on any issue. It's distressing and disconcerting.
GCT: I think we would get allong great.
- New visiter
"Given the bipolar world we live in today, it seems that the solution is to try to encourage tolerance and acceptance domestically within the US, while supporting the US when it fights terror abroad and domestically. (assuming it does so while obeying constitutional norms and human rights)
That is my strategy."
But what does this all have to do with creating a pecking order who hates gays more?
Agree with the points made that religion is anti-gay. I wrote about this in my post on the Episcopal Church.
Spirituality, on the other hand, is free to everyone and I think it behooves our community to accept it. Maybe that would put an end to so much self loathing among gay men and women.
No pecking order is needed to rank who hates gays more...I stand by my point that in the course of world events a new enemy has surfaced and that is Islam. The hardliners are charting the course for the future of the faith. The moderates, if they're not too busy shopping at Harrod's (per one person's comment) should speak up.
And anonymous, I haven't decided which mall I'll visit first in Dubai...any recommendations?
"The moderates, if they're not too busy shopping at Harrod's (per one person's comment) should speak up."
So why don't they? Because they're tired of bigots like you that throw out the baby with the bathwater. The self-righteous among you that constantly goads "prove yourself". The sweeping statements of ignorance such as those from you that sparked this debate. Why reward ignorance?...its exhausting...and the great thing about america is that we can just get on with it, melt away into the melting pot, and not have to deal with crap like you're spouting (right down to the glib sarcasism about shopping).
Here is an example of speaking up...the Muslim Assoc of Canada after the Toronto arrests...what more do you want...a statement that "we reject Islam in all its forms and renounce our faith"...how naive.
"The Muslim Association of Canada wishes to express its support for our law enforcement agencies as they pursue efforts to prevent terrorist attacks in Canada. The arrest of individuals suspected of planning terror attacks on Canadian soil is welcome news. While we believe that our law enforcement agencies are doing their best to maintain public safety, we also believe that the accused must be judged and tried in courts of law, rather than by the media or the public. Diligent police work coupled with supremacy of the law is the best defense against terrorism.
The Association has expressed on a number of previous occasions its firm belief that terrorism has no place in our world. Islam does not condone the use of violence against civilians. This position is widely shared by Muslim communities across Canada and the world. If indeed the allegations prove true, we must all redouble our efforts to ensure that our communities are free from such ideologies. We must also guard against the prejudice and hate that have emerged in the aftermath of similar investigations."
Anonymous why can't you just admit that just like the Christians at one point held the monopoly on terror that Islam has now emerged as the nihilistic force of the new millenium?
Further, the Christians were seeking to rule the world so their insane behavior had a tangible objective (of course one that was veiled under the idea of converting the masses). What's frightening about the situation with Islam is that these men are expecting their heaven via the destruction of everyone else on the planet.
And those hardliners ARE Islam's current incarnation. They would be the first to tell you that "moderates" are not Muslim.
"Anonymous why can't you just admit that just like the Christians at one point held the monopoly on terror that Islam has now emerged as the nihilistic force of the new millenium?"
That wasn't where the debate began mate...nice try, but lets focus on your core sweeping allegations:
"Muslims have no allegiance to anyone except their faith, a faith that demands the head of every "infidel" on the planet....Muslims living in the West don't harbor a nostalgic or romantic connection to their faith and homeland while living in a foreign land; they're pissed that their new neighbors don't share their beliefs. They don't want to become a part of their adopted countries, be it France, the U.S., or England, they prefer to sulk among their own, hating and plotting against everyone who is not like them."
When you vilify every "muslim" in the same one-size-fits all category, you expose yourself for what you really are...not someone seeking analytical thoughtful debate, but a bigot who doesn't know what he's talking about.
And you expose the reason that those moderate muslims (a sub-category that you suddenly became aware of after your one-size-fits all condemnations and accusations above) don't speak out.
The terrorists would be the first to tell you that THEY are the real muslims. That's what they want us to believe and the moderate community isn't doing anything to prove otherwise.
So you tell me, how are we to know that the moderate Muslim driving the cab or living next door is just that? Is there NO precedent at all for my opinions?
"the moderate community isn't doing anything to prove otherwise."
how do you know that? i pasted one example on here already. and in canada it was muslims that helped the rcmp turn in the toronto alleged.
you just can't help yourself...the boundaries of your bigotry and ignorance, framed by your successive sweeping generalizations as fact betrays you for what you really are
btw, you live in nyc no? how many taxi drivers have tried to behead you?
One thing I want to note about religion.
Not all religions are bigoted and not all religions are anti-gay.
The Unitarian Universalist Church is quite inclusive, and very much welcomes gay members. Same for reform judaism. There is also an Episcopal openly gay minister, and polytheistic faiths such as buddhism tend to not denigrate gay people. So it's not like every religion denigrates gays.
I will be the first to say that there are good, warm Muslims in the world. I know some myself. Yet where are they, taking back their religion? Why is it that such large majorities of Muslims hate JEWS (that is right JEWS), not just Israelis?
Here is a Pew poll that backs this up.
http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?PageID=831
I refer to this recent public opinion poll that says it all.
http://pewresearch.org/obdeck/?ObDeckID=26 - shows vast support for terror that Muslims have
It is not just the way the media portrays things. The media within the Arab world is heavily antisemitic and heavily antigay. Large numbers of Muslims actually believe in the Protocols of Zion.
Does this literally mean that every single Muslim is bad? Of course not. There are good, decent Muslims who have tried to make the world a better place. But the GOOD ones face fatwas - see Salman Rushie, Irshad Manji, and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. The good ones are few and far between and are not being supported in the way they should be.
The sad truth is that Muslims have killed more Muslims than the West ever has. The sad truth is Muslim terrorism is mostly directed at fellow Muslims, above all else.
Big Pharaoh - a Muslim living in Egypt - wrote an excellent column on Muslim silence. The attitude seems to be to place all the blame on the West and to refuse culpability for their own actions.
http://www.bigpharaoh.com/2006/06/26/on-muslim-silence/
Big Pharoah is an example of one of the good Muslims out there. He should be encouraged for his bravery. Why aren't there more like him? Why do so many Muslims stand back and allow mass killing to occur without a fight? And there is no excuse for "Well, they live in authoritarian countries."
Where are the vast protests for peace and against terror in Western nations? A million Muslims live in England alone - millions more across Europe. Why do they sit back and let the extremists speak for their religion and do so little to stop them?
I would like to add that there are isolated instances of Muslims protesting against terror. But it has yet to occur on any wide scale, and the vast majority of Muslims in the world do not even believe that Muslim hijackers were behind 9/11.
"Why is it that such large majorities of Muslims hate JEWS (that is right JEWS), not just Israelis?
because jewish scripture was the justification for denying palestinians their homeland.
i don't agree with it, but it resonates very powerfully...and the truly anti-semetic play this in the arab media for all it's worth. its all very complicated. you can't divorce the geo-political events of the 20th century with the manefestations that result.
in ottoman times and muslim spain, jews were treated far better than christians ever historically treated jews (the high point of chistrian anti-sematism being the holocaust which was carried out by christians).
oh, the pew pole... 71% of muslims in france have favourable views of jews...that same france that the worldly author of this site lived in, and in all his observations from life in france, declared arab immigrants innately violence as a consequence of the fact that their muslim
"Where are the vast protests for peace and against terror in Western nations? A million Muslims live in England alone - millions more across Europe. Why do they sit back and let the extremists speak for their religion and do so little to stop them?"
because they think that they would be playing into the hands of hateful bigots like you.
its a no-win situation
Oh ok, so calling out for peace would be defeat for moderate Muslims. How nice. Thanks for the tip, anonymous.
Anon,
That still means 29% of Muslims have unfavorable views of Jews.
And you are dead friggin wrong in your history of Israel. DEAD WRONG. I suggest you pick up a book.
I wrote a blog entry explaining why I do not believe there will be peace in Israel in my lifetime. In it, I addressed common myths and facts regarding Israel.
http://cultureforall.blogspot.com/2006/07/is-peace-possible.html
There is more, however. In fact, Palestine never really was a "homeland" as the Palestinians never had their own state. They were offered their own state in 1948, but instead chose war. Those who remained in Israel are full 100% citizens - Israeli Arabs. In contrast, the Jews who lived in the West Bank were kicked out the second Jordan unlawfully took control. In a Jewish state, there are 15 religions that have the ability to peacefully practice their faith. In the Palestinian state, they already said there will be an official religion - Islam - and Jews will be kicked out.
So don't go speaking about things you clearly are uninformed about as if you have the answers.
Conservative Liberal:
This anonymous person is just humorously beyond the pale.
That quote has to take the cake!
because they think that they would be playing into the hands of hateful bigots like you.
Wow. Just wow.
So why don't they? Because they're tired of bigots like you that throw out the baby with the bathwater. The self-righteous among you that constantly goads "prove yourself". The sweeping statements of ignorance such as those from you that sparked this debate. Why reward ignorance?
Then why don't they take it back for themselves?
"There is more, however. In fact, Palestine never really was a "homeland" as the Palestinians never had their own state. They were offered their own state in 1948, but instead chose war.
So don't go speaking about things you clearly are uninformed about as if you have the answers."
uh, actually miss r, my minor in college was in middle eastern history. I have read more on israel palestine than you have probably seen in books.
let me ask you something, if muslims came to your state claiming that the koran deeded it to islam, and the united nations agreed, would you willingly subjugate yourself to living in a muslim state there, or leaving to a neighboring state?
go back to the politics underlying the balfour declaration. yea, palestine wasn't a state, but neither was iraq (the british created that)...but the palestinian people were there, and those falling under the designated jewish state under the UN 1947 partition plan simply said no (and not only because it accorded 55% of the land of palestine to the jewish state, where jews at the time were 33% of the population).
i'm not defending the actions of palestinians...they've played their cards poorly. but YOUR ignorance of history is mindblowing
"Then why don't they take it back for themselves?"
i agree...take a page out of what the gay movement has done. i really respect the way gay men/women took back slurs like queer and used them to empower that community. but it took gays time...it didn't happen over night. decades of prejudice and discrimination. for moderate muslims, their nightmare really only began on 9/11 in earnest...they'll get there. the self-righteous among you can all arrogantly demand NOW, forgetting that all progressive movements took their own course in history
Anon:
Having a master's in Middle Eastern studies does not necessarily mean anything. There are plenty of "academics" out there who spew the most hateful rhetoric against Israel.
As far as your reply - it ignores several realities...
1) Terrorism against settlers of Israel started way before Israelis had their own state.
2) This terror was not just aimed at settlers, but also was aimed at those who lived in Israel since time immemoriam. (Hebron massacre of 1929)
3) Palestinians took part in killing Jews during the Holocaust - aiding Hitler. Thus, they actually did deserve a sanction afterwards for this. (and it's not just "punishing Palestinians for the actions of Germany")
4) The land upon which Israel was granted was land that the majority of Jews lived on - and those Israeli Arabs who already lived there were not kicked out. (and allowed to stay)
5) To the extent there was/is a Jewish claim to the State of Israel, it is not just based on the bible - it is based on history. This was the Jewish homeland, until they were kicked out. Then Jews lived as "dhimmis" in the Muslim world for centuries, until they were slaughtered THERE as well. Muslims are quite complicit in the way Jews of the diaspora were tortured and killed. Now they claim they should get the State of Israel because of their "historical claim."
Whatever.
Anon:
Let me add that thus far you did not spew hate against Israel - just typical propoganda. However, my point is that many ACADEMICS spew hate. (so your having a master's does not mean you necessarily have a greater knowledge or perspective)
ok miss r, lets go at it (btw, you STILL have not validated your assertion re "large swaths" and beheadings, but whatever, you've found new nonsense to spew.
"Terrorism against settlers of Israel started way before Israelis had their own state."
...uh, the irgun, the stern? terrorists against the british (and wanted by them)...or, in your warped view, are they "freedom fighters"?
("Hebron massacre of 1929)"
..and the massacres perpetrated by the zionist terror groups like the irgun?
"Palestinians took part in killing Jews during the Holocaust - aiding Hitler"
...again, another sweeping statement...miss r, the vast majority palestinians at the time were villager peasants who probably couldn't find germany on a map...after you validate "large swaths", validate what percentage, precisely, took part in hitlers killing of the jews, and in what capacity...10%, 30%, 90% ? whats your source the statistics...pew?
"The land upon which Israel was granted was land that the majority of Jews lived on"
...any pen can draw a boundry to create a majority...what nonsense. focus on the land of palestine miss r
"those Israeli Arabs who already lived there were not kicked out"
read Israel's new historians on the expulsion of palestinians by the zionists
"To the extent there was/is a Jewish claim to the State of Israel, it is not just based on the bible - it is based on history. This was the Jewish homeland, until they were kicked out"
...so by your logic, lets give america and canada back to the natives, mexico should establish a mayan state, and lets re-draw the map of the world the way it looked 2000 years ago.
if you're not prepared to re-draw the map the way it looked 2000 years ago, why just for israel?
...or is it just that the arabs are scum and islam evil, so why not?
1) Irgun and Stern did not aim for civilians, with exceptions. I never said I advocated what they did, but it was in retaliation against Arab violence and generally aimed for military installations - not civilians. I also do not advocate what happened re: the Bombing of the King David Hotel, though it was in response to the actions of the British and warning was given for the attack.
2) 20,000 Palestinians were sent to work for the SS, and the very LEADER of the Palestinians sent them, and was personal friends with Hitler (Grand Mufti of Jerusalem)
Catalogue of Grand Mufti's mayhem in general:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/mufti.html
Grand Mufti and Hitler:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/muftihit.html
3) I could point to a map and prove my claim of numbers of Jews who lived in Israel, and yet the battle of the maps goes on at every debate I have ever seen on the subject.
Here are demographic statistic of Israel/Palestine:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/demograhics.html
Here is a map/explanation of the partition plan:
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/History/partition_plan.html
4) The point is that Palestinians now claim a superior right to the land because of their "historical ties." Given the fact that Muslims were complicit in kicking Jews OUT, it is a pretty pathetic argument.
Oh, and provide PROOF that Arab Israelis were kicked out.
miss r,
if you're not already at GCL's place humping him, lets go on (btw, you STILL STILL STILL have not validated your claim re "large swaths")...your credibility grows with every exchange:
"I also do not advocate what happened re: the Bombing of the King David Hotel, though it was in response to the actions of the British and warning was given for the attack."
...amazing...you sound just like apologist muslims who "condem" terrorism with a "yes but" argument about palestine, chechneya and afganistan?...are you for or against terrorism, full stop? no ifs, buts, and (to use your word) "though". you have just betrayed yourself lady
"20,000 Palestinians were sent to work for the SS"
... uh, and what percentage of palestinians was this?
"the very LEADER of the Palestinians sent them"
...was that LEADER elected??
"The point is that Palestinians now claim a superior right to the land because of their "historical ties."
....and so do the israelies!!! symetry on that point
"Given the fact that Muslims were complicit in kicking Jews OUT"
uh, lady, the jewish diaspora pre-dated islam.
Oh, and you still haven't anwered my question: should we re-draw the map of the world today the way it looked 2000 years ago?...and if not, then why just for Israel?
Wow!
Where's Rodney King when we need him?
The language is sometimes inadequate to the moment. Emily Dickinson wrote of not going to church, because when she walks under a tree and hears a bird singing, she already is in church.
For lack of a better word, the experience each of us undergoes at moments of serenity and comforting happiness--alone on a beach "communing" with the ocean--is "spiritual."
Too often the spiritual has very little to do with organized religion.
Alas.
Thank you, GRT. Did everyone else hear, that? I'm talking to you, Anon.
"Oh, and provide PROOF that Arab Israelis were kicked out."
uh, they were PALESTINIAN ARABS who WERE kicked out... by definition, if kicked out, they could NOT have been Arab Israelis.
But whatever...here you go:
For the record, from Benny MOrris, Israeli historian:
in December 1982, came the first fading, pre-Xerox photocopies, neatly stacked in files in an archive outside Tel Aviv. They recorded the doings during late 1947-1948 of the Palmah, the strike force of the Haganah, the main Jewish underground militia in Palestine. They were still classified but I had been given access. Some of the documents, such as Lieutenant-Colonel Yitzhak Rabin's order to the Yiftah Brigade of July 12 1948 to expel the inhabitants of the just-conquered Arab town of Lydda
re transfer, again, Morris:
the Zionist leadership in the 1920s, 1930s and 1940s, from David Ben-Gurion, Israel's founding prime minister, through Chaim Weizmann, the liberal president of the World Zionist Organisation, and Menahem Ussishkin and Zeev Jabotinsky, had supported the idea. In 1928, Frederick Kisch, the chairman of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, told Weizmann that he had "always been hoping and waiting for" a solution of "the racial problem of Palestine" by way of a transfer of its Arabs to Mesopotamia.
but also, read Palestinian narratives (or do only Israeli's own the truth because Arabs are scum?)...lots of books on the firsthand stories, but just read the Question of Palestine by Edward Said...he, as I'm sure you know, was a Columbia university professor and one of the foremost literary critics of the 20th century (or does he not count because he's arab scum).
Now, where is your PROOF re "large swaths"? waiting...
Anon:
BENNY MORRIS is your "expert?" Please.
Here is an article debunking what Benny Morris has to say:
http://www.meforum.org/article/466
As far as the actions of Irgun/Stern. They were NOTHING LIKE modern Palestinian terrorism. Their policy was to aim for military installations, NOT civilians. And yet, even that said, I am not comfortable with what they did and don't condone it. I never said Israel was perfect.
I am quite aware of how the Jewish diaspora worked. However, the point is that Jews were still living in the Middle East post-diaspora. They were living in Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia. Furthermore, there were Jews who never left Israel. And yet, in the Middle East, they had to suffer from crippling "dhimmi" laws, and Jews were slaughtered by Mohammed himself.
I am not saying Israel's map should be re-drawn to 2000 years ago. However, the historical claim PLUS the fact that there were large numbers of Jews who ACTUALLY lived in Israel in 1948 is ample reason for Israel to exist.
The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem was the personal mentor of Yassir Arafat, for the record. Arafat was allegedly popularly elected multiple times. He learned what he learned from someone who was an open Nazi supporter. And I would like to add that Palestinians could have chosen a different leader, but didn't. They didn't have to follow what the Grand Mufti said. They could have formed an alternate, break away group. But...oh yeah, they didn't, and he had popular support.
I have already shown public opinion polls of Muslims, and actions taken by Muslim governments with support of the people. I have yet to see protests for gay rights in a single Muslim nation, other than Lebanon, and that was a small protest that ended violently. I have yet to see any prominent Muslims band together and demand gay equality, hell, even fair treatment of Jews in Muslim nations. I *have* seen this from Christians and Jews. This only leads one down to a single logical conclusion.
And one last thing. You are utterly devoid of humor in every way, and it is sad, sad, sad. I was clearly *JOKING* about the humping. But you have shown yourself to be a voyeur, anyway.
thats the reality of the middle east, ms humpy...oh, sorry, miss r. for every claim, there is a counterclaim. and you're approach is that only the jews must be telling the truth (and not the bad-jew historians like benny morris who have seen the declassified docs for himself), and the arabs telling nothing but nonsense. have you read any account of the palestinian evictions of 1947-48 written by palestinians who went thru it, or do they not count because arabs tell only lies? and you claim historical right by jews to israel because they lived there...are you prepared to accord the same right to palestinians, because the to LIVED and LIVE there?
oh, and arafat was elected mostly because he was mentored by the grand mufti who dies decades before arafat even stood for election by people who mostly weren't alive during the time of the mufti?...you perversion of logic continues to defy logic. oh, and you STILL have not shown any concrete evidence of what you claimed: that "large swarths" of muslims (aka morocco to malaysia) advocate "beheading" of gays. you keep spewing your hate and bigotry of muslims but you fail to cite one specific statistic to back you allegation other than polls that indicate muslims have prejudicial views of jews (news for you sweetie...polls also indicate that christians have prejucial views of muslims).
you're a moron.
Anon,
You have twisted my words and also refuse to look at facts.
The article I cited definitively debunks Benny Morris.
All the facts I have seen show that in fact Israel did NOT kick out the Palestinians - they left on their own to WAGE WAR.
As I have also shown, the Grand Mufti was a popular leader of the Palestinians, elected or not elected. Wikipedia has a great listing of links you will not read about this.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amin_al-Husayni
Nothing I say will appease you, and nothing I say will prove the blatantly obvious - that the "moderate Muslim" voice is muted and silent against Islamofacism, which clearly seeks to wipe Jews and gays off the planet. I never said every Muslim was bad.
Read Irshad Manji's book "The Trouble With Islam." (Oh right, she received death threats for her book)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000FUTQ6E/sr=8-1/qid=1152540117/ref=pd_bbs_1/103-8418543-2209413?ie=UTF8
Read "The Caged Virgin" by Ayaan Hirsi Ali (fatwa against her, of course)
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0743288335/qid=1152540222/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/103-8418543-2209413?s=books&v=glance&n=283155
The problem is quite deep and quite widespread and there is significant scholarship - that you will ignore - speaking about it all.
I am not tolerant of intolerance.
Anon, what is it with you and name-calling. Miss R is giving you hard evidence, she's sharing resources with other readers and you're just spewing from your soap box. You're no better than me. You're opinionated (great) but you're cornered now and you're coming out swinging. Lame.
Posting under "anonymous" isn't very admirable under any circumstance.
Hey GCL, great blog ya got here! Found you through AS last week. Good to know I'm not the only one fed up with both of our major parties.
Anyway, in the original post here you asked about some books about Islam and our current situation you might read this summer. I, too, have been trying to bone up, as I knew some basics but was a bit murky on some things (like how exactly does a fatwa work, how do you reconcile suicide bombing with provisions against suicide, etc.)
I can make a few recommendations so far:
Warrant for Terror by Shmuel Bar is a scholarly overview of fatwas and how they work, historically and in the present day. It's kind of dry, but it's pretty short, and he really draws on a lot of original-language source material.
While Europe Slept by Bruce Bawer -- although some of this might be familiar territory to you, having lived over there. He draws on a number of examples, especially from Holland and Norway, where Western governments' attempts to be politically correct to fundamentalist Muslims while also failing to integrate them into society have had very chilling consequences.
No God But God by Reza Aslan -- just starting this one, it's very well written though. I somehow missed it when it first came out.
And, finally, although it's not exactly focused on Islam, a big pitch for Ron Suskind's The One Percent Doctrine which totally reads like a John LeCarre novel except is creepier because it's true (or as true as you can get with his extensive and impeccable sources).
This book is the scariest of the lot, since it really shows the massive failures of our anti-terror policies (if you can even call them that) since 9/11. There are a number of other juicy tidbits as well (Condi Rice comes out with a big stain on her integrity, for instance) that also make it a must-read.
See what ya think, let us know -- and keep up the great writing!
Post a Comment