Hillary Clinton reaches out to Muslims in Indonesia

[Uthman]

Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, has pledged a new willingness to work with the Muslim world during a visit to Indonesia.

Small and scattered protests were held in several cities, with some Islamic hardliners setting tyres on fire and others throwing shoes at caricatures of Mrs Clinton, but her message was warmly received by the country's officials.

She said her choice of Asia for her first overseas trip as President Barack Obama's top diplomat was "no accident" and a sign of the new administration's desire for broader and deeper relations with the continent on regional and global issues. Indonesia and southeast Asia often felt overlooked by the George W Bush administration.

With President Barack Obama wishing to "reach out to the entire world", Mrs Clinton said Indonesia would be an important partner in that effort.

"Certainly Indonesia, being the largest Muslim nation in the world, the third-largest democracy, will play a leading role in the promotion of that shared future," she said.

Mrs Clinton, who arrived from a stop in Japan praised the country for its multi-ethnic democracy and efforts to fight terrorism while respecting human rights. Today [thurs] she heads to South Korea and then China.

Indonesia has powerful personal ties for President Barack Obama, who spent four years in Jakarta as a child. Among those who turned out at the airport to welcome Mrs Clinton were 44 children from his former primary school, singing traditional folk songs and waving Indonesian and US flags.

"It gave him an insight into not only this diverse and vibrant culture, but also the capacity for people with different backgrounds to live harmoniously together," said Mrs Clinton.

Source

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you wise Mr Osman; I was thinking I have not seen you around for a while

Hopefully things will improve since Mr Bush decided to leave us.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

[fairandbalanced]

Greetings and peace be with you wise Mr Osman; I was thinking I have not seen you around for a while

Hopefully things will improve since Mr Bush decided to leave us.

In the spirit of praying for peace on Earth

Eric

Yes..yes.. I quite agree. Everything will be fine now that Bush is no longer President. A quick review of history will review that there was absolutely no friction between Islam and the "West" before his Presidency :sunny:


As a gesture of goodwill, President Obama just ordered another 17,000 US troops to Afghanistan and has continued or even increased the CIA-run Predator missile strikes in Pakistan. We even learned recently from Sen Feinstein that the Predator aircraft are actually based in Pakistan (it was supposed to be a secret). Guantanamo Bay detention facility will be shut down.....in a year or so.....maybe. ;D President Obama also invoked State secrets privledge in recent cases of Muslim men who claimed they were tortured in Mulsim countries after deportations from the US. They will, therefore, not get a day in civil court. He also refused to reverse policies regarding surveilance of foreign phone calls entering the US from suspected bad guys. The problem is, when you are President, you have act responsibly in the interest of the American people...that is his job.

Peace is just breaking out all over. :D

BTW...how old was Obama when he was in Indonesia? Didn't he leave when he was about 4? How much could he even remember? I suppose it has symbolic value.

[AFDAL]

Boycott her !!!!!

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Cabdullahi]

there's a growing list of alleged crimes she has committed.......
but allahuelam

[Uthman]

Clinton says Indonesia shows Islam and modernity coexist

U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton held up Indonesia on Wednesday as proof that modernity and Islam can coexist as she visited the country where U.S. President Barack Obama spent four years as a boy. Clinton's 24-hour stay in the world's most populous Muslim nation underlined Obama's desire to forge a better relationship with the Islamic world, where his predecessor George W. Bush's policies were deeply unpopular, notably the invasion of Iraq.

Clinton, on her first trip as secretary of state, said she wanted to deepen cooperation between the two countries on counterterrorism, climate change and security.

"As I travel around the world over the next years, I will be saying to people: if you want to know whether Islam, democracy, modernity and women's rights can co-exist, go to Indonesia," she said at a dinner with civil society activists.

Clinton basked in Obama's popularity in Indonesia at every stop during her day, which included talks with the Indonesian foreign minister and a visit to the Jakarta headquarters of the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN).

Obama spent four years in Indonesia after his American mother, Ann Dunham, married Indonesian Lolo Soetoro following the end of her marriage to Obama's Kenyan father.

Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda said Indonesia shared the United States' "joy" at Obama's election and he wanted Clinton to go back and tell the U.S. president "we cannot wait too long" for a visit.

Playing on Obama's Indonesian ties, about 50 schoolchildren from the U.S. president's old school waved U.S. and Indonesian flags and sang folk songs to Clinton on the tarmac after she landed at an airport in the suburbs of Jakarta.

'DIPLOMATIC ABSENTEEISM'

Although Clinton got a generally warm welcome, about 100 Muslim students, some chanting "Allahu Akbar" (God is greatest), held a protest rally at Jakarta's presidential palace, some throwing shoes at a picture of Clinton.
While most Indonesian Muslims are moderate, the country has a radical fringe and has suffered from sporadic bombings in recent years. More than 200 people, many of them foreigners, were killed when Islamist militants bombed tourist areas of the island of Bali in 2002.

Police have deployed 2,800 officers in the capital for Clinton's visit, part of a week-long trip that began in Tokyo and will include stops in Seoul and Beijing.

On Thursday Clinton will meet Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, who seeking is a second term this year and is keen to showcase Indonesia's stability since its transformation from an autocracy under former President Suharto -- who was forced to resign in 1998 -- to a vibrant democracy.

At ASEAN, which critics often dismiss as a toothless talk shop, Clinton said Washington would study whether to join its Treaty of Amity and Cooperation, a step short of membership but that could signal stronger U.S. ties with Southeast Asia.

"Your visit shows the seriousness of the United States to end its diplomatic absenteeism in the region," ASEAN Secretary-General Surin Pitsuan said after welcoming Clinton to the group's headquarters.

Seeking closer ties with ASEAN could be a tactic by the new U.S. administration to try to exert influence over Myanmar, which has been ruled by a military junta for decades.

Clinton, who this week said Washington was reviewing its Myanmar policy and hinted it may drop some sanctions, admitted U.S. policy has had no effect on Myanmar's government.

"Clearly, the path we have taken in imposing sanctions has not influenced the Burmese junta," she told reporters at the news conference with Wirajuda, referring to the country by its British colonial name. ""But ...reaching out and trying to engage them hasn't influenced them either," she said.

Clinton also announced the U.S. Peace Corps would be negotiating to resume volunteer work in Indonesia, four decades after it left the country during the turbulent 1960s.

Source

[nocturnal]

Welcoming her with such grandeur and ebullience is the most obscence thing the Indonesian authorities can do. Its no secret that she leads the pack of pro-israeli hawks in Washington and all you need to do is view her speech to AIPAC just before Obama was confirmed as Democratic Presidential candidate to understand how much of a bellicose neo-imperialist she is.

If the Indonesian government had even a semblance of morality, they would reject with vehemence the visit of such a ranking US official who is complicit in the massacre of the people of Gaza and in the continuing zionist occupation of Palestine. Shame on the Indonesian government for lionizing this murderer in the world's most populous Muslim nation.

[Uthman]

US Indonesia warmth for Clinton

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has met Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and appeared on a TV chat show in Indonesia.

She promised greater US efforts to build peace in the Middle East, a top concern of many Muslims in Indonesia.

Her visit to Jakarta was filled with mutual admiration as she praised Indonesia's democracy and freedoms.

After Jakarta she headed to South Korea, amid rising tension on the Korean peninsula.

Ahead of her arrival in Seoul, North Korea issued a warning to Seoul that it was ready for "all-out confrontation" - the latest in a series of similar statements from Pyongyang.

Mrs Clinton's visit also comes amid speculation North Korea may be preparing to test-fire a long-range missile, something that the US secretary has said would be "extremely unhelpful".

Middle East pledge

Hillary Clinton began the day by appearing on a leading TV chat show in Jakarta, where she spoke of her favourite music - the Beatles and the Rolling Stones - and tackled world issues.

Asked about the recent conflict in the Middle East, she pledged greater US engagement.

"We felt like the United States had not been as active in trying to bring the parties together to resolve the conflict," she said.

"We're going to work very hard to resolve what has been such a painful and difficult conflict for so many years."

She also announced her intention to attend a donors' pledging conference for rebuilding Gaza, to be held in Egypt in early March.

Indonesia can be a good partner for the US in reaching out to the Muslim world

Hassan Wirajuda
Indonesian foreign minister

Many Indonesians have been deeply troubled by US policy in the Middle East and the invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

Mrs Clinton had earlier praised Indonesia, where the majority of people profess a tolerant Islam, for achieving democracy, women's rights and religious freedom.

She also announced plans to re-start the Peace Corps programme of American volunteers to Indonesia, which had been stopped in the 1960s.

Indonesian Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda said Indonesia could perform a powerful bridging role.

"Indonesia can be a good partner for the US in reaching out to the Muslim world," he said.

Rising tensions

In Seoul, Hillary Clinton's attention is set to focus on security concerns and North Korea's nuclear programme.

South Korea wants the US to help restart stalled six-party talks aimed at ending Pyongyang's nuclear ambitions.

The BBC's state department correspondent, Kim Ghattas, says that North Korea's sabre-rattling over the past few weeks is seen as an attempt to grab the attention of the Obama administration and improve its bargaining position when the talks eventually resume.

Mrs Clinton has warned North Korea against any provocative action and said Washington would be watching closely.

Source

[ardianto]

Clinton says Indonesia shows Islam and modernity coexist
Clinton, on her first trip as secretary of state, said she wanted to deepen cooperation between the two countries on counterterrorism, climate change and security.
Source

Counterterrorism is a main trouble between Indonesian people and US government.
In Indonesian people minds terrorists are George W Bush, his supporter and Zionist. But in US govenment minds terrorists are Muslims who doesn't fear to USA.

My advice to Mrs Clinton is : Dont talk about terrorism and counterterrorism !

[fairandbalanced]

Welcoming her with such grandeur and ebullience is the most obscence thing the Indonesian authorities can do. Its no secret that she leads the pack of pro-israeli hawks in Washington and all you need to do is view her speech to AIPAC just before Obama was confirmed as Democratic Presidential candidate to understand how much of a bellicose neo-imperialist she is.

If the Indonesian government had even a semblance of morality, they would reject with vehemence the visit of such a ranking US official who is complicit in the massacre of the people of Gaza and in the continuing zionist occupation of Palestine. Shame on the Indonesian government for lionizing this murderer in the world's most populous Muslim nation.

Calling Hillary Clinton a "murderer" is a well struck blow, sir, and it was delightfully clever, but you forgot to mention her chubby thighs and her lies about the Rose Law Firm records.

To referesh your memory, however, there is a new government in the US and she was only confirmed less than one month ago. Before that she was one vote out of 100 in the US Senate.

She also was criticized for hugging Arafat's wife immediately after she gave a speech lauding homicide bombers blowing up teeangers in a pizza parlor.....err.....I mean........martyrs for Palestine defending their homeland.

I don't know how you expect anyone to take you seriously when you start calling someone in office for 20 days a "murderer".

[nocturnal]

Calling Hillary Clinton a "murderer" is a well struck blow, sir, and it was delightfully clever, but you forgot to mention her chubby thighs and her lies about the Rose Law Firm records.

To referesh your memory, however, there is a new government in the US and she was only confirmed less than one month ago. Before that she was one vote out of 100 in the US Senate.

She also was criticized for hugging Arafat's wife immediately after she gave a speech lauding homicide bombers blowing up teeangers in a pizza parlor.....err.....I mean........martyrs for Palestine defending their homeland.

I don't know how you expect anyone to take you seriously when you start calling someone in office for 20 days a "murderer".

If you condone and actively support the actions of an agressor state and infact defend it, then you are complicit in it. Especially so when the US is underwriting this odious genocidal regime. She is a murderer to me, there's no question, just as Olmert and Obama are too.

She does not have to be secretary of state for people to understand what her record and her ideological perspective is on the middle east. A clinton state department is essentially another zionist outpost with a brief to entrench israeli primacy in the region and brutally continue to suppress the legitimate rights of the Palestinian people and to castigate them for democratically electing Hamas as their government.

When the entire US administration is in thrall of zionist lobbyists and powerful related interests, fronted by people such as clinton, there is realistically not a whole lot one can expect individuals like George Mitchell to achieve in the way of progress. So understand the situation acutely before attempting to controvert facts with vapidly erroneous arguements.

[Pomak]

Funny that Bush did the exact same thing in 2004, that time they used Turkey as an example. In fact they almost used the same words. Obama should sit down and read, "what a billion muslims think", if he is honest.

[Dawud_uk]

obama / bush are just different sides of the same coin.

this story when i read it just shows exactly where the west is going wrong,

they fly into a muslim country, speak to the rulers, many of whom the ulema classify as apostates, say how wonderfully modern it is and shows how islam and west is compatable blah blah blah whilst ignoring all the protests taking place.

then fly out pretending everything is fine and nothing wrong.

these people are blind and deaf to the truth.

[Yanal]

Its obviously because she wants to go in the good side of Barack Obama that's why she is helping Muslims.

[Grace Seeker]

obama / bush are just different sides of the same coin.

this story when i read it just shows exactly where the west is going wrong,

they fly into a muslim country, speak to the rulers, many of whom the ulema classify as apostates, say how wonderfully modern it is and shows how islam and west is compatable blah blah blah whilst ignoring all the protests taking place.

then fly out pretending everything is fine and nothing wrong.

these people are blind and deaf to the truth.

So, are you saying that:
a) Indonesia is NOT wonderfully modern?
or
b) Islam and the west are NOT compatable?
or
c) both?

[Dawud_uk]

So, are you saying that:
a) Indonesia is NOT wonderfully modern?
or
b) Islam and the west are NOT compatable?
or
c) both?

i answer B

[Uthman]

i answer B

I ditto that.

[Pomak]

So where does that leave western muslims?

[Uthman]

So where does that leave western muslims?

Bear in mind that not all 'western Muslims' are practising Muslims. But for many, it leaves us with an identity crisis, struggling to reconcile our religious values with western values.

[KAding]

Bear in mind that not all 'western Muslims' are practising Muslims. But for many, it leaves us with an identity crisis, struggling to reconcile our religious values with western values.

Well, won't this inevitably lead to segregation of practicing Muslims? I'm not sure that is good for our society. Or maybe this concern is unjustified? As long as this segregation doesn't lead to activities that...ehm...undermine the "security of the state", everything should be okay maybe?

To be honest I'm amazed that hardcore practicing Muslims don't group up more in private communities, a bit like some smaller protestant movements. Some of these movements truly try to keep their distance from their "sinful" fellow citizens and build their own mini-society with homeschooling and separate social rules and mores.

[KAding]

So, are you saying that:
a) Indonesia is NOT wonderfully modern?
or
b) Islam and the west are NOT compatable?
or
c) both?

i answer B

I suppose it depends on what you mean by "compatible", "the West" and "Islam" :thankyou: :D

[Uthman]

Well, won't this inevitably lead to segregation of practicing Muslims?

I just feel that the fundamental values of Islam differ radically from those of 'the west' which can leave young Muslims confused as to who they really are. There is no reason for complete segregation since practising Muslims may still participate in society. However, they can only integrate to a certain extent as they cannot transgress the limits set by Islam. For example, Muslims can still get a job in a western society but they are limited as jobs must be halal and they should be allowed to perform their prayers on time. Many Non-Muslim employers find it outrageous that Muslims can "demand" that they are allowed to leave their job to pray several times a day. The British tabloids pick up on this and make it a million times worse. But I digress. It would make sense therefore that practising Muslims will never be fully assimilated into western culture, but that doesn't mean they will be completely segregated either.

Of course, concerns have been raised in Britain about Islamic 'no-go areas' but I think they would probably be more accurately described as Pakistani or Bangladeshi Ghettos as opposed to Muslim ones.

[Mr. Baldy]

As far as I'm aware there is a large HT following in Indonesia... I think that is quite interesting.

[Uthman]

HT confuses me. I never know whether or not they are 'extremists'.

[Mr. Baldy]

Apparently, their 'Islamists' bro. Whatever that means!

[Uthman]

Apparently, their 'Islamists' bro. Whatever that means!

Indeed! But 'Islamists' according to who? I know the BBC has referred to them as an extreme organisation. If you take a look at their website their aims and methods appear noble. Maybe there is a discrepancy between this and what they do in practice.

[Mr. Baldy]

hmmm... Well I wouldn't trust the beeb 100%. There do seem to be a lot of rumours enshrouding them though, I was once told they allowed pornography. I'm sorry, but I don't accept that to be true. and Allah hu alim

[Dawud_uk]

HT are non violent, one of the reasons i never joined them as violence although not usually the first answer, if very rarely the last either.

they are considered 'extremist' and 'islamist' because they believe in a khilafate, believe in politically working towards it and are very vocal on this point.

but i dont find it helpful when muslims use the labels of the disbelievers, we should examine their beliefs and actions in accordance with the Quran and sunnah to decide if they extremist or not according to that criteria.

[Pomak]

Bear in mind that not all 'western Muslims' are practising Muslims. But for many, it leaves us with an identity crisis, struggling to reconcile our religious values with western values.

Bear in mind that not all eastern muslims are practicing.

Bear in mind that most eastern countries are dictatorships or authoritarian.

Bear in mind that Rule of Law is an islamic value, something missing in the east but quite evident in the west(except USA from time to time)

Bear in mind that in the West you are more free as a muslim to loby the govt, than you are in places like Egypt. (Unless you want to spend time with the nail removalist)

...ect

No i don't think Islam and the west are polar opposites.

[Uthman]

HT are non violent, one of the reasons i never joined them as violence although not usually the first answer, if very rarely the last either.

they are considered 'extremist' and 'islamist' because they believe in a khilafate, believe in politically working towards it and are very vocal on this point.

but i dont find it helpful when muslims use the labels of the disbelievers, we should examine their beliefs and actions in accordance with the Quran and sunnah to decide if they extremist or not according to that criteria.

Agreed.

[Grace Seeker]

Bear in mind that not all eastern muslims are practicing.

Bear in mind that most eastern countries are dictatorships or authoritarian.

Bear in mind that Rule of Law is an islamic value, something missing in the east but quite evident in the west(except USA from time to time)

Bear in mind that in the West you are more free as a muslim to loby the govt, than you are in places like Egypt. (Unless you want to spend time with the nail removalist)

...ect

No i don't think Islam and the west are polar opposites.

I think you are right, they are not polar opposites. They are not necessarily always going to be harmonious, but they are not two ends of a continuim. Indeed, I suspect that in a truly secular western society it is no more difficult being Muslim than it is to be any other practicing faith, for all faiths will occassionally challenge the status quo, and face ostracisim as a result.

But if some do consider the west and Islam to be incompatible with each other, it makes me think that there is probably less freedom for a non-Muslim person from the west to live in a strict Muslim culture than for the Muslim to live in a western society. Agree or disagree?

[Uthman]

I also agree that Islam and the West are not 'polar opposites' but I maintain that their fundamental values are very different. You can be a practising Muslim and still comply fully with the law, but you will still be at odds with Western values. The notion of freedom of speech as an example which, in Britain and America, includes the freedom to insult is a value which the West prides itself upon. Remember the Danish Cartoons incident? I think that probably supports my point.

Another example is the issue of gender interaction. Free mixing of the genders is frowned upon in Islam, yet is an integral part of Western culture. Many Muslims see it as haraam for an unmarried man and a woman to make any contact e.g. shaking hands.

These are just a couple of reasons why I think Islamic values and Western values are incompatible.

[Uthman]

But if some do consider the west and Islam to be incompatible with each other, it makes me think that there is probably less freedom for a non-Muslim person from the west to live in a strict Muslim culture than for the Muslim to live in a western society. Agree or disagree?

I would probably agree with that suggestion.

[zanjabeela]

I think you are right, they are not polar opposites. They are not necessarily always going to be harmonious, but they are not two ends of a continuim. Indeed, I suspect that in a truly secular western society it is no more difficult being Muslim than it is to be any other practicing faith, for all faiths will occassionally challenge the status quo, and face ostracisim as a result.

But if some do consider the west and Islam to be incompatible with each other, it makes me think that there is probably less freedom for a non-Muslim person from the west to live in a strict Muslim culture than for the Muslim to live in a western society. Agree or disagree?

I'm going to have to largely disagree. Non-Muslims seem to live quite nicely in places like the Malaysia, Indonesia, UAE, KSA (they have their own compounds in which alcohol is allowed, free-mixing is not frowned upon, and I believe I recall reading that the selling of Christmas ornaments are quite a hit in Saudi Arabia around Christmas time), and other Muslim countries that are not under the influence of war. I don't imagine, for example, that living in Egypt or Morocco is a great difficulty for many non-Muslims. Libya or Lebanon might not be as free, understandably. I think it varies from country to country, depending on the prevailing political situation.

But, I also don't know what freedoms you are speaking of that would be restricted.

[Grace Seeker]

I'm going to have to largely disagree. Non-Muslims seem to live quite nicely in places like the Malaysia, Indonesia, UAE, KSA (they have their own compounds in which alcohol is allowed, free-mixing is not frowned upon, and I believe I recall reading that the selling of Christmas ornaments are quite a hit in Saudi Arabia around Christmas time), and other Muslim countries that are not under the influence of war. I don't imagine, for example, that living in Egypt or Morocco is a great difficulty for many non-Muslims. Libya or Lebanon might not be as free, understandably. I think it varies from country to country, depending on the prevailing political situation.

But, I also don't know what freedoms you are speaking of that would be restricted.

To say: "they have their own compounds in which ______ is allowed" sounds a lot more like segregation than freedom to me.

Of course, it may be that people choose to live in self-imposed ghettos or other people like themselves. In that circumstance we shouldn't say that the problem is the willingness of the dominant culture to grant freedom to people, but of those minority group to withdraw from being in contact and communication with the society in which they are living.

I think of a girl who worked as a volunteer at a local hospital. A member of my church was the volunteer coordinator there, and when this girl (who was a Muslim) arrived she was wearing the traditional headscarf. My church member was glad to have her as one of her volunteers, not concerned about her being a Muslim and happy to accommodate any of the issues that were important to this woman's faith as long as it did not impact patient care. I've been told by some, that I would not be equally free to walk down the streets of some cities that were the population is predominately Muslim wearing a cross, carrying my Bible, ans engaging in conversation about my faith with those who asked me about it. Now I know that isn't everywhere, but those are some of the freedoms of personal expression that I am thinking of.

[Uthman]

Greetings,

I think of a girl who worked as a volunteer at a local hospital. A member of my church was the volunteer coordinator there, and when this girl (who was a Muslim) arrived she was wearing the traditional headscarf. My church member was glad to have her as one of her volunteers, not concerned about her being a Muslim and happy to accommodate any of the issues that were important to this woman's faith as long as it did not impact patient care. I've been told by some, that I would not be equally free to walk down the streets of some cities that were the population is predominately Muslim wearing a cross, carrying my Bible, ans engaging in conversation about my faith with those who asked me about it. Now I know that isn't everywhere, but those are some of the freedoms of personal expression that I am thinking of.

That's true but it should be borne in mind that, although this country has a Christian heritage, the church and state are separate and so the country is ruled by a secular government which doesn't favour any particular religion. Many Muslim countries, on the other hand, are ruled by a religious government where no such separation of 'church and state' exists and, although their laws may not always reflect true Islamic teachings, they do have reason to favour one particular religion over the rest.

Regards

[zanjabeela]

To say: "they have their own compounds in which ______ is allowed" sounds a lot more like segregation than freedom to me.

Of course, it may be that people choose to live in self-imposed ghettos or other people like themselves. In that circumstance we shouldn't say that the problem is the willingness of the dominant culture to grant freedom to people, but of those minority group to withdraw from being in contact and communication with the society in which they are living.

I think of a girl who worked as a volunteer at a local hospital. A member of my church was the volunteer coordinator there, and when this girl (who was a Muslim) arrived she was wearing the traditional headscarf. My church member was glad to have her as one of her volunteers, not concerned about her being a Muslim and happy to accommodate any of the issues that were important to this woman's faith as long as it did not impact patient care. I've been told by some, that I would not be equally free to walk down the streets of some cities that were the population is predominately Muslim wearing a cross, carrying my Bible, ans engaging in conversation about my faith with those who asked me about it. Now I know that isn't everywhere, but those are some of the freedoms of personal expression that I am thinking of.

Fair enough...except that the purpose of the compound is to allow non-Muslims their cultural freedoms without a side effect on Saudi culture. It's segregation if it's done in a manner akin to apartheid, where the compound would be a ghetto and the residents would have limited access to jobs, benefits, and so on. Such is not the case in countries with compounds: the compounds are not ghettos, self-imposed or otherwise, and the residents have access to some of the best jobs and benefits the country has to offer. Also, compounds are available to expats of Muslim countries too, and neither Muslims nor non-Muslims are required to live inside a compound dwelling...yet, it's a choice that many expats, especially non-Muslims, seems to prefer to utilize, perhaps for the cultural freedoms they allow for.

Regarding ghettos being self-imposed...I don't believe it's reasonable to say that any minority group chooses to "withdraw from the contact and communication with the society in which they are living." Even in a free country, ghettos happen out of circumstances that have to do with finances, access to opportunity, etc. much more than pure choice. No parent decides, "Well, wouldn't it be awesome to bring up my children in a slum where the schools are horrid and drug/gang problems abound." Ghettos cannot be likened to compounds, in any way, shape or form. Not to my mind.

And I think of a woman who was a Muslim, who went to a battered women's shelter that had a Christian philosophy. Her faith was impacted by the people who ran the place, and she did convert to Christianity. At the time, she felt pressured into it, although she is now content with her decision. I know this isn't every Christian organization...but it does happen, indicating that freedom is something found and lost everywhere. Additionally, do you know how common it is for a practicing Muslim woman in the USA to be scolded by a non-Muslim for donning the head-scarf or face veil? It certainly is not be governmental policy...but society is certainly free to pick on my freedom in dressing choices. The Muslim city in which walking down the street wearing a cross...which city was that? Dubai, Kuala Lampur, Cairo or Beirut, it would be accepted, probably without the paternalistic scolding I occasionally get in the US of A. Kabul or Baghdad, perhaps not so accepted...less so to do with governmental policy, I'm sure, than to do with prevailing tensions.

Freedom is not really a zero-sum game in any society. We have some freedoms here that we don't have elsewhere...and they might have some freedoms there that we don't have here.

Are we way off topic here? I'm sorry if we are.

[Pomak]

I think you are right, they are not polar opposites. They are not necessarily always going to be harmonious, but they are not two ends of a continuim. Indeed, I suspect that in a truly secular western society it is no more difficult being Muslim than it is to be any other practicing faith, for all faiths will occassionally challenge the status quo, and face ostracisim as a result.

But if some do consider the west and Islam to be incompatible with each other, it makes me think that there is probably less freedom for a non-Muslim person from the west to live in a strict Muslim culture than for the Muslim to live in a western society. Agree or disagree?

Depends on which part of the west your talking about really. The dominant culture in places like Europe is very different to places like America.(in term of faith)

disagree. A while back there was this missionary hospital in yemen(i think) and it was under threat from extremists who wanted to c4 the place. The gov't stationed guards and said that it wasn't going to let it close.

I can't say that i know of any similar move in any western country. (note that in some European countries there are (political)parties whose platform is only "no mosques in X city".

And for example there are places in the EU that are worse for you to be a muslim than a Christian in Turkey.

PS. Remember that "The West" isn't a defined word. It means different things to different people.

[Grace Seeker]

Are we way off topic here? I'm sorry if we are.

Getting there, if we aren't already. But it will neither be the first not last time for either of us, I suspect. :)

Regarding ghettos being self-imposed...I don't believe it's reasonable to say that any minority chooses to "withdraw from the contact and communication with the society in which they are living." Even in a free country, ghettos happen out of circumstances that have to do with finances, access to opportunity, etc. much more than pure choice. No parent decides, "Well, wouldn't it be awesome to bring up my children in a slum where the schools are horrid and drug/gang problems abound." Ghettos cannot be likened to compounds, in any way, shape or form. Not to my mind.

I don't think of "ghetto" as having to be synonymous with "slum".

A part of a city, not necessarily a slum area, occupied by a minority group. The term was first used for the enforced concentration of Jews into specific residential areas in European cities from the Middle Ages, but has now spread to include other ethnic groups in unofficial ghettos, especially black minorities in the USA. Lifestyles within the ghetto differ distinctly from those of the ‘host’ population and the prejudices of the host confine the sub-group to particular locations. see redlining. Although ghettos are characterized by social disadvantage, most ghettos display a spread of socio-economic groups and the better-off may move to the affluence of the ‘gilded ghetto’.

from Answers.com

Using that definition, I see even gated communities as a type of ghetto. And I often see people on these boards suggesting that Muslims should intentionally live in such isolation when living in western cultures. I also see some suggest that protestants do the same in certain parts of Europe, though I have no knowledge of that independent of this forum.

And I think of a woman who was a Muslim, who went to a battered women's shelter that had a Christian philosophy. Her faith was impacted by the people who ran the place, and she did convert to Christianity. At the time, she felt pressured into it, although she is now content with her decision. I know this isn't every Christian organization...but it does happen, indicating that freedom is something found and lost everywhere.

This is very true.

Additionally, do you know how common it is for a practicing Muslim woman in the USA to be scolded by a non-Muslim for donning the head-scarf or face veil? It certainly is not be governmental policy...but society is certainly free to pick on my freedom in dressing choices. The Muslim city in which walking down the street wearing a cross...which city was that? Dubai, Kuala Lampur, Cairo or Beirut, it would be accepted, probably without the paternalistic scolding I occasionally get in the US of A. Kabul or Baghdad, perhaps not so accepted...less so to do with governmental policy, I'm sure, than to do with prevailing tensions.

I understand your point about prevailing tensions. My daughter (who happens to be a Muslim from Turkey) was living with me in the USA in 2002-2003, less than a year after the destruction of the World Trade Center and when the USA invaded Iraq. I never once saw or heard anyone say something to her about wearing her headscarf, but I also know that know one needed to say anything directly to her, comments were all around her on new broadcasts, in the comments made by late night comedians, and discussions not directed at her but simply general conversation among the public which she of course overheard.

Paradoxically, she was more free to wear her headscarf at our American schools than she was when back home in Turkey.

Freedom is not really a zero-sum game in any society. We have some freedoms here that we don't have elsewhere...and they might have some freedoms there that we don't have here.

I buy that as well.

Maybe even what freedoms are important varies not just from country to country or society to society, but from person to person. For me, the freedom to drink alcohol is not something that I value at all. In fact, I might vote to restrict it in certain circumstances. But freedom of speech, assembly, and expression is something I value very much.

But I do understand those who say they see the west and Islam are incompatible because they hold to different standards. Despite my valuing of many western "freedoms", I feel much the same way with regard to values harbored by the culture in which I live that Muslims do. For not only are those value unIslamic, they are decidedly unChristian as well. Thus you hear Christians talk about being in the world but not of the world.

It might be different terminology that Muslims use to express this phenomena, but I expect that the views of practicing Muslims and practicing Christians toward the societies in which they live really isn't all that different.


Pomak: Though I didn't address them, I want say that I appreciate your above comments as well. I hadn't heard about some of the specific instances you shared.

[aadil77]

God, can't the americans leave us alone? they want puppet control over every bloody muslim country. What 'Global issue' does they have there? They need to be told to piss off and mind their own business, we don't need them

[Green_shoes]

Good on her

[Green_shoes]

To say: "they have their own compounds in which ______ is allowed" sounds a lot more like segregation than freedom to me.

Of course, it may be that people choose to live in self-imposed ghettos or other people like themselves. In that circumstance we shouldn't say that the problem is the willingness of the dominant culture to grant freedom to people, but of those minority group to withdraw from being in contact and communication with the society in which they are living.

I think of a girl who worked as a volunteer at a local hospital. A member of my church was the volunteer coordinator there, and when this girl (who was a Muslim) arrived she was wearing the traditional headscarf. My church member was glad to have her as one of her volunteers, not concerned about her being a Muslim and happy to accommodate any of the issues that were important to this woman's faith as long as it did not impact patient care. I've been told by some, that I would not be equally free to walk down the streets of some cities that were the population is predominately Muslim wearing a cross, carrying my Bible, ans engaging in conversation about my faith with those who asked me about it. Now I know that isn't everywhere, but those are some of the freedoms of personal expression that I am thinking of.

I'd have to agree with this, there are many muslim countries as a muslim i would hate to live in (for various reasons i do not want to do into because i'm feeling sleep right now) now imagine for a non muslim, it would be very hard to even walk down the street without getting glares from people like they are sort of aliens or worthless people.
in the West some muslims do not appreciate the amount of freedom they have compared with some muslim countries to be honest and anyone who disagree with this is either ignorant of that fact or they are lying to themselves.

[zanjabeela]

Getting there, if we aren't already. But it will neither be the first not last time for either of us, I suspect. :)

Too true!

I don't think of "ghetto" as having to be synonymous with "slum".


Using that definition, I see even gated communities as a type of ghetto. And I often see people on these boards suggesting that Muslims should intentionally live in such isolation when living in western cultures. I also see some suggest that protestants do the same in certain parts of Europe, though I have no knowledge of that independent of this forum.

OK...I see your point with this specific a definition. I live in a city which is almost exclusively Asian cultured (Vietnamese), and while I can see how it's beneficial to them to have such a setup, I don't think I'd encourage it for Muslims. I'm much more of an integrationist, and think that Muslims ought to be able to function at maximum capacity within other people. [/quote]

Paradoxically, she was more free to wear her headscarf at our American schools than she was when back home in Turkey.

Point well taken.

Maybe even what freedoms are important varies not just from country to country or society to society, but from person to person. For me, the freedom to drink alcohol is not something that I value at all. In fact, I might vote to restrict it in certain circumstances. But freedom of speech, assembly, and expression is something I value very much.

But I do understand those who say they see the west and Islam are incompatible because they hold to different standards. Despite my valuing of many western "freedoms", I feel much the same way with regard to values harbored by the culture in which I live that Muslims do. For not only are those value unIslamic, they are decidedly unChristian as well. Thus you hear Christians talk about being in the world but not of the world.

Excellent way of looking at it, although that does pose more complex issues of whose personal idea of freedom is to be considered and whose rejected.

The part about being in the world but not of the world is very similar to the Islamic principle of "Be in this world as a stranger (or traveler)."

It might be different terminology that Muslims use to express this phenomena, but I expect that the views of practicing Muslims and practicing Christians toward the societies in which they live really isn't all that different.

That is very likely.

Thank you for a really respectful and stimulating dialogue. You are as I remember you to be from when you first joined LI :)

[Uthman]

We are off-topic but personally I don't mind. That is the nature of discussion and I like where this discussion is going.

[Grace Seeker]

God, can't the americans leave us alone? they want puppet control over every bloody muslim country. What 'Global issue' does they have there? They need to be told to piss off and mind their own business, we don't need them

I think you are being a little naive to think that it is about Islam. America has a history of wanting to have a hand in every country that they can influence (I suspect the USA is not alone in this, just perhaps does so more egregiously than others). Perhaps we do need to be told to mind our own business, but don't think that the interest has to do with Islam as much as it has to do with America's own sense of self-importance and desire to control the world to the supposed benefit of its own ideology.