Islam?

Remove all ads!

Odd response to a post suggesting that we not lump the entire Muslim community in with the extremists. That isn't even how it went down. Some imams staged protests in response to the Danish governments refusal to discuss the issue with several Muslim ambassadors. It was a small group, and not indicative of the majority of Muslims by any means. I would also point out that the worst they did was actually no worse than the riots conducted after the Rodney King verdict in the US. You have perfectly demonstrated exactly what I was warning against.

 

Exactly. What you see in the media is a few hundred people who behave badly. Islam has around 1.4 billion followers, and not all of them are in the middle east you know... Do you really think over a billion people, or even remotely close to it, acted like this? The media doesn't show the "normal" muslims, because it itsn't newsworthy; they don't go around praying for the death of every westerner, or plan terrorist attacks.

 

But i don't see them condemning the "not so normal" muslims either, is that because the majority quietly agrees with the displayed sentiments in the pics ?

 

drew if just part of the muslim community (in denmark) actually had voiced an oppinion against does imams i would have believed you, none save one muslim politician, who then also recieved death threats and a bombe threat.

when they dont condem these form of riots and threats, and thinks its okay to burn ambassays and such over drawings made for a newspaper, i lose my respect for them.

the group called moderate muslims, generaly led by the politician called Nasher Khader, while i dont agree with them, i adleast have some respect for them, as they where the only muslim orginisation to speak out against it.
the rest i must assume accepted it and saw it as a good solution

 

Actually, all the terrorist attacks has been condemned by many muslim groups/communities. But with 1.4 billion muslims, naturally all of them won't speak at once. Many people out on the countryside probably hasn't even heard about what has happened in the last few years, remember that access to tv and other types of media is not something that everyone has.

 

Actually, they have. Their efforts to speak out were even acknowledged by the Jyllands-Posten, the paper that initially published the cartoons.

Here are just a couple of examples that I dug up.

http://agora.blogsome.com/2006/04/03/demos-danish-moslems-arise-and-protest/
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/689

Here's an official statement made by the cultural editor of the Jyllands-Posten, who clearly doesn't feel that moderate Muslims haven't been speaking out enough. His take on the situation is actually rather positive.
http://www.buydanish.dk/index.php/explanation-from-jyllands-posten/

 

There's a program dispatches did on Muslims in Britain a few months back, they put it on YT now, it's in 6 parts, and the other parts can be viewed on the right. It's very interesting, and worth watching. Dispatches investigate.

 

The next point I'd like to adress is the recurring comment that there are muslims condemning extremists as on the pictures, suggesting these people are a radical fringe outside the mainstream. While the observation is correct, the assumption they're somewhat fringe stands on shaky ground.

Are Osama and his crew really claiming unjustified authority to radically redefine what Islamic belief really sais?

Understanding the underlying problem requires to delve deeper into the structure and history of Islam. Islam has no clergy. If someone is bold enough to interpret the Koran in a certain way, and finds followers for his view, then that interpretation of Islam is legitimate. That is clearly the case with Osama bin Laden. One can say that what Islam means is determined by consensus. That also explains why there are muslims who claim that some things, like circumcision of weman, are demanded by Islam - and that there are other muslims who fervently disagree.

That also explains why Islam is prone to generate sectarian subgroups. But no matter their views, as long as they stick to the key tenet that Allah is the only god and Mohammad his prohet, they're within Islam. It is very important to understand that. Bin Laden, probably just like the folks on the pictures, is not some far out crackpot, but a genuinely pious man motivated by his deep faith in Islam.

The orientation backwards, to the Golden Age and the values of the Golden Age, is because ithijad, the re-interpretation of the Koran, was stopped at some point in the middle ages on grounds that it would lead too far away from the tenet, and too fast. The argument was that everything that could possibly shed light on how to understand Islam has already been said. Thus the 'gate of ithijad' was closed and Sunni Islam remained more or less static ever since (it's somewhat different with the Shia who allow for a degree of re-interpretation through accepted learned scholars [not clerics] - the ayatollahs -- and even there new interpretations are only accepted when made by a consensus. In some of his ideas Khomeini for instance was overruled).

Judaism and Christianity also had such phases. They only never lasted so long. So what we see are the consequences of a structural problem within Islam, and it's certainly not a problem that the West is going to solve.

And when the Muslims will finally adress that problem, they will do so in accordance with Islam and the result will not at all look like Western modernity.

[ March 25, 2007, 15:08: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

 

drew you first aticles cites the very politician i myself mentioned, what should that prove? that i was right when i said Naser khader spoke against the imams?
the second seems positive, allthough i havent heard this organisation they intended to form voice any opinions at all.

the last is just an interview with the editor from jyllands-posten explaining why they published the cartoons and why it was so importent to do so. I agree with him, it still dosn't remove the fact that all twelve cartoonists are living under police protection do to death threats.

moderate muslims / muslims for democraty is by the way quite a buzz word in denmark, used by Naser khader, so it might be undestood diferently when translated from danish to english.

@sarevok we have a semilar problems with imams from turkey and saudi arabia, which is why an imam-studie along the priest study at the university is being surgested in denmark. the foreign imams often have no idea about the countries culture

 

It is a long known and much denied that Saudi Arabia is one of the key sources of radical Islam in the world. Why the denial? The US has huge oil interests in Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is one of 2 nations that follow Sharia law for all aspects of Jurisprudence (the other is Iran). To be honest, I'm not surprised at all by the video Sarevok linked to as it is, frankly, old news. Wahabism is dangerous. It's dangerous not only to non-Muslims, but to Islam, as well. Nevertheless, it is still important to point out that there is resistance to Wahabism within the Islamic community, so I will re-iterate that labeling all Muslims adherents to Wahabism is dangerous. It just isn't true.

First of all, Hadith explicitely states that "people of the Book" (Christians and Jews) are able to go to heaven (although it is harder) and that they should be left alone. It even states that a Muslim who marries a Christian woman must not only allow her to practice her faith, bur must see her safely to and from her place of worship. Wahabism is in direct contradiction of many of the prophet's words in Hadith...and frequently contradicts the words in the Quran as well.

 

problem is that while it was so, when islam began. (jews and christians where threated as people who where on the right track but had lost thier way)
it isn't really that way anymore the last 800 years of wars between christians and muslims and later jews versus muslims has ruined this.

 

Wrong. In most Islamic nations, Christians and Jews are allowed to practice their faith unmolested. Check out nations like Jordan, Egypt, and Morocco and you'll see what I'm talking about. Militant fundamentalism is primarily exported by the nations of Pakistan, Iran, and Saudi Arabia. Most other Middle Eastern nations are actually quite western.

 

egypt still today has problems with the radical movement called the brotherhood of islam.

somalia has huge problems with the radical union of islamic judges.

Sudan practise one of the most extreme forms of islam.

tunis and its nabours are nice countries when all the turist are there, try travelling outside turist time.

and thats just the countries near europe and the middle east.

 

None of what you said has anything to do with the fact that those countries allow Christians and Jews to practice their faiths unmolested. Hell, even Lebanon allows that. It's obvious that problems with fundamentalist groups exist all over the Muslim world. Given that the western world has problems with fundamentalist groups, what would you expect?

 

Equester,
you mean the Muslim Brotherhood. That is the oldest Islamist organisation, founded by the sufi Islamic lawyer Hassan al-Banna in 1928 in iirc Egypt. However, it is active all over the Muslim world. The aforementioned and highly influential Islamist Sayyid Qutb also was a member of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt today is first of all a conservative political organisation, and a very large and very important one for that. Would there be fair elections in Egypt today, the Muslim Brotherhood would win hands down. Think of them as a broadly popular political party.

The Union of Islamic Courts in Somalia has achieved for the first time in 20 years to restore order in Somalia. Compared to the crooks and warlords there, they look good. And I predict they are not gone but will return and participate in government sooner or later.

It IMO is a very disingenious thing to lump together conservative islamic political parties with terrorists or that scary bogeyman 'Islamofascism'.

[ March 25, 2007, 17:51: Message edited by: Ragusa ]

 

did you read your own link ragusa, the very goal of the muslim brotherhood is to re-establish a worldwide muslim caliphat, do you hournestly think such an organisation would not clash with our society at some point?

after reading your link i really see the errors in my believe that this group was bad

 

Equester,
you miss my point. Islam means subordination under Allah, the only god, and that applies as much for the individual believer as for the state as well.

The separation of church and state as we know it is inherently alien to Islam, as are ideologies like nationalism or socialism. Allah is the only god, and a nation state or the 'international working class' to a conservative Muslim are false gods, a heresy. For a devout muslim thus the emergence of a new caliphat means restoring an (idealised, no doubt) order in sync with Islam. It is a natural end state, and it is not exactly a radical position to call for that to happen. It's theologically consequent, and you can in fact expect many a pious muslim to support that goal.

My beef with your views is that they to me resemble beerhouse ramblings.

BTA,
fair enough, but all most peoples ask for in their government is that it serves them, not their neighbours.

 

as far as i can read from your post your agreeing with my view, wether its beerhouse rambling or not.

you agree with me that muslims dont aknowdlege our idea of a society.
you tell me the majority would prefer a land ruled by sharia ( a lovely law system that contains women oppression and physical punishment, oh and removes a large part of freedom, like the freedom to critize islam)

i cant see that form of islam ever integrate in our society and i certently can not respect it.
I generaly consider myself an undestanding man, and i find it totally okay to voice whatever opinions people has, i will rahter see them voiced then hidden.
but i can not respect a religion who so violently oppress people(women mainly) around the world, and which teaches so much hatred.

but i guess having this view, makes me a beerhouse rambler, unlike people who defends this religion, no mather what its followers does

 

I don't think you're a beerhouse rambler, in my opinion you're spot on. There have been too many incidents in mosques all over my country to ignore this problem any longer. This weekend one of em almost went up in flames, and i predict this is the first of many more to come.