Steve

The problem is that every extremist group has some legitimate grievances,
however minute they are.
Whenever a problem arise, usually the moderates fail to get the attention
of the opposition ( one's freedom fighter is the other's terrorist).
Whether it's the Minuteman ( militia border patrol) guarding the borders,
the KKK, the IRA, the PLO. I can see their point, I can see what they are
asking for, Some more than others,  And I disagree with their methods and
most of their demands BUT they do have a point or two. Had these issues
been resolved earlier, things would not have gotten this bad.
Nelson Mandella was jailed, only to be let out years later to become the
president of his country.

If you are really interested in knowing why things went to hell with the
Muslim world, there is a great little book by a scholar named Bernard
Lewis: "what went wrong".
Another great book that shows the relationship between the 3 Abrahamic
faiths is "the history of God" by Karen Armstrong.

Islam in some ways is pretty dynamic, in others it's static and hard to
change.

And as we have in the story of Jesus saying " let he who is without a sin
cast the first stone", religion has to be flexible. Yes the Law does say
to slay the adulterer, but, Jesus Being Jesus found a loophole and showed
mercy.
I don't why he did not feel compelled right there on the spot to do away
with such law?

Islam in way has the same thing. there is the Koran and there is the
"hadith": talks or lectures. These are the talks of the prophet. and in a
way you have to apply both. 

Stepping back and looking back at it here is what you have.

God creates the heaven and the earth.
He makes man
Man screws up and is sent downstairs
God started having second thoughts and wish to straiten things up so he
sends Noah, Jonah, Jobe Abraham then Moses.
Moses gets his people out, and within days of saving their hide and
performing major miracles, he goes up the mountain to talk with ten big
boss, and upon returning finds them worshiping a golden calf.
God sees that his major religion ( let's call that Version 1.0) is not
doing well. So Jesus shows up ( V 2.0).
Followers of V 1.0 cannot admit the legitimacy of Jesus because that
would make their belief nil and void.
650 years go by, and God feels compelled for one more revision. V3.0
Now the followers of V2.0 have a hard time even admitting that V3.0
exists. in a way that my indicate that they have gone astray and that's
why the reversion.
Actually Mohammad did not show up to revise the previous version as much
as to bring God to the idolaters of Arabia.
In some ways You can look at Islam as the religion brought to fill a gap
and not to change the previous versions. In fact Jesus is mentioned more
by name in the Koran than Mohammad is. There are many indication that
says this is an Arab prophet, An Arabic book, brought to you Arabs here
in Arabia. Who happen to be the descendents of Abraham through Ishmael.
When a Muslim does his five daily prayers, every time he asks god to have
grace and  mercy on Mohammad and his followers as he had given grace to
Abraham and his followers. So Islam is an inclusive religion off all the
3 monotheistic religions.

The previous messengers are not just mentioned in the Koran, they are
referred to in details. From Adam to Mohammad.

When the Spaniards went midevil and started their inquisition, the Arabs
ran back to North Africa, some Jews followed, other Jews became boat
people. The sultan of Turkey took them in and they became part to Turkish
society. According to Bernard Lewis, Jewish Philosophy was at it's peak
when they lived under Arab/Muslim rule. Whether that was in Baghdad or
Andalusia.

So what the hell has happened in the last 100. Why are people like the
Taliban compelled to blow up the Buddha's statues in Afghanistan? Where
did this crazy fundamental mentality come from? Hell if know.

yes it's like cancer, you have to get rid of it, yet be careful not to
kill the patient.

As for your question about the moderates giving cover to the extremist.
here is one theory for you.

PBS is running a documentary about the Jews in the US. and the issue came
up about the support of israel and it's occupied territories and why
Jewish Americans don't speak about what the rest of the world sees as
unjust. The response from a lady was that we have to sow a united front
otherwise people will be able to take our comments and use them against
us.
Not every one is like Noam Chomsky, willing to come out and speak his
mind.

So while any body who denies the Holocaust is hung up to dry, AIPAC
lobbies on behalf of turkey to deny the Armenian Genocide. Israel and the
US are the only 2 counties that Officially don't recognize the Armenian
Genocide. Again showing unquestioned unity to a common cause based on
religion. When Mark Arax, a writer ( of Armenian descent) writes an
article about that for the LA time, it's not that the article does not
get published, he gets fired. So one asked where are the moderates in
that community and why are they giving cover? Well my reasoning is the
following: "they don't feel that they are part of society. yes they are
integrated but not 100%, therefore they must present that united front
come hell or high water.

After the racial knee jerk reactions of 2001 ( we had a few attacks in
our are on Sikh, just because they wore turbans) the Muslim community had
to present a united front, otherwise a show of dissent might split the
community, putting some in concentration camps and the others under
surveillance. the attitude is that yes these guys  these are bastards but
they are our bastards. Just a theory here and there might be other
reasons.

As a child we a watched the Arab tourists come form Saudi Arabia and
other Gulf states to spend the summer in Beirut, and we used to look at
the way their women would be dresses ( Black with veils) and wonder what
caves they crawled out of. Well now 1/2 the population dress closer to
that than the European styles they adorned in the 1960s and 1970s.
Partially we have the Iranian revolution to thank for that.

What are these people afraid of? Change.

There is a documentary done with Richard Dawkins. in it he visits a Rabbi
who is born and raised in London, yet the Rabbi spoke English with a
rather heavy accent. The reason? Despite the fact that he lived in London
all his life, he is so isolated from the rest of British society, that he
might as well be living in Jerusalem or Yafa. The Muslim community is
faced with the same question. How do we live anywhere in the world,
whether it's Denver, Marseilles, Beirut or Dubai and still be who we are.

Here is the million dollar question.
If I happen to be Jewish or Muslim would i act or dress any different in
relation to where I live. The Rabbi in London chose NO as an answer. And
for him Orthodoxy trumps all, regardless of locale.
So now we have a Muslim living in London and she chooses to dress in a
burka. Well this is not Kabul, and the authorities need to see your face
to issue you and ID card and let you in and out of certain places.
So what is a moderate Muslim to do? Well he/she can say that is my
country I have to cover up so I would not attract attention to myself,
her in a society where no women cover up I can dress modestly, and go out
and have less people looking at me than if I was wearing a head scarf.. I
remember a few years ago seeing a head scarf with the stars and stripes
on it. I thought to myself this is really a sad state of affairs.
Of course the other logic is that if you want to live this kind of life
style, go back to where you came from. Of course the dictatorships we
support keep driving all kinds of people to the west. 
Another problem I see is allowing people to have dual citizenships. I
think that needs to be done away with. You pledge allegiance to one
country and one country only. I have seen that first hand leaving people
on the fence culturally and socially.

Well enough for now.

Khaled


[Steve]
> I'm not sure how religious fanaticism or whatever you want to call 
> it  can be best eradicated. In the past I have always assumed as you 
> seem  to that the moderates are the ones who have the best chance of  
> communicating with extremists.
> 
> Lately I've come to see moderates as giving cover to extremists. 
> They  validate extremist beliefs in a way.
> 
> But I am seriously interested it what parts of the Koran might be  
> used by moderates to support claims that they are a religion of  peace.

 
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/

Reply via email to