Wafa Sultan - Rebel, Heretic or Outcast?

Coolness, but that picture threw me off for a moment - I kind of thought I'd see the ass-kicker!

Yeah, that would've made more sense. There's a pic in the NY times profile on her.

Sly shout-out to Desicritics:)

This is powerful stuff. She is a dynamite. I hope the media gives more coverage to her. Hopefully that would unite some of the more moderate Muslims and release them from their fear.

Wow!!!

9/11 is the best thing that could have happened to the silent majority of muslims...time for dormancy and hibernation no more...

we already witness signs of stirring....they are questioning, shouting, writing, discussing

the jury is not yet selected:) (no, not out!)

what good will come out of this, if any time will tell....one thing is for sure ... whether they like it or not 9/11 is a wake up call

the change will come from within ...the youth...the new breed of aware and educated youngsters.... and from without (irshad manji, taslima nasreen, salman rushdi, that dutch legislator sorry i cannot recall her name this minute, wafa, warraq etc.)

wittingly or unwittingly the change will come!

@Nachiketa: Agreed it's powerful. I don't know if u saw the video at the Mimri website; she comes across as pretty relentless. The cleric's expression is trapped somewhere between a sickly grin and a gasp. Unfortunately, the choice she seems to give is to abandon the religion altogether or stay stuck in the 13th century; I can't see how that could possibly appeal to moderates. Perhaps Islam needs more of a Ataturk or a Nasser type figure.

@Anil, she presents a face that is diametrically opposite to what one hears normally. I agree that the solution lies in the middle, but you need something like this to create waves.

Good point @$#Nachiketa - change always comes from the extremes and extremists

BTW, whenever I see your @name style, I think of Perl operators:)

@temporal: ref to: "9/11 is the best thing that could have happened to the silent majority of muslims." Intriguing idea. Hmmm... I think you're right. Islam is ripe for a protestant-type fracturing. Hopefully, without the accompanying violence.

On a slight offline note: The SF writer, Arthur C. Clarke invented one such variant. Its (martyred) prophet is a Gulf-war soldier, a female, and it ends taking over the world. Clarke called it Chrislam.

And remember in Dune, the Buddhislamic galactic cult?

Yeah! Buddhislam. That's like drinking coffee with a couple of spoons of salt.

That's how the Tibetans drink their tea - tsampa

Aaman don't forget the dash of (goat?) butter in tsampa;)

anil there are inherent problems associated with external pressures

they can only act as a catalyst up to a point only...any meaningful changes/reforms have to come from within

I agree it's a travesty that this woman doesn't get any air time or media coverage in the West, I had only heard of her and this interview in the entertainment section of one of Canada's supposedly biggest newspapers "The Globe and Mail". A meida watch columnist talked about her interview.

I actually converted that into my post on Al Jazeera for here and BC. What was heartening is that people at BC. posted sites where the transcript for the show was available and the clips were still avialible to be watched. So hopefully more people will get access and awareness of her.

The whole situation is very scarey, and I fear for what could happen to those millions of people who are Muslim it the religion goes through the type of internal strife Christianity went through from the 16th century through to 17th century. In those days they were still using flintlocks, horses and sabres, and it was awful. It doesn't take much to imagine what could happen with today's weapons.

Is it too much to hope for rational minds in a religious debate?

gypsyman

Tell me you guys are pulling my legs on goat butter and salt in coffee! My entire worldview is crumbling here...

@gypsyman: I guess the cartoon incident is still causing a lot of fourth and fifth thoughts in the media. NY Times picked the safest items to quote from the debate.

anil!

trust the editors (lock the doors tho')


Here

;)

Anil - tsampa is quite interesting, and tasty once you get used to it

In its simplest form, tsampa may be prepared by placing the roasted flour in a bowl and pouring tea over the top

(copied and pasted from elsewhere)

Hmm, how is she a hero?

she ignores facts.
ignores history.
skews facts.
skews history.

i've watched both interviews on aljazeera, and i understand arabic, in BOTH of them she had her ass handed to her, however in BOTH of the clips on the net, those sections are edited out... odd?

Memri, is biased shit, they've EDITED OUT any reply and any section that wouldn't fit their agenda, and their agenda is that they want to show the world that muslims and arabs are religous fanatics and people who fail at debates.
heck, there was a point or two where she actually RETRACTED stuff she said.
even their translations are wrong... and my reply from another post:

[quote]

to those that will bother to learn:

i WATCHED this clip on Al Jazeera itself, and guess what, EVERY point she said was replied to, and after a certain point, she changed her tone... don't take memri seriously cause it's biased EVEN in words translated.

anywho, here are some points to those that'll bother to read:

1- This clip is incomplete, there's a HUGE part that's NOT in there, where SHE ended up looking like an idiot and changing her tone because she knew what she was saying was wrong. memri is VERY selective, notice the cuts in the video.

2- If you think stuff like this doesn't come on Al jazeera and other arab channels all the time, you're kidding me... you need to follow arab tv more before you critize it... believe it or not, Al-Jazeera was Bush's pal before they broadcasted something bush didn't like. Yay.

3- secondly mistranslations from memri such as "woman as a beast, no, woman as a mule" "are you a heretic, no , are you an Atheist" "secular, no, science believer" "i'm a secular person that does not believe in spirtual things, no, i am a science beleving woman that does not believe in anything paranormal" memri is VERY selective in translations to invoke even more anger. especially the heretic point, since he wasn't insulting her, he was asking her if she was an atheist or not. (and additon i'm just adding, he was saying that if she was an atheist, then there is no blame on her of committing blasphemy, which actually SHOWS civility)

4- other than her points, which mostly DON"T make sense and which SHE HERSELF retracted afterwards (in the part you don't see) it's obvious by anyone that knows arabic is that her Arabic is NOT native, it's TAUGHT as a second or third language. any phonetics expert could tell that.

5- it's obvious she hasn't been in most of the muslim countries lately if she thinks we're backwards and living in some sort of "repression and ignorance" do yourself a favor, do a search on Melody tv and/or singers such as the egyptain "ruby" the lebanese "nancy agram" and a zillion others, or do a search for arabic movies from even the 1950's and before.

6- she opposes that muslims refer to non-muslims with names they haven't chosen, well then she should be offended by the term 'goy' ,'gentiles', 'unenlightened' and whatever term christians use or used to denote non christians... and don't even CLAIM they didn't exist, because guess what, christians thought non christians were barbarians and savages and that's why there were missionaries, you know who else thought they needed to bring enlightment to others? the japanese when they invaded and buthchered china.
anywho, for the terms she opposes;

a- "Ahl el Beit" directly means "people of the house" meaning wise means: people of the house of God.

b- "ahl el kotob" directly means "people of the book" meaning wise means: people of the books of God, i.e people who believe in one of the holy books (torah, Enjeel, Qu'ran).

c- "ahl el Dhimma" directly means "people of Concience" meaning wise means: people who have concience.

d- "el nasara" directly means "the victory helpers" meaning wise :"those who saved the Muslims" or "those that stood by the muslims" in islamic history, when the Prophet Mohammed and his followers were being attacked and killed in Mecca, they left for Madina, Madina was a Christian City, and the people of Madina helped the Prophet and the muslims, and they shared their houses and Bread, el Nasara is a term used to show how much islam LOVES these people.

so far, the above three names AREN"T in any way offensive... now let's see what she says that SEEMS offensive:

a- " El Maghdoob 3alehom" (3 denotes a sound unavalible in english) : directly means :"those that are angered upon" meaning wise : "those that God frowns upon, or God is angry at" HOWEVER, this word is NOT used to refer to christians or jews , or even ANYONE in particular, it is used to refer to those that have gone astray and God is angry at, it's part of a prayer that basically is asking God not to be one of those Gone astray... not so evil sounding now is it?

b- "el khanzeer we'll Korooud" : "the monkeys and pigs" (both translations) : Everyone attacks this point for existing... HOWEVER what they don't understand, YES it exists in the Qu'ran but it's telling part of a story.
In the story, Some people angered God so God turned them to Pigs and Monkeys. and yes these people WERE jews. however this story is a story that PREDATES Islam by eons, and it's not used to riducle or attack jews, it's used to show that EVEN followers of God can anger God if they disobey him. in this vein i guess everyone should attack both the bible and the Qu'ran for having mass genocide (Noah's Flood).
are these words used in a bad way? Yes, sometimes by some people THEY ARE USED, but then again, so is the term Sand Nigger.

i can't recall what other names she was "angry at"

7- in NO part of Islam does it call to "Fight non muslims until they believe" in fact, in Part of the Qu'ran, The Prophet was sad that he couldn't get everyone to believe in God, and God told him " I ordered you to Preach to them, NOT to force or convert them,if you can go into the deepest earths or highest heavens, to find something that would make them believe, then do so, If i willed, i would make everyone a believer."

YAY FOR MISINFORMATION! i hope the above passage cleared up the view of "FORCING" someone into a religon, which DOESN"T EXIST in islam. and umais already said, it's spreading in europe and the usa and other western cultures... is anyone FORCING them to convert?

8- Muslims started a Culture clash or a clash of civilizations? really? hmm, that's odd... i thought people were doing that for centuries and ages and ages.... even before the existance of muslims.... hmm... anyone care to clarify to me how this is even possible? is it a time paradox of some sort? did some muslim guy invent a time machine or something?

9- as for saying "they're people of all scientific books" yeah, go ahead and ignore all the arab and muslim influences on science... in fact go ahead and ignore the MUSLIM egyptain scientist called "Ahmed Zoweil" who's researches have more or less changed physics for the past few years. yeah.

10- As for her point that no jews burn embassies or kill germans... some probably did, but other than that, did she point out that they've killed and bombed arabs and their holy places?
Job said it best:
[quote]
Job, on 3/3/2006 9:10:04 PM

Maybe she is secular, but she is misinformed in her suggestions that The arabic and muslim world hasn't added anything to the worlds of science. Perhaps not so much in the modern world but they paved the way, pretty much all modern maths (algebra and further concepts of greek geometry) originated in the mid east.

Now on her statement that other peoples (christians, buddhists and jews were what she mentioned) don't commit attrocities for their religions and specifically the Jews who have achieved everything with hardwork and perserverence rather than complaining and murder;

The creation of Israel is the bloodiest blackest event in Jewish history. Not only did they conduct an incredibly violent hostile takeover in 1948 after they were eventually awarded a state, before that time they committed acts of terrorism both in the mid east and on the King David Hotel (a british fortress in Jerusalem) to muscle their way into Palestine.

-http://www.historylearningsite.co.uk/bombing_of_the_king_david_hotel.htm

Another main pivotal argument for the creation of Israel, the rights and respect attained by jews as the speaker suggested, was the holocaust. It is reknown that the Zionist movement used the holocaust as leverage and continue to defend their actions and label anyone who questions them as antisemetic.

If 50 years ago is too long ago to consider Jewish terrorism as significant then consider everyday of the time since then. Israelis broke into a mosque not too long ago and sprayed hundreds of bullets into the place murdering many not so long ago is just one such example of terror comitted in the name of Israel.

Christians aren't much better, from the Crusades where they roasted babies up to the conflict in Ireland and one can even argue American foreign policy today is Christian aggression.

I'm not sure how she could not only ignore attrocities comitted by these people but also claim that they don't act in this way...
[/quote]

also be sure not to ignore the recent attack on a church by 3 israeli's (one jewish) (there's an article i posted about it on shoutwire) , the attack on people PRAYING at the Aqsa mosque, the uss liberty, the borrowing that's threatening to make the Aqsa mosque collapse and a million other such attacks... Yes i know not all jews have done this, but hey, since she's generlizing i might as well do the same!

11- Islam says Judgement lies with God only... which is why there is a story in the Qu'ran about a brother that was constently praying, and another that wasn't... the one that was praying went to his brother and told him that he's going to go to hell, in the end it was the brother that was praying all the time that went to hell because he had done more evil even though he was praying at the same time.


12- she is not an atheist, she is a Coptic Christian.she's well known in egypt.

13- in the videoclip, in arabic, she ATTACKED ALL MUSLIMS, and supported ALL Jews, she did NOT single out extremists in islam.

Now for replies at others:



@syedimranhasan,

[qfe]
EVER WONDER WHY?

Why a Jew can grow his beard in order to practice his faith

But when Muslim does the same, he is an extremist and terrorist!

Why a nun can be covered from head to toe in order to devote herself to God

But when Muslimah does the same she oppressed

When a western women stays at home to look after her house and kids she is respected because of sacrificing herself and doing good for the household?

But when a Muslim woman does so by her will, they say, "she needs to be liberated"!

Any girl can go to university wearing what she wills and have her rights and freedom?

But when Muslimah wears a Hijab they prevent her from entering her university!

When a child dedicates himself to a subject he has potential.

But when he dedicates himself to Islam he is hopeless!

When a Christian or a Jew kills someone religion is not mentioned, but when Muslim is charged with a crime, it is Islam that goes to trial!

When someone sacrfices himself to keep others alive, he is noble and all respect him.

But when a Palestinian does that to save his son from being killed, his brother's arm being broken, his mother being raped, his home being destroyed, and his mosque being violated -- He gets the title of a terrorist! Why? Because he is a Muslim!

When there is a trouble we accept any solution? If the solution lies in Islam, we refuse to take a look at it.

When someone drives a perfect car in a bad way no one blames the car.

But when any Muslim makes a mistake or treats people in a bad manner - people say "Islam is the reason"!

Without looking to the tradition of Islam, people believe what the newspapers say.


But question what the Quran says!

[/qfe]

do you know that in egypt for example, the vast majority of women wearing hijab do so of their own will because they refuse to be a show case? because tehy believe in it?

@seriom,


@others,

Muslims are the ones that started attacking? excuse me? how about the creation of israel? how about the occupation by france, and britan? how about bosnia and hersak ? how about chechneya? how about the muslim countries that are a thing of a past because of china taking over them? how about a MILLION other examples where muslims didn't start?

[/quote]

Care to provide a link, bah?

bah:

if you are not a desicritic become one and write a post on this subject

as for MEMRI desicritc dr. bhaskar dasgupta has already alleged similar biases

@bah: I'll second temporal on making your comments a post. Lots of great points there.

I think though, it is not so much what she says as much as the fact it is an Arab woman saying it. I myself responded to the fact. Her arguments don't really hold water, except perhaps for the events of the post-World War II years. She is especially incorrect in her assessment of Arabic contributions to science.

That Dr. Sultan now passes as a critque of Islam brings to mind Yeats's lines about how the "best lack all conviction while the worst are full of passionate intensity." The best need to be out there, fighting the extremists in their midst. This is true of Islam, Hinduism as well as Christianity. I exempt the Tibetans -- a people who can drink tsampa are best left alone.

anil:

there have been many such critics of islam ... both from within and without...as can be expected from sheer numbers ... [1.2 billion worldwide spread over tens of countries]

fox news is just beginning to discover them;)

fatima mernissi (moroccan)... ibn warraq (pseudonym - said to be of indian-pakistani origin) ... tasleema nasrin of bangladesh are some of them ... most of them avoid exposure...

then there are others like irshad manji who hog it :)

This bah person really kicked ass.

Bah is [edited] Read:

http://www.jihadwatch.org

While Wafa Sultan's comments on a clash between medieval thinking and 21st century thinking were about Islam, the Hindutva movement in India too has a worrying extremist fringe that deserves attention. Of particular note is their self assumed role of moral police. The recent attack on couples in Meerut, the Valentine day protests, the raid on Chennai bars, the amazing furore over the actress Khushboo's statement that in today's time and age, a girl may not be a virgin at the time of marriage are worrying signs that point to a similar clash between the Ram Janmabhoomi Hindu and the Barista version. The Gujarat pogrom is an even more sobering pointer.

Vivek

Last time I checked.

11 Year old Jews don't blow up school buses with bombs strapped to there chests.

Islam is for liars and losers!

Mohammed, in point of historical fact, was a murderer (often beheading so-called "infidels" himself), thief (his raids on innocent people are well documented and celebrated by Islamic texts themselves), liar (please google "takiyya" and "kitman" - lying is justified in Islam so long as it furthers global Islamic domination), enslaver (the well documented fate of women and children conquered by Muslims, the men usually being beheaded) , slave owner (still practiced in many Islamic countries and I would note that the U.S. slave trade is dwarfed by that of Islam, both being evil), misogynist (women are chattel, worth only half that of a man, a woman can only receive half of her husband's inheritance (assuming he has only one wife) and, if a woman is raped, a Sharia court will require four male witnesses to the act, something that is nearly impossible and also means that her words are worth 1/4 in an Islamic court than that of a man's) and pedophile (his youngest wife was six years old, but he was a nice fellow and did not "deflower" her until she was nine [insert sarcasm]).

Aren't all of the above applicable to 90% of the human population in historical and medieval times? What's your point, other than to be offensive?

In point of fact, all other founders of the world's major religions are diametrically opposed to the evil example of Mohammed and that is the point. You should try to not be offended by the truth of Mohammed'ds evil life and followers. If anything is offensive, it is Islam itself, offensive to all of humanity. Islam stands alone in rejecting the "golden rule" of treating others as one would like to be treated. What is moral in Islam is defined by what promulgates it and it really does not matter what a follower does in getting there. Islam is the most successful forms of fascism. Wake up! Islam is the offender and not the offended. Read and learn the truth about Islam's violent theology, jurisprudence and history.

Islam will win says Mullah Krekar.

Norway's most controversial refugee, Mullah Krekar, told an Oslo newspaper on Monday that there's a war going on between "the West" and Islam. He said he's sure that Islam will win, and he also had praise for suspected terrorist leader Osama bin Laden.
. . .

"Just look at the development within Europe, where the number of Muslims is expanding like mosquitoes," Krekar said. "Every western woman in the EU is producing an average of 1.4 children. Every Muslim woman in the same countries are producing 3.5 children.

"By 2050, 30 percent of the population in Europe will be Muslim."

He claimed that "our way of thinking... will prove more powerful than yours." He loosely defined "western thinking" as formed by the values held by leaders of western or non-islamic nations. Its "materialism, egoism and wildness" has altered Christianity, he claimed.

Krekar, who's been supported by the Norwegian government since arriving as a refugee from northern Iraq in the early 1990s, now faces deportation after violating the terms of his refugee status and being deemed a threat to national security.

Bin Laden 'a good man'

Krekar told Dagbladet that he favours Islamic rule where political and religious leaders are one and the same. One such leader he respects, he said, is Osama bin Laden.

"Osama bin Laden is a good person," Krekar said. He claimed Osama bin Laden is considered a terrorist simply because he lacks his own state.

"Those who say Osama bin Laden is a terrorist are themselves killing our women and children," Krekar said.

Attempts to "spread democracy," he claimed, are merely a ruse to wage war against Islam, adding that "the West destroyed the Taliban regime in Afghanistan" because "it feared the Islamic state."

Chaz: If you would care to read any meanigull history books, you would probably realise the greatness in Prophet Mohammed.

Meanwhile, instead of me giving you any sort of exampls, evidence & explanation to refute your irresponsible, illogical and ill-documented comments, you may want to see this UNBIASED documentary, made by PBS. There are Western Historians and Literary figures who would tell you more about The Prophet. Maybe you can learn something about the Prophet from it and then talk a little more educated.

Link: Mohammed : Prohet of Islam

I am merely relaying historical fact. No amount of apologists will change people coming to a more accurate understanding of the wrath of Islam's history. Be warned: people are catching on to your totalitarian designs and are for the most part cognizant of Muslim takiyya and kitman (religiously sanctioned lying) and we are not afraid (dhimmitude, like slavery in Islam and its poor treatment of women, is an unacceptable evil). Good people will never allow such a malevolent ideology control of the planet. Islam will lose and is already on its way to having discredited itself in the eyes of civilized people. I would also like to recommend http://www.faithfreedom.org

Open your eyes brainwashed people. You have no right to harm non-Muslims simply because we do not follow the evil example of Mohammed, evils well celebrated in the Koran, Hadith and Sira. Abrar, you belong to and evil movement. Time to grow intellectually and reject the evil perpetrated against innocent people around the globe.

Something for the intelligent:

Winston Churchill On Islam

A quote from an 1899 book by Winston Churchill, "The River War", in which he describes Muslims he apparently observed during Kitchener's campaign in the Sudan:

"How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property - either as a child, a wife, or a concubine - must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities. Thousands become the brave and loyal soldiers of the Queen; all know how to die; but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science - the science against which it had vainly struggled - the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome."

"Religion" of "peace"...LOL!!!

John Quincy Adams Knew Jihad

http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=15201

[Edited]

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

Not being an expert on religion, I depend on others who are acknowledged experts on the topic. Wafa Sultan must know that she is talking about, I presume. But then she could be biased since she is an "insider". But some outsiders also appear to have a pretty dark opinion of Islam. Take for example the thinker Arthur Schopenhauer.

In the 'World as Will and Idea,' Schopenhauer writes:

"Temples and churches, pagodas and mosques, in all lands and in all ages, in splendour and vastness, testify to the metaphysical need of man, which, strong and ineradicable, follows close upon his physical need. Certainly whoever is satirically inclined might add that this metaphysical need is a modest fellow who is content with poor fare.It sometimes allows itself to be satisfied with clumsy fables and insipid tales. If only imprinted early enough, they are for a manadequate explanations of his existence and supports of his morality. Consider, for example, the Koran. This wretched book was sufficient to found a religion of the world, to satisfy the metaphysical need of innumerable millions of men for twelve hundred years, to become the foundation of their morality, and of no small contempt for death, and also to inspire them to bloody wars and most extended conquests. We find in it the saddest and the poorest form of Theism. Much may be lost through translation; but I have not been able to discover one single valuable thought in it. Such things show that metaphysical capacity does not go hand in hand with the metaphysical need. Yet it will appear that in the early ages of the present surface of the earth this was not the case, and that those who stood considerably nearer than we do to the beginning of the human race and the source of organic nature, had also both greater energy of the intuitive faculty of knowledge, and a truer disposition of mind, so that they were capable of a purer, more direct comprehension of the inner being of nature, and were thus in a position to satify the metaphysical need in a more worthy manner. Thus originated in the primitive ancestors of the Brahmans, the Rishis, the almost superhuman conceptions which were afterwards set down in the Upanishads of the Vedas."

Just finished reading all of the comments here. I might quote Chaz in a impending post on Islamophibia (for Aaman, sorry for the delay, I'll finish this soon).

Reading such comments no doubt dissapointed me me a tad, just to think that any one could have THIS level of hatred for whole faith was a bit shocking for me, sure, people always dislike other people, that's normal, it's even normal for people to hate other people, even groups of people, but to hate an entire school of thought and completely dismiss their beliefs as nothing but tripe, that was, above all, a bit shocking for me. I never imagined people could have such deep roted prejudices. But it was also a realisation that I perhaps get too harsh in my criticism of local poloticians here in Pakistan, particularly those from the MMA, that rely soley for all their polictical lobying and success on one hidden agenda : breeding Anti-Americanism and Anti-west sentiment. Turns out Islamophobists should not be underestimated, they can go to any lengths at competing with their Muslim Westophobists counterparts. Ignorance, I suppose, just like knowledge it self, has not limits.

Islam must be the most misunderstood and misquoted faith in the world right now, the sheer volume of misconception, even about some of the very basic beliefs Muslims have is so high, I just don't know where one should or could begin in trying to remove some of the misconceptions. In fact, I'm rather pessimistic given the tone of Shaz's comments, I'm not sure if any attempts to remove his many misconceptions will actually do any good.

BTW, my eyes just fell on the line after all the comments that says "personal attacks are not allowed". I don't accept people who might have personally attacked not one or two but millions of people in some of the above comments above will have any regrets in doing so, let alone their comments being removed (that would obviously be tantamount to being the greatest violation of freedom of speech you or I will have ever heard of), but I'll apologize my self in advance if anyone takes this comment by me as "personal attack".

Yes, I strongly disagree with the view Shaz has discussed here, but I'll still not declare his whole faith or ideology if he's an atheist, simply because I disagree with him, even if I disagree with him strongly. A certain faith I follow teaches me that disagreements are fundamental part of any conversation, and that the civil way of getting involved in a discussion is to accept the other person's right to have an opinion and not dismiss him dimwitted from the start and hence not even consider what he or she might be saying. It doesn't teach me either that I should generalise, and equate the actions of a few with those of the everyone else. But nevertheless, I thought I should apologise in advance, just in case Shez takes my comments a personal attack...may be this will set up an example of how I'm a violent, illtolerent, extremist, Muslim, oh yeah, and since I'm female Muslim, I'm also opressed, how could I possibly forget, of course I am opressed, I need liberation. I can come here, online on Desi Critics and discuss this with thousands of other people is living proof if one was ever needed that I'm opressed. I'm the most opressed person on the planet, you might add, just in the name of getting carried away, since that seems to be the theme of the whole discussion here.

@Zainub: ref to: "I just don't know where one should or could begin in trying to remove some of the misconceptions." Thought your comments made a good start at doing exactly that. Look forward to reading you post on Islamophobia.

Maybe it's just a difference ofthe way we as a paople look at things...I keep reading that we (non-muslims) shouldn't lump all muslims together...it's that one bad apple kinda analogy...but I (my family and friends) look at things a little differently. If my daughters or brother or parents or anyone in my family does something wrong then I feel it's on me. What my family does is representative of me...on the same line, what people do in the name of YOUR religion is on you and yours. There are not enough moderate muslims speaking out against these things...blowing up mosques in the name of Allah makes absolutely no sense whatsoever...killing women and children in the name of Allah makes absolutely no sense...flying planes into buldings and killing thousands in the name of any god makes no sense...and constantly saying stupid shit like christians did it...yeah...a thousand years ago...get a clue...it's time to grow up, time to move into the 21st century...the rest of the world will be happy to welcome you and your prophet into the new millenium...but leave the IUD's behind!

IUDs? No birth control then, hmm:)

my bad...but you got the idea...IED's???

Yep, just sounded funny

andy:

wow! now let us sit back and read what you have just written?

but I (my family and friends) look at things a little differently. If my daughters or brother or parents or anyone in my family does something wrong then I feel it's on me. What my family does is representative of me.. on the same line, what people do in the name of YOUR religion is on you and yours...

...this is nothing personal:)....since the discussion is centered on assigning/assuming blame we have to look beyond your immediate family and friends...and since you so generously implicate almost every muslim...should not the same reasoning apply to you?...would you share the blame for the civilan deaths in iraq? chechenya? the holocaust? spain? ireland?.....

... There are not enough moderate muslims speaking out against these things...

...maybe, maybe not ... just as there are not enough folks who are listening to the moderate voices...

Temporal/others - you might want to respond to andy's post on Blogcritics

aaman:

i give up!

there is divine/cyber intervention of sorts:)...about four times have been 'frozen' out of BC when i try to open that article...looks like muslims cannot win;)

I know plenty of muslim feminists - both men and women. this is nota muslim problem. I think the birth of islam was a particularly feminist moment and rushdie ideas resonate with this. And yes there are many conflicting camps within feminism and feminist takes on islam both positive and negative

there are plenty of women from muslim cultures and civilizations in the plural [!] who reject the particular and very crass versions of things presented above. step out of your own s**t for a change. just look at the range and type of jews - including meir kahane - and scale it x no of times.

the individual relationship to god and scripture (read!!!) without mediation of the church is there in islam and led to the reformist ideas of luther calvin zwingli ...

dont believe the hype.

...

I also have problems with

a- "Ahl el Beit" directly means "people of the house" meaning wise means: people of the house of God.

No, it refers directly and only to the prophets immediate family, usually (but not always) meaning muhammad, ali, fatima, hasan & husain - the panjatan

b- "ahl el kotob" directly means "people of the book" meaning wise means: people of the books of God, i.e people who believe in one of the holy books (torah, Enjeel, Qu'ran).

Yes, usually torah (moses), bible (jesus), zuboor, psalms? (David) & Quaran (muhammad). But ona wider interpretation other religious books of antiquity and their prophets/leaders/wise men may be included

d- "el nasara"

the christians, but the reference could be to the very impoertant support and refuge providede by the reigning najashi king of christian abyssinia, to muslims, when the meccan were persecuting the earaly muslims. he has a wonderful life story himself - a prince he was he was sold in slavery by his uncle, but still turned out to be king - he acccepted the muslim version of jesus and mary saying the difference with his own faith was of very little importance - not more than a line.

i'd better not waste my energy on the orientalist dogs caught barking in other twilight zones. I'd let them be bled by ufos and aliens from mars.

I have respect for debate diversity and aljazeera, but many many more interesting types of interactive scenarios rather than adversrial gladiator type gameshows can be created. but there are trends in nmedia and most are unfortunate in not undressing stereotypes and rather veiling them to make them presentable to the visual dominated image culture.

i leave it to readers to make connections with particular comments - sorry. but pointedly relevant they are, i can assure you of that, and not tangential rants.

best

@gazelle,
yes i'm sorry, you're right on the first one, anywho.

@chaz,
i'm sorry, you expect me to believe anything from a totally biased site? i'd rather check www.religoustolerance.org

anywho, just to prove that all you know is hog wash.

in islam (like christianity and judism) Adultery is prohibited, however in sharia law for someone to accuse someone of committing adultery s/he must bring 3 other witnesses (bringing the total to four) OR get lashes him/herself for lying and trying to disgrace someone.

See the difference?
it's not when she's raped.
when she's raped all she has to do is say " i was raped by this guy" and they investigate it, and if her claim is true, then they KILL the rapist.

[quote]
Islam stands alone in rejecting the "golden rule" of treating others as one would like to be treated.
[/quote]

that's odd, there's a hadith that says " none of you will see heaven, unless you love for others what you love for yourself"

hmmm...

you know chaz, i'm kind of wondering, how is it you know a religon is SOOO evil when you can't even read it in it's original form? and how odd it is, that you decide to quote flawed (see biased) translations, and/or misquote, take out of context....etc

do you know i can post verses from the bible and torah that treat women like shit, and condone violence, terrorism, rape and genocide?

you want to post faithfreedom (who has been proven wrong several times and yet refuses to remove the articles, even though he says "if proven wrong i'll take it down") or all those other sites, and i'll just post www.evilbible.com

you want to post jihadwatch, i'll post www.jewwatch.com , www.blairwatch.com www.bushwatch.com , www.christianwatch.com (not sure of some of the urls)


The problem with what chaz says? it's misinformation that's been passed around so much that people are starting to consider them as facts.

@temporal
i'll think about it, but my time is already caught up enough and i don't feel like getting 101 insults a day just because i tell people islam isn't evil.. so i'll consider it.

@Aaman,
if i had a link i would gladly provide it, unfortunately i don't know of any other sites monitoring Aljazeera video, and i don't have a video card to do so, so i'm sorry.
however if you meant other stuff, you could always watch videos at www.watchislam.com including the REAL stance of women in islam.

@Anil Menon
Hats to you sir.

@Gourge

Can you please tell me what's the age of the youngest suicide bomber?
he was 16.
not 11.
16 is hardly a "kid" anymore.

@Andy,
it's not that the moderates aren't speaking out, it's that no one is listening.

the two biggest sources of islamic fatwa's (more or less instructions) the saudi sheikhs and the Azhar, as well as ALL the moderate clerics, have said the suicide bombings and killing of innocents is forbidden because islam itself forbids it, as well as killing of elders, women and children EVEN at times of war.

there's a pdf file called " the hijacked caravan" (google it) which is a fatwa AGAINST suicide bombings and such, and it PROVE without a doubt USING islamic sources that it's prohibited in islam.

unfortunately, there ARE radical asshole pieces of shit that do advocate suicide bombings and such, BUT contrary to popular belief these asses ARE a minority.

-----------------
hmm,
Why is it no one realizes (yes and i admit, including some muslims), that the verses that say "kill the infidels"
were ORDERS given to the muslims of the time, WHEN THEY WERE ATTACKED BY THE INFIDELS?!

the christians and jews were living with the muslims (in fact the christians HELPED the muslims), the pagans of the area were the ones attacking the muslims because the muslims said they should worship God alone and not those idols they worship (hence the muslims getting along with the christians and jews of the time cause they also believed in one God.)

why do they not understand, that it's part of a freakin STORY?!

heck, i guess since the Qu'ran (as well as the bible) tells of noah's flood, then i should go right now , find Noah, be loyal to God and Noah, and join him in building an ark before the flood starts.


Jesus Christ.

---------

i'll check this later... maybe.

muslims said they should worship God alone and not those idols they worship

Hindus worship thousands of idols. Where does that place them vis-a-vis the Qu'ran?

Nachiketa, idol-worshippers, for that is what the filthy Hindoos are, are fodder for the Islamic sword. Has been going on for centuries. Too bad the job is not completed yet. Pakistan with its nuclear bomb may finally do it.

@Nachiketa,
you're misquoting me.

[quote of myself]
the pagans of the area were the ones attacking the muslims because the muslims said they should worship God alone and not those idols they worship (hence the muslims getting along with the christians and jews of the time cause they also believed in one God.)

[/quote]
notice the whole "the pagans of the area were the ones ATTACKING the muslims because the muslims said they should worship God alone...snip

the point was, the muslims were being attacked, harrassed and killed for their beliefs, since they turned away from the old beliefs of the area.

Interesting to note, that under Islamic rule, when the Islamic army moved to free countries from the roman empire, the majority of those countries under islamic rule, MAINTAINED a majority (more than 50% of the populous) of christians, jews and pagans.
how many history books will tell you of that?

anywho, to answer that question, officially, where does that put you in islam considering you worship idols and are hindu? whereever you want to be, as long as you don't attack us, by islam we have NO right to attack you (not saying that some idiots probably don't anyway thinking it's "religous")
and before you cite something like saying " kill the infidels" or something of the sort.
that was AT THE TIME, it was a STORY OF HISTORY, the orders were FOR the time, and the only time it's still allowed is in SELF DEFENSE.
Honestly? some muslims (the asshole radicals) don't even realize that, because like you, they've been hearing the sentence "kill all infidels" without hearing the rest of the Sura.


btw, i've seen several joint jewish and muslim peace groups, and i was wondering, are there any hindu-muslim peace groups? cause if there are, i'd like to advocate them and spread their message.

Tome Paine is hereby indicted and sentenced for inciting hatred. In addition s/he is also indicted and sentenced for impersonating the real Tome Paine and using his good name for less than revolutionary, pro-monarchy imperial-empirical activities. S/he is hereby sentenced to death by hanging.

If Tom is still alive, s/he should take this to be a satirical comment within the purview of free speech expression humor and satire. ^%^

@Tom Paine

i find your response VERY despicable.
that is a VERY ignorant thing to say.. you cannot force others to confirm to your beliefs, and you cannot punish them for having different beliefs either (unless of course their beliefs are truely evil in nature).

If I didn't think Tom Paine was being facetitious, given the spelling of 'Hindoos', I'd probably axe that comment, but gazelle's commentary is more effective:)

@bah: in reference to: "btw, i've seen several joint jewish and muslim peace groups, and i was wondering, are there any hindu-muslim peace groups? cause if there are, i'd like to advocate them and spread their message."

www.asiapeace.org
www.indiapakistanpeace.org
http://asiapeace.org/good_news_2005.htm

And again, bah, do consider joining us as a desicritic:)

fine, i'll seriously consider joining, but what exactly would you want me to post?

She cannot be a Rebel or Outcast as she left Islam long ago.

She is a Heretic, but then her views are not new, and we have heard them many times before.

In fact she is no different from the likes of Salman Rushdie and Ayaan Hirsi Ali. Those that make their fame and fortune from slandering Islam. Intrestingly, Wafa Sultan is writing a book at present.

There is a saying, the non-believers will never accept you until you denounce your religion and become like them.

On Wafa Sultan: There Is No Clash of Civilizations

jamal, be a desicritic - email me

ok.

Over 2300 years ago, Aristotle noted that one had to know with whom one is speaking, otherwise every conversation is bound to degenerate. So, I will not waste my time here. The empirical evidence of Islam's brutality and twisted evils is overwhelming. The world is catching onto your methods, both seemingly nice and definitely not. Islam will never extinguish human freedom. It will be stopped just as it was rightly so before. Praise be Charles Martel. Do you realize how much has been appropriated for detention centers in the U.S.? [Edited] :-)

Chaz:

So, I will not waste my time here.

you are so kind and considerate...won't you reconsider?

temporal, you are killing me with your kindness...

I am wondering about the recent riots over the publishing of the cartoons. Issuing a death warrant on the cartoonists? Rioting, destroying buildings, and killing each other because of some drawings? Can someone explain this?

I also "heard" or read second hand that in some Arab countries that if you are a Christian or any other religious belief other than Islamic, you are treated as a 2nd class citizen or worse. But, when they are in another country and are unable to wear a headdress to school, it is unforgivable and unbelievable. I believe both sides are wrong in this scenario, but it is extremely hypocritical on the part of the Islamists. The ol do as I say not as I do theme.

Now they are going to execute someone for leaving their religion???

You can all bad mouth Chaz all you want but he was RIGHT ON...

the transcript of this whole program is available at http://www.aqoul.com/archives/2006/03/aljazeera_trans.php Please read the whole thing! I'll let the transcript speak for itself....

Hmmm... We "Hindoos" are idolatrous. We worship 23000 gods. We worship the Lingam which is symbolic of the human penis. So what...???

Go check the wikipedia article on religious terrorism... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religious_terrorism Hinduism is the only "way of life" that is not there in that page. Nor the friends of Hinduism i.e. Buddhism, Jainism and the like are there...

So am I to conclude that monotheist religions are bad simply because they try to have a "absolutism" and "monopoly" over spirituality and hence are simply violent and bad by nature???

Come on people... The existing religions were created millenia ago... they dont apply to 3rd millenium individuals anymore. I suggest "God without Religion" for us progressives if you are spiritual and aethism in general...

And the Dune fans... Islam & Buddhism are light years apart. It makes good fiction to marry them, but that is about it... :-)

Anil, you might find this complete transcript of the Wafa Sultan interview interesting

Aaman, thanks! I read it carefully. Makes CNN's Crossfire look like a quilting lesson. Khouli came off more well-informed than I'd originally thought. Some puzzling referents in the Memri transcript also got cleared up. Al Khouli and WS have a lot in common, I'm beginning to think.

I still think Wafa Sultan came out as an intelligent and forceful person. The overall message wasn't distorted too much by MEMRI.

Al-Khouli does have more of a personality in the full transcripts, but he still comes across as being closed-minded. For instance, when he says that the non-muslim world is condoning homosexuality etc and is contributing to the bastardization of the world...his true colors come out.

Could one of you please do an analysis of what's different, given the full transcripts for the more lazy among us, like me?:)

Nachiketa: I agree entirely. Only hope Al Khouli doesn't represent the typical Islamist. His weird bit about Saudia Arabia not being "properly" Islamic threw me. Whaaat? Ditto for some of his questions such as: "What fault did Afghanistan commit to justify its destruction" Um, didn't they have Bin Laden? Taliban? Anyway, we're blogging a dead horse.

Aaman, I'll take a shot at it. It might be a while though as I am in the middle of a major deal.

religion is always the hottest topic of debate anywhere. seems to confirm the same.

This lady sounds like George W Bush's mouthpiece. In Sri Lanka after the tsunami Buddhists burned down churches, in Burma, Muslims are forced to recite Buddhist prayers at school; the founding of Israel involved assassinations and bombings of the British. To most people commenting on 'Islam' here: which Islam are you talking about: the Islam of Ibn Rushd, whose work on Aristotle brought rationalism to Europe or Ibn Sina, whose medical tracts were used in Europe for seven hundred years up to the nineteenth century, or Shihabbudin Suhrawardi who founded the Ishraqi school of Illumination, or Ibn al-'Arabi ? ... or perhaps you haven't heard of any of these people because you haven't read anything about Islamic history and don't know anything about Islam except the reactions to twentieth century imperialism.