A Religion of Terror?

[جوري]

sure they have higher morals... all you have to do is look at the crusades and how Muslims dealt with the POW compared to the enemy... salah Adeen Alayoubi's war manners were exemplary... instead of butchering them he let them go........ compare that to an enemy that was said to be swimming in Muslim blood... Please read a little history from a non-political point of view... you'll see under the Muslim empires how well the enemies were treated.... I believe bros Ansar had a pretty amazing post here about it... and I think fi and others could probably locate it with more dexterity than I......... You want to speak of deception even to very close in modern day... look at how England used to go into towns assuming peaceful means only to torch villages... and open fire on peace demonstrators.... colonized half the world to steal their wealth... rather than inmpart enlightenment
-- sry you had a poor experience with a "hundred or two" but that hardly speaks for Islam or the 1.4 billion Muslims... it only speaks of your experience which for all intensive purposes probably has two sides......... I have known Muslims who know nothing of Islam short of how to spell it since it is on their birth certificate... that hardly should speak for islam......
Peace

 

[Hijrah]

you had quoted verses from the old testament. only sorry sister, but christians don't use the laws of the old testament. so your case is invalid lol. plus i don't see the significans in slamming down other religions to make yours seem not bad or something.

Yet Jesus himself said in the NT that he had come to fulfill the old laws, not abolish them

 

[GARY]

sure they have higher morals... all you have to do is look at the crusades and how Muslims dealt with the POW compared to the enemy... salah Adeen Alayoubi's war manners were exemplary... instead of butchering them he let them go........ compare that to an enemy that was said to be swimming in Muslim blood... Please read a little history from a non-political point of view... Peace

Without giving too much information about myself (I choose not to), I can only assure you that I am aware of both history and current events, and have always made a point of trying to find the truth behind the bias. I would also like to assure you, that the same way that I come to this muslim forum asking the hard questions, I also grind on other groups/religions. I am fair, in a 'not patronizing to anyone' kind of way.
So, having said that. Where should I read my history from? Islamic texts? Jewish texts? Texts written by european scholars? Or american scholars? Perhaps I should not forget the point of view of those in asia and throughout the pacific rim.
We must always read between the lines.
Muslim recorded history speaks of muslim honor and integrity. This of course conflicts with other records of muslim massacres. Don't ask for sources, it is pointless. you will claim that the sources are biased, and I will agree. So are the muslim sources, it is just the world we live in. Let it be enough to say that the sources on both sides will have different accounts of what happened. It is up to the reader to seek both and try to decide where the truth lies, which is usually somewhere between both accounts.

........ You want to speak of deception even to very close in modern day... look at how England used to...

Once again, I will say, I never said noone else uses deception. All of mankind does. Always has, likely always will.
But why is it such a common defense on this forum when faced with an ugly truth, to say "Oh yeah? well look at that guy! What about him!?"
What about him? We are talking about you right now. We can get to him later.

 

[جوري]

You are not presenting me with any truth?.... I too can assure you!........ I am well aware what goes on in the world and I am well aware of what happens in the name of Islam by Muslims...

--Books I have learned from given that I am an American were text books curriculum mandated by the schools and colleges I attended..... and I think they relayed a picture "history chanel" type without the inflammatory anecdotes that we are all so accustomed to on the news... Tons of socities and civilizations had their rise and fall, had their good and evil... Hopefully the bigger picture should be more telling than the actions of a few?

I always find however that you start with a scathing comment and don't care to carry it all the way... such as with the verse from the Quran or now with the "don't bother"... if we are here to learn from one another with no ulterior motives then what is the point if you don't back up what you are saying... in the very least as an awakening for fellow Muslims of what others think of their behavior so they can improve....

personally....I don't feel accused of anything by virtue of being a Muslim, In fact I am grateful and proud to be one.... Nothing on the news or stated by another human being will make me feel bad about that... as I am Muslim by choice!... I believe I am a good person and a contributing member to society... I try to do my best in accordance with my moral compass which I base from religious teachings... I have friends from all denominations and I haven't heard a complaint yet... on occasion there will be a constructive critisicm, never in the way of religion... which I do appreciate to help better my person! .... but I don't see why I should be on trial or judged somehow or any other person here or in the world by virtue of being a Muslim? Also, I don't see how people who can only speculate on the primary sources of Islam should have their views revered as the new fecund manifesto.... Unless you were there to witness... or have a primary source (recorded history book)... everything else around it is speculative with a dash of opinion which is surely driven by something... zeal or hatred it is all the same......... There are multiple sides to every story and someone as learned as you surely must know the more variables you add to a formula the more complicated.....
peace Gary

 

[GARY]

PurestAmbrosia,
Excellent post. Intelligent and thought-provoking, just the way I like it. (I admit my own fall short of this - sigh.) I have little to comment on as your post says enough.

This point I would like to discuss.

.....don't care to carry it all the way... such as with the verse from the Quran or now with the "don't bother"...

If you would really like me to point out some historical texts that state that muslims have committed atrocities in war I will. I was not attempting to be evasive, I merely found it pointless to provide sources that you will obviously disagree with, only to have you claim my source is biased. You and I have access to the internet, and can google up anything to support our statements. We both know that most sources are biased.

I know you still want me to give you something, so I will point out "The Massacres of the Khilafah" by Walter Short. It is an examination of massacres committed by muslims during the Ottoman Caliphate. It speaks of muslim forces slaughtering, plundering, and enslaving multitudes of Christians.

Do you want more?

 

[جوري]

Not many people liked the ottomans including Muslims themselves (Syria, Egypt) lost some of their best not to mention they were stripped of their own armies so when came time for British invasion, they were rendered helpless, against the brits the ottomans themselves sold to foreign invaders.

I have read a great deal many awful things they have done... Muslims as well suffered under their reign... you might be surprised that even though sadam seems a murderer by all standards Iraqis have suffered worse on the hands of their rulers. (Al-Hajaj) being one the worst...however some of the best ages of enlightenment happened under Muslim rule and not all ottomans were bad... I think if there were an ottoman empire today the Muslim world wouldn't be in the state that it is in.... even the undefeated Peter the Great had to retreat to the ottomans........

As for massacres of the khilafaha it seems shady to me... I haven't read it to judge it... but it doesn't spark my interest just by virtue of it being a non-primary source.... and not because I want an Islamic source but there are tons of books popping up nowadays and their interest is very apparent to me. their mantra is pushing for an Armageddon If it weren't recorded in history then I don't care really for someone speculating based on something he read. A Mr. short hardly seems like a qualified name unless he were omnipotent and witnessed all from 1400 years ago first hand... In fact I challenge him to come up with something original that wasn't based on an Islamic source or heresy from secondary sources whose soul benefit is to see the fall of Islam... there were tons of missionaries and popes(urbane) whose soul purpose was to conjure up lies and pass them as truth, and for obvious reasons... the same reasons by the way that lead them to pop a thousand websites trying to find error in the Quran... ... I have already read about the khalifs including some bad ones (mawya) being a cunning one himself wasn't much liked even amongst Muslims....... and I am well aware of what they have done... it doesn't surprise me one bit everyone trying to jump on the band wagon of how awful the Muslims are or were.... in fact you can say it is expected......
I can't say the above two sources are very supportive no... to each his own? everyone will eventually seek what fosters their train of thoughts.... which reminds me of a story I once read... two young men came to a scholar after having gone on a trip to Lebanon... the scholar asked the first... son how was your trip... the young man stated... it was awful... fll of lewedness, full of prostitues, full of debuachery and immorality....... and the scholar said ( you are right my son Lebanon is indeed full of all those things....
the second young man begged to differ... he stated he found people to be kind. hospitable, a school and a library on every corner, and virtous people... the scholar again stated... son you are right... Lebanon is indeed full of decency and kindness and knowledge to be sought.... both the young man looked at him with astonishment... How can we both be right? one asked... Scholar stated... each of you found what you were seeking......... and with that I bid you good night........

peace!

 

[GARY]

*sigh* Just the reaction I mentioned, that is why I didn't want to bother. Although there is a shred of common ground between what I was trying to say and this last post of yours - which is encouraging - the fact remains that whatever source I might provide, something will be wrong with it. I could have mention the works of Thomas F. Madden, that would have been too "crusaderish". Had I dug something up written by *insert name here* it would have been too ....*insert reason here* .....
It as I was trying to say, why bother?

 

[جوري]

If you wanted to read a book about Byzantine art would you read a book written by Robin Cormack or by Ahmed deedat?
If you wanted to attend a lecture about the life and works of Rothko would you attend the Walters or the Cairo Museum?
If you wanted to learn of Judaism would you attend a synagogue or a Mosque?
If you wanted to see an original Georgia O'keefe would you attend the Metropolitan Museum or the metropolitan opera?
If you wanted to learn of Nuclear Medicine in Tropical and Infectious Diseases would you start with a purchase of a genetics book?
if we are too predictable would you still frequent this forum or take your efforts else where, with like minds and where it will be better appreciated?

Once you answer between you and yourself at least a few of the above truthfully then we can proceed... otherwise you are right... I don't know?....why do you bother?

 

[GARY]

If you wanted to read a book about Byzantine art would you read a book written by Robin Cormack or by Ahmed deedat?
If you wanted to attend a lecture about the life and works of Rothko would you attend the Walters or the Cairo Museum?
If you wanted to learn of Judaism would you attend a synagogue or a Mosque?
If you wanted to see an original Georgia O'keefe would you attend the Metropolitan Museum or the metropolitan opera?
If you wanted to learn of Nuclear Medicine in Tropical and Infectious Diseases would you start with a purchase of a genetics book?
if we are too predictable would you still frequent this forum or take your efforts else where, with like minds and where it will be better appreciated?

Once you answer between you and yourself at least a few of the above truthfully then we can proceed... otherwise you are right... I don't know?....why do you bother?

I read your post and at the risk of being rude, I must say, that after all the reasonable and intelligent conversation you have engaged in, that is a pile of self-righteous nonsense.
I challenge you, if it is so easy, to present even one source that we can both agree upon. It is an unlikely feat.
I would have thought that you were enlightened enough to realize that your examples of topics and subsequent choices of source information are a question of one's own perspective. In other words, I could have asked the same questions. But out of respect for what I thought was an obvious mutual understanding that biased sources and one's own perspective are key issues in any such discussion, I avoided asking such nonsense of you. In a nutshell, what I purposely avoided asking you, is precisely what you asked me. That is to realize that my perspective is the right one, and you must accept my point of view as such before we can make any progress.

Nonsense. I have had many good conversations where we both benefitted while understanding that we didn't see things the same way.

One point;

if we are too predictable would you still frequent this forum or take your efforts else where, with like minds and where it will be better appreciated?

The point why I am here should be obvious. I am making an attempt to get past the one-sided views of the immediate world around me, and see things from a different perspective. And yes, I will ask some difficult questions. I have found that some muslims are very intolerant to people like me asking questions. I have tried to beat around the bush before, but was still met with hostility. So I don't bother anymore I just get to the point and ask what I want to know.
I have found many muslims to be intolerant to the idea that they might be wrong in any aspect of their thinking, no matter how small the detail.
So, having said that, many exchanges that could have been mutually beneficial, ended up only benefitting me. The other person involved missed the chance to learn. Which is of course fine by me, but it is a little frustrating at times.

 

[جوري]

I don't think I have offered you any books to read? short of an honest query... if you wanted to get the most distilled understanding of those whom according to you needing to get " past the one-sided views of the immediate world around" you... which sources would you choose? those that support western mantra? or those with a first hand account? --You seem to think or at least I am getting the notion that you think we do nothing but sing the praises of our khalifs even though according to some very "scholarly" people they were blood thirsty murders....

I believe in the justice that existed in the early Muslim empires... the Justice that enabled a woman to take to court the 2nd khalif (Omar Ibn Ilkhtab) for supposedly causing her a spontaneous abortion, and winning charges against him for unmediated (2nd degree murder).... Simply for stating when he walked he had a presence and took her by surprise that she lost her baby....

The same system where the 4th Khalif Ali RA...was robbed by a Jew, and couldn't prove beyond a reasonable doubt to a judge that it was in fact his sword and not stolen and so was awarded to the robber--- who though I digress converted to Islam from the dignity with which he was treated.... Does Mr. Short mention any of this in his book about the khalifs? I admit I am ignorant as to what is in it ... but I am not ignorant of the events that took place.... I don't know why you'd get the notion that Islamic books would describe folks untruthfully, disguising the truth or sugar coating it?... but a Mr. Thomas or a MR. Short's book wouldn't?

Does Mr Short mention how pre Islam female infanticide was common to that region and triabal? and that the Khalif Omar Ibn Ilkhtab RA had burried a daughter alive.... and that when he recatned he would cry remembering how she would wipe the sand from his beard while he was digging her grave? Does Mr. Short give you a humanistic picture of their lives bad or good?.... or were they all just blood thirsy pillagers? Does he mention at all what Arabia was like pre-ISlam and what the muslim empires did for the region, including such places as Egypt who would have easily fallen to foreign invaders as was the norm throughout the entire history of Egypt?

I know a great deal of westerners think we are just driven toward Islam like controlled sheep because we are born into it and are brain washed to think a certain way.... but it isn't the truth... if it were, there would be no reason holding those of us who live in the west back from being whatever we wanted to be moreover there wouldn't be so many of us Willingly and freely converting... and another surprising fact is that 4 out of every 5 converts are women... if Islam were as opressive toward women why would a great deal of reasonably intelligent human beings hang on to what seems to others like rotten principals or walk toward it freely? We are not all the country oafs they paint us and neither is Islam...

were there less than stellar people in the history of the Muslim world... You bet... Islam isn't responsible for how the Mongols who became Muslim perceive ISlam, as the Muslim world in and of itself fell to Mongolian conquest......... please just think a little about the reason to such books... far be it from me to tell you what to read... but consider the source if you wanted an unbiased view....

Lastly, I don't think two people in the same family share the same views or have an identical feelings or experience.......let alone the diverse muslims from all over.... Omar Ibn Ilkhtab and Abu Baker RA were as different in nature as can be... one very gentle and mellow, the other very avant-garde and stern... both pillars for the muslim world in spite of their differences ......
well I said my two cents
peace!

 

[GARY]

Without getting into the whole biased source discussion again, do you agree that muslim forces in history are guilty of at least "some" atrocities, or totally disagree altogether?
Western recorded history is wrong, and muslim scholars got it 100% right? Or a somewhat more realistic view that it is likely somewhere in between?

 

[جوري]

if you would read above you'd find your answer........
Mongols were pillagers they invaded the Muslim world... they became Muslim... they carried some of their practices... same goes for the Turks (old habits die hard?).... I will not blame Islam for the actions of some Muslims who find it to shake their old ways... given that even Muslims suffered on their hands..... I don't know any Muslim scholar or historian that would disagree with the said sentences......... I like specific incidents though... not conjured up lies.......
I don't know any sane human that can classify others as all bad or all good for all time... unless they were edging upon bipolar and exhibited other symptoms of splitting?........ I can't believe what you are asking sometimes......

 

[Woodrow]

Without getting into the whole biased source discussion again, do you agree that muslim forces in history are guilty of at least "some" atrocities, or totally disagree altogether?
Western recorded history is wrong, and muslim scholars got it 100% right? Or a somewhat more realistic view that it is likely somewhere in between?

A difficult concept to understand. There have been throughout history people who called themselves Muslim, but did not follow Islam.

"do you agree that muslim forces in history are guilty "

I will agree that some forces in history called themselves Muslim, but that did not mean they acted as Muslims.

 

[جوري]

A difficult concept to understand. There have been throughout history people who called themselves Muslim, but did not follow Islam.

"do you agree that muslim forces in history are guilty "

I will agree that some forces in history called themselves Muslim, but that did not mean they acted as Muslims.

Very well said..... I have already stated above... of the actions of Mongols and Turks... the presence of the former devestated the Abbasaid empire....... yet they later converted........ Why should we be responsible for their lack of understanding of war ethics or Islam?... or have the entire people be labeled since it is a free for all?

 

[GARY]

........ I can't believe what you are asking sometimes......

What do you think I am asking?
A more important question might be, why am I asking it?
I ask such a thing because so many people on this forum deal in absolutes. "The crusaders were 100% bad. Muslim armies always were good to the people they conquered. Etc..." I ask you to see where your thinking lies. You say you can't believe what I am asking, but I don't know you. We have never met and I know nothing about you. So the only way to find out is to ask. Your previous posts carried a hint of what your thinking was, but the answer was lost in the semantics and technicalities of our discussion. I wanted clarification. That is why I ask what I ask.

 

[GARY]

A difficult concept to understand. There have been throughout history people who called themselves Muslim, but did not follow Islam.

"do you agree that muslim forces in history are guilty "

I will agree that some forces in history called themselves Muslim, but that did not mean they acted as Muslims.

Very well said..... I have already stated above... of the actions of Mongols and Turks... the presence of the former devestated the Abbasaid empire....... yet they later converted........ Why should we be responsible for their lack of understanding of war ethics or Islam?... or have the entire people be labeled since it is a free for all?

These are not things that have eluded me. The points made here are obvious. It still sidesteps the real question of do you believe that muslim forces never behaved improperly. I don't mean people that thought they were muslim but were not, I mean bonified, most of the time well behaving, muslims. Do you feel they never committed atrocities?

 

[جوري]

well I hope amidst my semantics you got your answers
atrocities were recorded by Muslims as well... Turks used to take some people to the town center and stuff them after they had killed them to make an example out of.... Iraq had its share of tyrants... what they have done to the people is unspeakable... it is also Unislamic......

I hope for your sake and on any forum you visit that you consider the age and the level of education of those who correspond with you... else you will form a very obtuse view... There are people here as young as 13... although I have met with some very wise 13 year olds I don't think a person articulates the same way at 13 the way they do at 25... and well, knowledge is something we are all ever in its quest....

peace

 

[جوري]

These are not things that have eluded me. The points made here are obvious. It still sidesteps the real question of do you believe that muslim forces never behaved improperly. I don't mean people that thought they were muslim but were not, I mean bonified, most of the time well behaving, muslims. Do you feel they never committed atrocities?

That is a difficult question....
1- to commit an atrocity or torture is truly unislamic ... there is a Hadith about those who never even smell heaven... and it is men who use torture methods to hurts others....... and the second part of the hadith is about women who were see through garments......

so you can see why we easily conclude that those who do aren't muslim even if they think they are.... most of us believe that the egyptian president or syrian one or most arabic ones who open torture methods on people aren't Muslim.... but we can't label them as such because ultimately we believe it is up to God to declare who is a Muslim and who isn't....it becomes encumbent upon men to overthrow such people.... but they can't... the greatest form of Jihad then is a word spoken against them......

are these people bonifide Muslims? they tend to think they are? they look like they go to mosques with the people? they sit in the middle out of fear of being shot... but we will all return to God anyway and they will have to answer for their ills...
peace

 

[GARY]

I hope for your sake and on any forum you visit that you consider the age and the level of education of those who correspond with you... else you will form a very obtuse view... There are people here as young as 13... although I have met with some very wise 13 year olds I don't think a person articulates the same way at 13 the way they do at 25... peace

Thank you for reminding me of this. For a while I didn't realize how young some members here were. And even since, I often forget. It certainly changes one's view on a discussion when you realize that the person you have just spoke for an hour with is a child. (LOL! It has been humbling a time or two.)

 

[GARY]

Wouldn't that be an exercise in futility? I have had these discussions before, and you could be lying, as part of the deception already mentioned. You could present me with very convincing evidence, but it may be just that you are very good at the deception. I have no way of knowing.

HAHAH :giggling:

oh my g-d whatever bye...

I know, you are right. If there was any plot, the people in charge would certainly not trust you with that kind of information.