“Terrorists do not wear a special uniform.. They are like other people, like other youths. They are not easy to recognize. Sometimes, finding a terrorist in the 14 million population of Tehran is like finding a needle — not in a haystack, but in 10 haystacks.”
Mahmoud Alavi, Iranian intelligence minister
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/11/world/middleeast/iran-kurds-terrorist-attacks.html
The Shia and Sunni differences have are similar to the Protestant/Catholic differences of Northern Ireland. However, some Iranians take a more tolerant view of extremists. For example, Jalal Jalalisadeh, a former member of the Iranian from Kurdistan takes a stance that many around the world could emulate. Salafis are an ultra-conservative group in parts of Iran. “They were peaceful. As long as the Salafi groups are not taking arms, they must be tolerated,” ibid.
"A child killed in a bombing while eating ice cream in Baghdad is the same as child killed in a bombing while attending a pop concert in Manchester.”
Shasta Aziz, Globe and Mail, 2017-06-05
https://beta.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/countering-extremism-requires-political-honesty-from-theresa-may/article35204868
Do not call terrorists Muslim or Islamic. They are no more "Muslim" than the Ku Klux Klan is “Christian”
Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Muslim. Show all posts
Sunday, June 11, 2017
Wednesday, May 24, 2017
Muslims Do Speak Out
I was listening to Swedish Radio’s weekly news podcast, “Good Morning World” when I heard a piece on “Arabs got talent” (http://sverigesradio.se/sida/artikel.aspx?programid=438&artikel=6700503). It has 100 million viewers, a figure many programs can only dream of.
I thought it strange that I had never heard about it. Searching the New York Times, I found a recent article that mentioned “Arabs Got Talent”, only because a network official involved in an anti-ISIS program is a “Talent” judge.
The NYT article mentions a series “Black Crows”, a dramatization of some of the atrocities committed by ISIS. It will be broadcast during Ramadan. Many families will spend more time watching TV than usual. Ramadan (in the U.S.) begins begins the evening to 26 May and ends the evening of 24 June. During this time Muslims fast during daylight hours.
See "Arab TV Dramatizes Life under Isis", Ben Hubbard, New York Times, 2017-05-16,
The only other reference in the New York Times to "Arabs Got Talent” was about an American, Jennifer Grout, who plays the oud (an Arab lute) and has learned many Arabic songs. At the time she didn’t understand much Arabic, but according to https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2016/09/195954/jennifer-grout-replies-criticize-moroccan-husband/ she now speaks fluent Arabic
A few other sources for Arabic news are
http://www.aljazeera.com/
www.dailystar.com.lb
https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/
Interestingly, from Morocco World News I found out about a women-led mosque in California.
Muslims do speak out; are you listening?
I thought it strange that I had never heard about it. Searching the New York Times, I found a recent article that mentioned “Arabs Got Talent”, only because a network official involved in an anti-ISIS program is a “Talent” judge.
The NYT article mentions a series “Black Crows”, a dramatization of some of the atrocities committed by ISIS. It will be broadcast during Ramadan. Many families will spend more time watching TV than usual. Ramadan (in the U.S.) begins begins the evening to 26 May and ends the evening of 24 June. During this time Muslims fast during daylight hours.
See "Arab TV Dramatizes Life under Isis", Ben Hubbard, New York Times, 2017-05-16,
The only other reference in the New York Times to "Arabs Got Talent” was about an American, Jennifer Grout, who plays the oud (an Arab lute) and has learned many Arabic songs. At the time she didn’t understand much Arabic, but according to https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2016/09/195954/jennifer-grout-replies-criticize-moroccan-husband/ she now speaks fluent Arabic
A few other sources for Arabic news are
http://www.aljazeera.com/
www.dailystar.com.lb
https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/
Interestingly, from Morocco World News I found out about a women-led mosque in California.
Muslims do speak out; are you listening?
Thursday, January 05, 2017
Cherry-picking religious texts to validate hate
Wisconsin Public Radio’s To the Best of Our Knowledge (TTBOOK) recently replayed an episode about building a new mosque in the Chicago area (http://www.ttbook.org/book/building-mosque-america).
One of the anti-mosque people quoted the Q’ran about killing idolators. Knowing that Mohammed and his followers were constantly harassed by idol worshipers (who made a lot of money selling statures of idols, I knew there was a larger context. Rather than offer my own explanation, I suggest you read “Does the Quran Really Sanction Violence Against ‘Unbelievers’?” by Kabir Helminski, Huffington Post, 2010-09-24, updated 2011-05-25.
One could cherry-pick the Bible and show that Judaism is a religion of hate: “But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth.” King James Bible, Deuteronomy 20:16.
History is filled with “Christians” who tortured and killed those they even suspected of not being Christian enough: Torquemada and the Spanish inquisition, burnings at the stake, and more. Even in our recent history many who call themselves Christians feel no remorse in lynching or burning churches.
Buddhism is supposed to be a religion of peace, but “Buddhists” are killing Muslims in Burma and Sri Lanka. Do you really think the Buddha would approve of such hateful actions?
One of the anti-mosque people quoted the Q’ran about killing idolators. Knowing that Mohammed and his followers were constantly harassed by idol worshipers (who made a lot of money selling statures of idols, I knew there was a larger context. Rather than offer my own explanation, I suggest you read “Does the Quran Really Sanction Violence Against ‘Unbelievers’?” by Kabir Helminski, Huffington Post, 2010-09-24, updated 2011-05-25.
One could cherry-pick the Bible and show that Judaism is a religion of hate: “But of the cities of these people, which the Lord thy God doth give thee for an inheritance, thou shalt save alive nothing that breatheth.” King James Bible, Deuteronomy 20:16.
History is filled with “Christians” who tortured and killed those they even suspected of not being Christian enough: Torquemada and the Spanish inquisition, burnings at the stake, and more. Even in our recent history many who call themselves Christians feel no remorse in lynching or burning churches.
Buddhism is supposed to be a religion of peace, but “Buddhists” are killing Muslims in Burma and Sri Lanka. Do you really think the Buddha would approve of such hateful actions?
Thursday, December 08, 2016
Religious freedom and commerce
Much is being written about serving gays violating a merchant’s freedom of religion. But what is the real question here. Is the merchant being forced to serve people he or she doesn’t like or being forced to participate in activities that he or she doesn’t like.
The latest case I’ve seen is about a photographer being forced to photograph a gay wedding. In this case, the photographer is being requited to participate in something he or she does not approve of.
On the other hand, if two men showed up at the studio can the photographer deny them service? Not if they act as any two buddies might having their picture taken. If they put their arms on each other’s shoulders the photographer should not have a complaint. But if they insisted on a picture of them kissing each, then the photographer would have a complaint.
Similarly with a baker being asked to bake a wedding cake. If two men showed up to order a wedding cake, then the baker should provide it, even if he knew they were gay. However, if they asked him to put two male figures on the top of the cake, then the baker now becomes a direct participant in the choice of the two men.
Suppose a neo-nazi asks a Jewish baker to make a cake with a swastika on top. The baker has every right to refuse on both religious and ethical grounds. However, if the neo-nazi just asks for a cake off the shelf, then the baker should serve him.
Suppose a Roman Catholic grocer is asked to deliver groceries to a nudist camp. He has every right to refuse. However, if one of the nudists comes to his store fully clothed to buy groceries for the camp, then the grocer should serve him.
Essentially, we should not be expected to participate in activities of which we disapprove, but we can’t refuse to serve those of whom we disapprove when they are acting in a socially acceptable manner.
A good case in point is the shock jock, Fred Tupper, in “Little Mosque in the Prairie”, who spreads all kinds of misinformation about Muslims. He is welcome in Fatima’s restaurant, as long as he doesn’t spout off too much.
The latest case I’ve seen is about a photographer being forced to photograph a gay wedding. In this case, the photographer is being requited to participate in something he or she does not approve of.
On the other hand, if two men showed up at the studio can the photographer deny them service? Not if they act as any two buddies might having their picture taken. If they put their arms on each other’s shoulders the photographer should not have a complaint. But if they insisted on a picture of them kissing each, then the photographer would have a complaint.
Similarly with a baker being asked to bake a wedding cake. If two men showed up to order a wedding cake, then the baker should provide it, even if he knew they were gay. However, if they asked him to put two male figures on the top of the cake, then the baker now becomes a direct participant in the choice of the two men.
Suppose a neo-nazi asks a Jewish baker to make a cake with a swastika on top. The baker has every right to refuse on both religious and ethical grounds. However, if the neo-nazi just asks for a cake off the shelf, then the baker should serve him.
Suppose a Roman Catholic grocer is asked to deliver groceries to a nudist camp. He has every right to refuse. However, if one of the nudists comes to his store fully clothed to buy groceries for the camp, then the grocer should serve him.
Essentially, we should not be expected to participate in activities of which we disapprove, but we can’t refuse to serve those of whom we disapprove when they are acting in a socially acceptable manner.
A good case in point is the shock jock, Fred Tupper, in “Little Mosque in the Prairie”, who spreads all kinds of misinformation about Muslims. He is welcome in Fatima’s restaurant, as long as he doesn’t spout off too much.
Monday, October 31, 2016
Sleaze Attack on Chobani
The usual suspects are attacking somebody who makes a good-hearted effort to help others.
See “For Helping Immigrants, Chobani’s Founder Draws Threats”, David Gelles, New York Times, 2016-10-31,
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/business/for-helping-immigrants-chobanis-founder-draws-threats.html?comments#permid=20314776:20316147
My comment to a reader’s comment about buying more Chobani yogurt follows:
Me too! I stopped eating Chobani yogurt, the best yogurt I've ever had, in a diet experiment. The experiment failed, and I've had a few servings of Chobani since. Maybe I'll eat put Chobani on my oatmeal and granola instead of almond milk. Let's meet hate with love, love of a good product and of a corporation with a heart.
When NYT notified me that my comment was approved, I found that many others had the same sentiment. I didn’t read more than a few dozen comments, but I found no sleaze attacks, only support.
See “For Helping Immigrants, Chobani’s Founder Draws Threats”, David Gelles, New York Times, 2016-10-31,
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/01/business/for-helping-immigrants-chobanis-founder-draws-threats.html?comments#permid=20314776:20316147
My comment to a reader’s comment about buying more Chobani yogurt follows:
Me too! I stopped eating Chobani yogurt, the best yogurt I've ever had, in a diet experiment. The experiment failed, and I've had a few servings of Chobani since. Maybe I'll eat put Chobani on my oatmeal and granola instead of almond milk. Let's meet hate with love, love of a good product and of a corporation with a heart.
When NYT notified me that my comment was approved, I found that many others had the same sentiment. I didn’t read more than a few dozen comments, but I found no sleaze attacks, only support.
Sunday, September 18, 2016
Islam prohibits music?
My wife has been visiting her sister outside Bradford, Ontario this past week. They often gathered around the TV to watch the news. But at home we don’t even have a TV, we get most of our news by reading three or more newspapers online.
I kidded her that every minute she watches TV news her IQ goes down one point. It would take her three minutes of reading a newspaper to gain it back. We went back and forth with text messages about what she found interesting and I countered with stories she probably wouldn’t see on TV.
To prove my point, I visited the Toronto Globe and Mail website to get a sample of news she probably wouldn’t see on TV. One story that jumped out at me was “Mandatory music classes hit a bad note with some Muslim parents” by Colin Freeze and Mahnoor Yawar. Strange, I didn’t know that Islam forbade music to its followers. After all there is “Ey Iran”, a patriotic Iranian song. And don’t most Islamic countries have military bands?
See http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/mandatory-music-classes-strike-sour-note-with-muslim-parents/article31716832/.
I emailed a Muslim friend about this article. His response included that “music is not forbidden in Islam if the additional message (oral or video) in the music is not against any other principle of Islam.”
I looked up military bands and found that even the Saudis have one. The Saudis promote a very rigid form of Islam called Wahhabism. You would think if anybody would prohibit music, it would be the Saudis. The Saudi military band played the “Star Spangled Banner” for President Obama as well as playing the Saudi national anthem. I found a picture of Iranian military trombonists marching past then President Ahmadinejab. If Islam prohibited music, you would think the Ayatollahs would prohibit a military band.
I searched Talal Itary’s translation of the Qu’ran and found no mention of music.
Ah ha! it must be in the Hadith: a collection of commentaries that followed the writing of the Qu’ran. A Google search for “hadith" and “music” turned up some very strong admonitions about any music. For example, http://www.islamiq.sg/2011/04/hadith-evidence-music-haram.html. This article gives a very strong prohibition against music of any kind.
Other articles give a more generous interpretation of hadith: https://controversialislam.wordpress.com/music-banned-in-islam/. Supposedly other hadith have Muhammad suggesting sending a singer to a wedding: “The Ansar are a people who love poetry. You should have sent along someone who would sing, ‘here we come, to you we come, greet us as we greet you.’”
To think that all hadith apply to all Muslims is like thinking that all the Pope’s encyclicals or all the doctrines of the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod apply to all Christians.
What should apply to all believers, Muslim or otherwise, is the equivalent of “...and you should forgive and overlook: Do you not like God to forgive you? And Allah is The Merciful Forgiving.” _ Qur’an (Surah 24, “The Light”, v. 22)
I kidded her that every minute she watches TV news her IQ goes down one point. It would take her three minutes of reading a newspaper to gain it back. We went back and forth with text messages about what she found interesting and I countered with stories she probably wouldn’t see on TV.
To prove my point, I visited the Toronto Globe and Mail website to get a sample of news she probably wouldn’t see on TV. One story that jumped out at me was “Mandatory music classes hit a bad note with some Muslim parents” by Colin Freeze and Mahnoor Yawar. Strange, I didn’t know that Islam forbade music to its followers. After all there is “Ey Iran”, a patriotic Iranian song. And don’t most Islamic countries have military bands?
See http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/mandatory-music-classes-strike-sour-note-with-muslim-parents/article31716832/.
I emailed a Muslim friend about this article. His response included that “music is not forbidden in Islam if the additional message (oral or video) in the music is not against any other principle of Islam.”
I looked up military bands and found that even the Saudis have one. The Saudis promote a very rigid form of Islam called Wahhabism. You would think if anybody would prohibit music, it would be the Saudis. The Saudi military band played the “Star Spangled Banner” for President Obama as well as playing the Saudi national anthem. I found a picture of Iranian military trombonists marching past then President Ahmadinejab. If Islam prohibited music, you would think the Ayatollahs would prohibit a military band.
I searched Talal Itary’s translation of the Qu’ran and found no mention of music.
Ah ha! it must be in the Hadith: a collection of commentaries that followed the writing of the Qu’ran. A Google search for “hadith" and “music” turned up some very strong admonitions about any music. For example, http://www.islamiq.sg/2011/04/hadith-evidence-music-haram.html. This article gives a very strong prohibition against music of any kind.
Other articles give a more generous interpretation of hadith: https://controversialislam.wordpress.com/music-banned-in-islam/. Supposedly other hadith have Muhammad suggesting sending a singer to a wedding: “The Ansar are a people who love poetry. You should have sent along someone who would sing, ‘here we come, to you we come, greet us as we greet you.’”
To think that all hadith apply to all Muslims is like thinking that all the Pope’s encyclicals or all the doctrines of the Lutheran Church, Missouri Synod apply to all Christians.
What should apply to all believers, Muslim or otherwise, is the equivalent of “...and you should forgive and overlook: Do you not like God to forgive you? And Allah is The Merciful Forgiving.” _ Qur’an (Surah 24, “The Light”, v. 22)
Sunday, July 31, 2016
2016: The first Presidential election where we have only one choice
Donald Trump keeps digging himself in a bigger and bigger hole. The latest being his fight with the Khan family over the patriotism of Muslims. Attacking a Gold Star mother: how low can you get?
He keeps changing his tune on this issue as he has so many times before. Is a man who can get angry at a small slight a person whose finger we want on the nuclear button?
Hillary Clinton is not my favorite possible person for President, but she now stands as the only possible choice for President. I don't like dynastic politics, but we have to consider all the government experience that she has had compared to that of Donald Trump.
Staying away is not an option. If you stay away, you might give the election to Trump. There are too many people that live in his fantasy world that will be voting.
In addition to voting for Clinton, you can hold her feet to the fire by reminding her of her vision with her 1969 Wellesley College commencement address. See http://www.ttbook.org/book/hillarys-first-speech-historic-1969-audio-reveals-blueprint-her-life. Warning, you'll have to listen to a lot of commentary before you get the speech in its entirety.
Wednesday, June 15, 2016
Shall we expel Roman Catholics?
Shall we expel Roman Catholics? If we go by Donald Trump’s logic, if someone from a particular group commits a crime, terrorism or otherwise, then all members of that group are guilty of the same crime.
Timothy McVeigh was one of the bombers of the Oklahoma City Federal Building; an attack that killed over 160 people. He grew up as a Catholic. Does that mean all Catholics could commit similar crimes?
Maybe we should expel all Southern Baptists. After all, most of the Ku Klux Klan were upstanding members of their community and church by day, but when night came, they donned white sheets and hoods and terrorized black people for crimes real and imagined.
But how many Southern Baptists didn’t like the Ku Klux Klan and thought they were unchristian and dangerous? Why didn’t they speak out? Because they were afraid of retribution by the Klan?
Critics of Islam say that all Muslims should speak out against terrorism committed in the name of Islam. I think many of these critics aren’t really listening to those who speak out.
How many of us speak out against all the injustices we know that exist around us? Very few of us. We have jobs and any number of activities that we would rather do than speak out.
“Don’t complain about the speck in your brother’s eye when you can’t see the beam in your own."
Timothy McVeigh was one of the bombers of the Oklahoma City Federal Building; an attack that killed over 160 people. He grew up as a Catholic. Does that mean all Catholics could commit similar crimes?
Maybe we should expel all Southern Baptists. After all, most of the Ku Klux Klan were upstanding members of their community and church by day, but when night came, they donned white sheets and hoods and terrorized black people for crimes real and imagined.
But how many Southern Baptists didn’t like the Ku Klux Klan and thought they were unchristian and dangerous? Why didn’t they speak out? Because they were afraid of retribution by the Klan?
Critics of Islam say that all Muslims should speak out against terrorism committed in the name of Islam. I think many of these critics aren’t really listening to those who speak out.
How many of us speak out against all the injustices we know that exist around us? Very few of us. We have jobs and any number of activities that we would rather do than speak out.
“Don’t complain about the speck in your brother’s eye when you can’t see the beam in your own."
Thursday, January 21, 2016
Rogues, clowns, politicians, and statespersons
Whether in government, business, unions, or any other human activity, we can find people who are rogues, clowns, politicians, or statespersons. And sometimes a person can be any of these at various times.
Rogues are those who are only for themselves. They may merely be selfish or they may work to destroy others. Clowns are those who have no connection to reality. Politicians are those who try to work with others to accomplish something they can’t do by themselves. Statespersons are those who have a vision for the common good and succeed in implementing some portion of that vision.
Richard Nixon was an example of someone who was all of the above as candidate and President. He was a rogue in his first campaign for the Senate when he misrepresented Helen Gahagan Douglas as a Communist. He was a rogue when he authorized the Watergate break-in. He was a clown when he said “I am not a crook.” He was a politician in that he did work on legislation that was supported by many in both parties, for example Marshall Plan funding. He was a statesman when he looked beyond his anti-Communism to visit and recognize China.
The genial Ronald Reagan was certainly not a rogue. He was a clown in that he thought the Laffer Curve showed that decreasing taxes would increase prosperity. He was a politician in that he did get legislation passed that had significant bi-partisan support. He was a statesman in that he worked with Mikhael Gorbachev on a nuclear arms treaty.
A good portion of the current Republican candidates are clowns and at least one is a rogue. They are clowns in their continued attacks on President Obama, including continuing to label him as a Muslim. They are clowns in their continued belief that giving more money to the rich will make the general public richer. Their schemes will make the whole country poorer with an even more rapidly deteriorating infrastructure and more rapidly warming climate. And they don’t seem likely to be good politicians because they seem incapable of compromise to get something done. As I looked at a picture of them in the Star Tribune of 2016-01-17, I thought that the only gray matter was their gray uniforms, I mean gray suits (“Give candidates a little time to think and a little time to speak – you know, kind of like presidents have.”, Stephen L. Carter, Bloomberg).
As for the current Democratic candidates, they may be politicians working with others, but I don’t see them as statespersons.
Rogues in business include those who ran Enron (into the ground) and those who gave misleading information to get people to sign mortgages they couldn’t afford. The Koch brothers are certainly rogues in that they buy a lot of legislation at the state and local levels that is advantageous to them and detrimental to the people.
The rogues in Oregon do not represent the people. Those “patriots” occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge are only after some Ayn Rand “freedom” to do what they please rather than the freedom to govern ourselves. The Tea Party types seem to completely ignore the General Welfare clause of the Constitution and the establishment of a Congress to provide laws. If law enforcement doesn’t bring these rogues to justice, it will be our misfortune (malheur in French).
The magical thinking of the anarchists in Oregon is of the same ilk as another set of rogue anarchists: the so-called Islamic Jihadists of ISIS, Al Qaeda, and Boko Haram. These “Islamic” rogues no more represent Islam than the Bundy anarchists represent the American people. Consider that there are only about 100,000 “Jihadists” but 1.6 billion Muslims
As a measure of how non-Islamic these rogues are, consider that they may not even have copies of the Qu’ran. “Because it has nothing to do with the Quran. They didn't even have the Quran; they didn't want even to give us a Quran.” - Al Arabiya News, 2015-02-04, reporting on Didier François’ interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour.
If you want a better sense of Islam, see www.trueislam.com.
But “Islamic” rogues are not the only misusers of “religion”. If we are a Christian nation, why do some “Christians” call for the expulsion of Muslims? Why do some “Christians” call for bombing women and children because there are “Islamists” in an certain area. What kind of Christian nation would have nuclear weapons that would indiscriminately kill thousands of innocent citizens?
On the one hand, we had the rogue Fred Phelps whose Westboro Baptist Church would picket veterans’ funerals as a protest against gays. I couldn’t confirm this memory but I did find a long list of non-Christian behavior. On the other hand, we have the Christian statesman, Martin Luther King Jr., who eschewed hate and worked hard to spread Christian love, even against those who would hurt him.
We don’t get to choose many of our rogues, but we can choose many of our politicians and statespeople. But to do that, we have to show up at each and every election. If we stay away, we bring on the clowns, and the rogues, too. Every vote counts and your vote counts only if you cast it.
Also published in the Reader Weekly of Duluth, 2016-01-21 at http://duluthreader.com/articles/2016/01/22/6588_rogues_clowns_politicians_and_statespersons.
Rogues are those who are only for themselves. They may merely be selfish or they may work to destroy others. Clowns are those who have no connection to reality. Politicians are those who try to work with others to accomplish something they can’t do by themselves. Statespersons are those who have a vision for the common good and succeed in implementing some portion of that vision.
Richard Nixon was an example of someone who was all of the above as candidate and President. He was a rogue in his first campaign for the Senate when he misrepresented Helen Gahagan Douglas as a Communist. He was a rogue when he authorized the Watergate break-in. He was a clown when he said “I am not a crook.” He was a politician in that he did work on legislation that was supported by many in both parties, for example Marshall Plan funding. He was a statesman when he looked beyond his anti-Communism to visit and recognize China.
The genial Ronald Reagan was certainly not a rogue. He was a clown in that he thought the Laffer Curve showed that decreasing taxes would increase prosperity. He was a politician in that he did get legislation passed that had significant bi-partisan support. He was a statesman in that he worked with Mikhael Gorbachev on a nuclear arms treaty.
A good portion of the current Republican candidates are clowns and at least one is a rogue. They are clowns in their continued attacks on President Obama, including continuing to label him as a Muslim. They are clowns in their continued belief that giving more money to the rich will make the general public richer. Their schemes will make the whole country poorer with an even more rapidly deteriorating infrastructure and more rapidly warming climate. And they don’t seem likely to be good politicians because they seem incapable of compromise to get something done. As I looked at a picture of them in the Star Tribune of 2016-01-17, I thought that the only gray matter was their gray uniforms, I mean gray suits (“Give candidates a little time to think and a little time to speak – you know, kind of like presidents have.”, Stephen L. Carter, Bloomberg).
As for the current Democratic candidates, they may be politicians working with others, but I don’t see them as statespersons.
Rogues in business include those who ran Enron (into the ground) and those who gave misleading information to get people to sign mortgages they couldn’t afford. The Koch brothers are certainly rogues in that they buy a lot of legislation at the state and local levels that is advantageous to them and detrimental to the people.
The rogues in Oregon do not represent the people. Those “patriots” occupying the Malheur National Wildlife Refuge are only after some Ayn Rand “freedom” to do what they please rather than the freedom to govern ourselves. The Tea Party types seem to completely ignore the General Welfare clause of the Constitution and the establishment of a Congress to provide laws. If law enforcement doesn’t bring these rogues to justice, it will be our misfortune (malheur in French).
The magical thinking of the anarchists in Oregon is of the same ilk as another set of rogue anarchists: the so-called Islamic Jihadists of ISIS, Al Qaeda, and Boko Haram. These “Islamic” rogues no more represent Islam than the Bundy anarchists represent the American people. Consider that there are only about 100,000 “Jihadists” but 1.6 billion Muslims
As a measure of how non-Islamic these rogues are, consider that they may not even have copies of the Qu’ran. “Because it has nothing to do with the Quran. They didn't even have the Quran; they didn't want even to give us a Quran.” - Al Arabiya News, 2015-02-04, reporting on Didier François’ interview with CNN’s Christiane Amanpour.
If you want a better sense of Islam, see www.trueislam.com.
But “Islamic” rogues are not the only misusers of “religion”. If we are a Christian nation, why do some “Christians” call for the expulsion of Muslims? Why do some “Christians” call for bombing women and children because there are “Islamists” in an certain area. What kind of Christian nation would have nuclear weapons that would indiscriminately kill thousands of innocent citizens?
On the one hand, we had the rogue Fred Phelps whose Westboro Baptist Church would picket veterans’ funerals as a protest against gays. I couldn’t confirm this memory but I did find a long list of non-Christian behavior. On the other hand, we have the Christian statesman, Martin Luther King Jr., who eschewed hate and worked hard to spread Christian love, even against those who would hurt him.
We don’t get to choose many of our rogues, but we can choose many of our politicians and statespeople. But to do that, we have to show up at each and every election. If we stay away, we bring on the clowns, and the rogues, too. Every vote counts and your vote counts only if you cast it.
Also published in the Reader Weekly of Duluth, 2016-01-21 at http://duluthreader.com/articles/2016/01/22/6588_rogues_clowns_politicians_and_statespersons.
Thursday, November 26, 2015
Who are the bigger fools? Daesh or Islamophobes?
I would say that it is the Islamophobes, especially those who attack individuals just because they look Muslim. See “'I’m frightened’ after Attacks in Paris, New York Muslims Cope with a Backlash". Even a Latino was attacked.
Hey, folks, these victims did nothing to you, but you are indirectly creating more recruits for Daesh! The victims of Islamophobic attacks probably have no thoughts of lashing back at the people the attackers purport to represent, but these attacks are going to make the marginalized more open to the nonsense spewed by Daesh: Christianity is at war with Islam. And dear Islamophobe, your attacks are not very Christian!
Hey, folks, these victims did nothing to you, but you are indirectly creating more recruits for Daesh! The victims of Islamophobic attacks probably have no thoughts of lashing back at the people the attackers purport to represent, but these attacks are going to make the marginalized more open to the nonsense spewed by Daesh: Christianity is at war with Islam. And dear Islamophobe, your attacks are not very Christian!
Monday, November 16, 2015
Bombs only lead to more bullets
In response to the attacks in Paris, many countries are ready to bomb more ISIS territory even more than they already have. This may work against standing armies, but will it work against a constant recruiting machine that uses the bombing to show how "Islam is under attack."
Put another way: drone bombers create more drone soldiers.
A much better strategy would be dropping leaflets with Koranic verses of charity and forgiveness. Just like some "Christians" select verses from the Bible to justify punitive actions against those that disagree with them, there are "Muslims" who select verses from the Koran to justify their punitive actions. Just like many real Christians select verses from the Bible to lead a life of charity, there are Muslims who select verses from the Koran to lead a life of charity.
What would be the costs of millions of leaflets of Koranic verses of charity versus the costs of hundreds of bombs? Being bopped on the head by a dropped book may change a lot more minds than being bopped on the head by a dropped bomb.
Put another way: drone bombers create more drone soldiers.
A much better strategy would be dropping leaflets with Koranic verses of charity and forgiveness. Just like some "Christians" select verses from the Bible to justify punitive actions against those that disagree with them, there are "Muslims" who select verses from the Koran to justify their punitive actions. Just like many real Christians select verses from the Bible to lead a life of charity, there are Muslims who select verses from the Koran to lead a life of charity.
What would be the costs of millions of leaflets of Koranic verses of charity versus the costs of hundreds of bombs? Being bopped on the head by a dropped book may change a lot more minds than being bopped on the head by a dropped bomb.
Monday, April 13, 2015
The perfect test for “blasphemy”
A Saudi blogger has already suffered fifty lashes for "blasphemy" by asking for more discussion of religion in Saudi Arabia. But can his accusers really know that he has committed "blasphemy" against Allah or that he is only disturbing their world view?
I propose the following test of blasphemy.
If a person is accused of blasphemy, he or she should be staked out just after sundown on a clear night in a field that is at least one hundred feet from any structure. If the person has actually insulted Allah, then Allah will send a lightning bolt to kill or injure the "blasphemer". After all, did not God send down fire to light Elijah's water-soaked offering?
If the accused is not harmed by a lightning bolt from Allah, then the accuser should undergo the following. The accuser should be tied to a ten-meter metal pole on the night of prolonged thunderstorms. If the accuser is killed during the night, then we can assume that it is Allah's will. If the accuser survives the night, then the accused and the accuser should ask forgiveness of each other.
And forgiveness is the basic tenet of all religions, irregardless of how the "believers" ignore this bedrock principle.
I propose the following test of blasphemy.
If a person is accused of blasphemy, he or she should be staked out just after sundown on a clear night in a field that is at least one hundred feet from any structure. If the person has actually insulted Allah, then Allah will send a lightning bolt to kill or injure the "blasphemer". After all, did not God send down fire to light Elijah's water-soaked offering?
If the accused is not harmed by a lightning bolt from Allah, then the accuser should undergo the following. The accuser should be tied to a ten-meter metal pole on the night of prolonged thunderstorms. If the accuser is killed during the night, then we can assume that it is Allah's will. If the accuser survives the night, then the accused and the accuser should ask forgiveness of each other.
And forgiveness is the basic tenet of all religions, irregardless of how the "believers" ignore this bedrock principle.
Tuesday, March 03, 2015
Proof that Muslims do speak out
The Huffington Post has a blog by Sophia Jones, “’SNL’ Has Nothing On the Way The Middle East Mocks ISIS”. See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/03/mocking-islamic-state_n_6790254.html. Many of the YouTube videos use the music from ISIS videos to mock ISIS.
Oh, yes, many are not anonymous. The poster’s name and picture accompany the YouTube snippet.
See also “Muslims do speak out. Are you listening?”
Oh, yes, many are not anonymous. The poster’s name and picture accompany the YouTube snippet.
See also “Muslims do speak out. Are you listening?”
Thursday, February 26, 2015
Muslims do speak out. Are you listening?
A few weeks ago a letter writer to the Reader stated that “ALL Muslims” must speak out. He stated this over and over again.
Should others claim that “ALL Christians” must speak out about slavery, lynchings, or discrimination? In an ideal world maybe “ALL” whoever would speak about crimes committed by some of their “co-religionists”, but we live in a complex world where people’s abilities and wishes vary.
Many Christians didn’t speak out about slavery or lynchings out of fear for themselves and their families. Many Christians didn’t speak out because they were far removed from where these crimes were being committed. Many Christians didn’t speak out because they had other concerns that were more immediate to them.
Are not many Muslims in similar situations? Are those in areas controlled by the Islamic State or by dictators going to speak out against injustice and be killed, imprisoned, or tortured for their opposition? Are those far from these awful situations going to spend all their time speaking out against injustice instead of going to work or caring for their families?
Well, if you have several news sources you will find that many Muslims are speaking out. The Duluth News Tribune of Sunday, February 22 had a story headlined “Norway’s Muslims form protective human ring around synagogue”. This was in reaction to a Danish Muslim killing two people at a synagogue in Copenhagen; the synagogue was holding an event to promote free speech. The Star Tribune has published several stories about the concern of Muslim parents that their children are being seduced to join ISIS.
Remember that one of the first people killed in the Charlie Hebdo attack was a Muslim police officer. Remember that in the attack on the Kosher grocery one of the people who led some people out was a Muslim employee.
Remember that Salman Rushdie, author of “The Satanic Verses”, condemned to death by Ayatollah Khomeini for blasphemy, is still speaking out against injustice.
Remember that Egypt struck back against ISIS in Libya because of brutal beheading of Coptic Christians, Christians who were Egyptian citizens.
Note that Mustafa Akyol, a Turkish journalist and Muslim, has been writing about the need for toleration by Muslims for the New York Times. You can find two of his latest columns at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/18/opinion/mustafa-akyol-a-letter-concerning-muslim-toleration.html and http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/opinion/islams-problem-with-blasphemy.html. See also his TED talk at http://video.ted.com/talk/podcast/2011X/None/MustafaAkyol_2011X-480p.mp4.
He also wrote Islam without Extremism, A Muslim Case for Liberty. Here are two notable quotes from his book.
“In all these cases, the Muslims who reacted with anger and violence probably were sincere in their zeal to defend their faith. Yet, alas, the practical result of their actions was to vindicate the very accusation brought against them—that Islam is an intolerant and aggressive religion. So, if they really want to change that negative perception about their religion, they must begin by changing their course of action.” p. 252
“Beyond the Hadith literature, a response to blasphemy that is more compatible with the liberal standards of the modern world actually comes from the Qur’an. The Muslim scripture not only lacks any suggestion of earthly punishment for blasphemy, it also advises a nonviolent response: ‘When you hear God’s revelations disbelieved in and mocked at, do not sit with them until they enter into some other discourse; surely then you would be like them.’” p. 254
My notes for this column include many more quotes about the tension among various Islamic schools of thought. I’ll try to summarize some of the highlights.
After the death of Muhammad, politicians dictated Islamic thought. They interpreted it to increase their power rather than to increase the welfare of the people. Sounds like something that has happened and is happening in Christendom.
A tool to increase political power were the Hadiths, “a collection of literature that claims to communicate the Sunna (tradition) of the Prophet Muhammad.” Many of them are contradictory to the Qur’an and to each other. Unfortunately, a number of historic events squelched the more liberal schools of Islamic jurisprudence and strengthened the more illiberal school.
“In 1258, the Mongols sacked Baghdad–then the most vibrant and polished city of Islamdom, if not the world.” The Mongols were so destructive that “that the river turned black for the ink for days on end”, ink from all the documents the Mongols destroyed.
Other invasions followed that weakened liberal Islamic thought and strengthened conservative thought.
Turkey allied itself with Germany in the early 20th century as a counter to its old rival, Russia. Poor choice! The defeat of Germany led to the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. The Allies slowly broke the Empire into pieces and installed leaders they chose. This continues today with the West trying to decide who should be rulers of these pieces. These actions certainly aren’t Christian: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
A second invasion was of oil men. Keep the flow of oil in our control and keep local leaders who support us in control. This strengthened those who supported Wahhabism, a very strict form of Islam that Akyol calls more of the desert than of Muhammad.
But beware, it can happen here in the hands of those who call themselves Christians. Jacques Berlinerblau warns in How to Be Secular: A Call to Arms for Religious Freedom that the “Revivalists” who claim that the United States is and has been a Christian nation really don’t want a pluralistic Christianity, but a Christianity as they interpret it. They ignore that the Founders were concerned with any given Protestant sect taking control and limiting the freedom of other sects.
Should others claim that “ALL Christians” must speak out about slavery, lynchings, or discrimination? In an ideal world maybe “ALL” whoever would speak about crimes committed by some of their “co-religionists”, but we live in a complex world where people’s abilities and wishes vary.
Many Christians didn’t speak out about slavery or lynchings out of fear for themselves and their families. Many Christians didn’t speak out because they were far removed from where these crimes were being committed. Many Christians didn’t speak out because they had other concerns that were more immediate to them.
Are not many Muslims in similar situations? Are those in areas controlled by the Islamic State or by dictators going to speak out against injustice and be killed, imprisoned, or tortured for their opposition? Are those far from these awful situations going to spend all their time speaking out against injustice instead of going to work or caring for their families?
Well, if you have several news sources you will find that many Muslims are speaking out. The Duluth News Tribune of Sunday, February 22 had a story headlined “Norway’s Muslims form protective human ring around synagogue”. This was in reaction to a Danish Muslim killing two people at a synagogue in Copenhagen; the synagogue was holding an event to promote free speech. The Star Tribune has published several stories about the concern of Muslim parents that their children are being seduced to join ISIS.
Remember that one of the first people killed in the Charlie Hebdo attack was a Muslim police officer. Remember that in the attack on the Kosher grocery one of the people who led some people out was a Muslim employee.
Remember that Salman Rushdie, author of “The Satanic Verses”, condemned to death by Ayatollah Khomeini for blasphemy, is still speaking out against injustice.
Remember that Egypt struck back against ISIS in Libya because of brutal beheading of Coptic Christians, Christians who were Egyptian citizens.
Note that Mustafa Akyol, a Turkish journalist and Muslim, has been writing about the need for toleration by Muslims for the New York Times. You can find two of his latest columns at http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/18/opinion/mustafa-akyol-a-letter-concerning-muslim-toleration.html and http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/14/opinion/islams-problem-with-blasphemy.html. See also his TED talk at http://video.ted.com/talk/podcast/2011X/None/MustafaAkyol_2011X-480p.mp4.
He also wrote Islam without Extremism, A Muslim Case for Liberty. Here are two notable quotes from his book.
“In all these cases, the Muslims who reacted with anger and violence probably were sincere in their zeal to defend their faith. Yet, alas, the practical result of their actions was to vindicate the very accusation brought against them—that Islam is an intolerant and aggressive religion. So, if they really want to change that negative perception about their religion, they must begin by changing their course of action.” p. 252
“Beyond the Hadith literature, a response to blasphemy that is more compatible with the liberal standards of the modern world actually comes from the Qur’an. The Muslim scripture not only lacks any suggestion of earthly punishment for blasphemy, it also advises a nonviolent response: ‘When you hear God’s revelations disbelieved in and mocked at, do not sit with them until they enter into some other discourse; surely then you would be like them.’” p. 254
My notes for this column include many more quotes about the tension among various Islamic schools of thought. I’ll try to summarize some of the highlights.
After the death of Muhammad, politicians dictated Islamic thought. They interpreted it to increase their power rather than to increase the welfare of the people. Sounds like something that has happened and is happening in Christendom.
A tool to increase political power were the Hadiths, “a collection of literature that claims to communicate the Sunna (tradition) of the Prophet Muhammad.” Many of them are contradictory to the Qur’an and to each other. Unfortunately, a number of historic events squelched the more liberal schools of Islamic jurisprudence and strengthened the more illiberal school.
“In 1258, the Mongols sacked Baghdad–then the most vibrant and polished city of Islamdom, if not the world.” The Mongols were so destructive that “that the river turned black for the ink for days on end”, ink from all the documents the Mongols destroyed.
Other invasions followed that weakened liberal Islamic thought and strengthened conservative thought.
Turkey allied itself with Germany in the early 20th century as a counter to its old rival, Russia. Poor choice! The defeat of Germany led to the breakup of the Ottoman Empire. The Allies slowly broke the Empire into pieces and installed leaders they chose. This continues today with the West trying to decide who should be rulers of these pieces. These actions certainly aren’t Christian: “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.”
A second invasion was of oil men. Keep the flow of oil in our control and keep local leaders who support us in control. This strengthened those who supported Wahhabism, a very strict form of Islam that Akyol calls more of the desert than of Muhammad.
But beware, it can happen here in the hands of those who call themselves Christians. Jacques Berlinerblau warns in How to Be Secular: A Call to Arms for Religious Freedom that the “Revivalists” who claim that the United States is and has been a Christian nation really don’t want a pluralistic Christianity, but a Christianity as they interpret it. They ignore that the Founders were concerned with any given Protestant sect taking control and limiting the freedom of other sects.
Monday, February 16, 2015
“Blasphemy” cuts two ways
Many Muslims complain about the “blasphemy” of cartoonists’ and others’ depictions of Mohammad. More extreme Muslims consider any non-belief in Islam as “blasphemy”.
What if non-Muslims considered any slanderous statements about their beliefs as “blasphemy”? What would Muslims think of non-Muslims shooting or blowing up Muslims who made these slanderous statements. Unfortunately, too many non-Muslims commit these heinous deeds against Muslims, and generally these Muslim victims never made any such statements.
One of the phrases many Americans consider annoying is one made by the Iranian revolutions is “Marg bar Amrika!” “Death to America!”
Fortunately, there are Iranian politicians who would like to see this phrase fall out of use. They figure it is counter-productive to reaching an agreement with the West about Iran’s nuclear capabilities. See
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/10390938/Iran-attempts-to-silence-its-Death-to-America-chants.html
What all those hardliners who profess Christian or Islamic values is a key value of both religions is forgiveness.
What if non-Muslims considered any slanderous statements about their beliefs as “blasphemy”? What would Muslims think of non-Muslims shooting or blowing up Muslims who made these slanderous statements. Unfortunately, too many non-Muslims commit these heinous deeds against Muslims, and generally these Muslim victims never made any such statements.
One of the phrases many Americans consider annoying is one made by the Iranian revolutions is “Marg bar Amrika!” “Death to America!”
Fortunately, there are Iranian politicians who would like to see this phrase fall out of use. They figure it is counter-productive to reaching an agreement with the West about Iran’s nuclear capabilities. See
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/iran/10390938/Iran-attempts-to-silence-its-Death-to-America-chants.html
What all those hardliners who profess Christian or Islamic values is a key value of both religions is forgiveness.
Friday, February 13, 2015
Only the quiet ones have true religion
I am listening to the ecstatic singing of Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan, the CD is called “Shahen-Shah”. Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan leads a group of Muslim singers from Pakistan. The words are in Urdu.
My own meditation as I listen is the variety of beliefs around the world, even within religions considered complete. For example, the CD would be banned by the Taliban because they don’t like singing.
I would say that the “true believers” are those who hold their religion in their hearts, not those who are willing to kill those who hold different beliefs. The latter are the insecure ones who can only believe if everybody believes exactly as they do.
My own meditation as I listen is the variety of beliefs around the world, even within religions considered complete. For example, the CD would be banned by the Taliban because they don’t like singing.
I would say that the “true believers” are those who hold their religion in their hearts, not those who are willing to kill those who hold different beliefs. The latter are the insecure ones who can only believe if everybody believes exactly as they do.
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Muslims do speak out!
Too often someone writes or says that Muslims should speak out against the violence committed in the name of Islam.
Are these complainers in a cocoon? Muslims do speak out about the violence. The complainers probably don’t read what is even in local dailies.
Maybe they spend too much time on Fox News. Someone put on the Coffee Party site a snippet from Fox News of an interview with Reza Aslan, author of “Zealot: Jesus of Nazareth”. The interviewer kept repeating “How can a Muslim write about Jesus?” In another era, many would ask, “How can a black women be an interviewer on TV?” Or today, “How can a non-Muslim write about Islam?” or “How can a non-Muslim even ask questions about Islam?”
As to speaking out, many Muslims do. A group of Muslim scholars in Britain condemned the violence and the cartoons both but counseled patience and restraint.
One writer who stands out from several that I have read recently is Ahmed Tharwat, a broadcaster and writer in the Twin Cities. He wrote “I am Ahmed – non-terrorist”. He wrote for many Muslims that he is tired of being held responsible for the actions of a few out of over a billion Muslims.
Are these complainers in a cocoon? Muslims do speak out about the violence. The complainers probably don’t read what is even in local dailies.
Maybe they spend too much time on Fox News. Someone put on the Coffee Party site a snippet from Fox News of an interview with Reza Aslan, author of “Zealot: Jesus of Nazareth”. The interviewer kept repeating “How can a Muslim write about Jesus?” In another era, many would ask, “How can a black women be an interviewer on TV?” Or today, “How can a non-Muslim write about Islam?” or “How can a non-Muslim even ask questions about Islam?”
As to speaking out, many Muslims do. A group of Muslim scholars in Britain condemned the violence and the cartoons both but counseled patience and restraint.
One writer who stands out from several that I have read recently is Ahmed Tharwat, a broadcaster and writer in the Twin Cities. He wrote “I am Ahmed – non-terrorist”. He wrote for many Muslims that he is tired of being held responsible for the actions of a few out of over a billion Muslims.
Monday, January 12, 2015
Tout est pardonné
I've spent a lot of time researching the "Tout est pardonné" issue of Charlie Hebdo. But I have found no address to order a copy. I could impose on a couple of French friends, but I email them too infrequently.
I did find out how to donate and did: http://www.charliehebdo.fr/index.html. This site has almost nothing else but donation forms.
But I won’t go to eBay for it. I read that somebody is already offering this issue at $300!
P.S. 2016-01-02 A French friend did mail me the "Tout est pardonné" issue of Charlie Hebdo. It really does tax my French.
I did find out how to donate and did: http://www.charliehebdo.fr/index.html. This site has almost nothing else but donation forms.
But I won’t go to eBay for it. I read that somebody is already offering this issue at $300!
P.S. 2016-01-02 A French friend did mail me the "Tout est pardonné" issue of Charlie Hebdo. It really does tax my French.
Thursday, January 08, 2015
The greatest threat to Islam is…
…Islamists.
Islamists have probably killed, maimed, kidnapped, or threatened more Muslims than any other group in the world, be it Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, or secular.
Islamists are among a long line of the supposedly devout that think they know better than anybody else what God/Allah wants.
Islamists have strengthened the hand of militant “Christians” who want to constrain all Muslims, regardless of how well they fit in or stand apart from the society they are in. Anti-Muslim parties are springing up in many countries, including Sweden and France.
The number of Muslims who actively oppose Islamists far exceeds those who support Islamists. The problem is that most anti-Islamist Muslims do not have AK-47s and do not blow themselves up; they only have their cell phones.
If you have a twitter account, see #notinmyname. If not, see https://twitter.com/hashtag/notinmyname. As could be predicted, a wide range of views are expressed, from Muslims who just want to go about their lives in a secular society to those who want to tar all Muslims with the actions of a few.
Islamists have probably killed, maimed, kidnapped, or threatened more Muslims than any other group in the world, be it Christian, Jewish, Buddhist, or secular.
Islamists are among a long line of the supposedly devout that think they know better than anybody else what God/Allah wants.
Islamists have strengthened the hand of militant “Christians” who want to constrain all Muslims, regardless of how well they fit in or stand apart from the society they are in. Anti-Muslim parties are springing up in many countries, including Sweden and France.
The number of Muslims who actively oppose Islamists far exceeds those who support Islamists. The problem is that most anti-Islamist Muslims do not have AK-47s and do not blow themselves up; they only have their cell phones.
If you have a twitter account, see #notinmyname. If not, see https://twitter.com/hashtag/notinmyname. As could be predicted, a wide range of views are expressed, from Muslims who just want to go about their lives in a secular society to those who want to tar all Muslims with the actions of a few.
Wednesday, January 07, 2015
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)