Tale of Two Commemorations - Jewish & Muslim

[jbg]

I don't even know where to begin with this lunacy. I hope you are better at arguing in court than you are here, because, brother, this is garbage.

The sad thing is, I know in six months or a year, you'll dig this whole bullshit line of reasoning and we'll be off to the racists er...races again.

I don't know why you and others persist in ignoring the very real problems of Muslim violence. In the days of Marco Polo it may have matters but little; adventurers such as Marco Polo were the ones in danger. Now universal and cheap air travel brings the Muslim world into "up close" contact with the West. If the Muslim world cannot find a way to dial down the danger, we're all in for some very rough times.

[Guest American Woman]

It is not "faint praise" that one religion's ceremonies are reflective, cerebral and meaningful, and another's are almost invariably bloody messes:

1. Ashuara;
   
2. The annual Hajj stampede chaos and slaughter Pilgrimage; and
   
3. Fatal stampedes at weddings
   

Let's just take your first claim and look at how wrong it is (emphasis mine):

".....Islam is divided into several main groups, the two largest being Sunni and Shiite (or Shi'a). Ashoura is exclusively a Shiite holiday [...] but this is not the end of it. There are several countries with significant Shiite populations, including Iran, Iraq, Syria, and Lebanon--and although Shiites of all nations mark Ashoura, only the Shiite of Lebanon practice the self-mutilation anymore. Other Shiites merely pound on their chests as a sign of sorrow. Then of course within Lebanon there are several divisions of Shiites, based largely on political lines with the two largest parties being Amal and Hizbollah. [...] only Amal supports this particular practice of Ashoura, and even their supporters primarily turn out for the blood ceremony in only one city in Lebanon--Nabatieh. So, although the streets of Nabatieh are full of the faithful awash in their own blood, the practice is actually quite rare among the Islamic population as a whole--just as the Filipino Catholic devotees who nail themselves to crosses every Good Friday are not representative of the Christian world." link

But yeah. This extremely limited practice, among an extremely limited group, confined primarily to one city, is "proof" that Islam's religious ceremonies are "almost invariably bloody messes."

Edited September 23, 2008 by American Woman

[Black Dog]

I don't know why you and others persist in ignoring the very real problems of Muslim violence. In the days of Marco Polo it may have matters but little; adventurers such as Marco Polo were the ones in danger. Now universal and cheap air travel brings the Muslim world into "up close" contact with the West. If the Muslim world cannot find a way to dial down the danger, we're all in for some very rough times.

I don't think anyone here in the West is in much danger of being hit on the head with a chain during Ashura or trampled during Haji. So what the hell do these things have to do with any threats to the west? I mean, not even the most ardent Islamophobe would suggest as you have that all Muslims are fundamentally violent subhuman creatures. I understand your debating technique is to simply throw all manner of crap at the wall in hopes something sticks, but it's not very effective, logical or convincing.

[BC_chick]

"If it's Christians killing Muslims it's a crusade, if it's Jews killing Muslims it's a massacre. If its Muslims killing Muslims it's Weather Channel".

Americans kill Americans every day, Canadians kill Canadians every day and nobody calls it a massacre or a crusade... what's your point?

[moderateamericain]

I don't think anyone here in the West is in much danger of being hit on the head with a chain during Ashura or trampled during Haji. So what the hell do these things have to do with any threats to the west? I mean, not even the most ardent Islamophobe would suggest as you have that all Muslims are fundamentally violent subhuman creatures. I understand your debating technique is to simply throw all manner of crap at the wall in hopes something sticks, but it's not very effective, logical or convincing.

The point he is trying to get across is that fundemental Islam is inherently backwards and as such it's ignorant, uneducated, generally poor masses are so hooked into the religion for lack of better option. Islam, because of it's own practices, has created a volitale and sometimes deadly culture. He just goes to far in his reasoning.

Edited September 24, 2008 by moderateamericain

[jbg]

I mean, not even the most ardent Islamophobe would suggest as you have that all Muslims are fundamentally violent subhuman creatures. I understand your debating technique is to simply throw all manner of crap at the wall in hopes something sticks, but it's not very effective, logical or convincing.

Touche. Show me where I have said that "all Muslims are fundamentally violent subhuman creatures". Isn't that statement your effort to "simply throw all manner of crap at the wall in hopes something sticks"?

[Black Dog]

Show me where I have said that "all Muslims are fundamentally violent subhuman creatures".

Don't you think it's wrong to write off an entire group of people based on the actions of a few ? We haven't applied that to other religions or nations either.

Here's my response, so typical of those people:

Link

Those people: usually a dead giveaway.

I guess we prefer tyrannies to imperfect democracies that have to protect themselves against barbarians that barely meet the definition of human.

Remember, the Calgary Stampede involves cattle; the Hajj Stampede involves people bellowing and hoofing each other to death.

Link

Comparing Muslims to cattle?

When it comes to Muslims, you're as even-handed as Julius Streicher.

[Rue]

Underneath my new apartment in the core of Riverside - lower east side of Toronto - is a bakery...run by a very nice Muslim family...Out in the alley at the end of the day the shop owners gather for a smoke and a talk...as this six foot two Muslim baker leaves his buisness for the day - he scouls with contempt at all of us - believing that we are all infidels and godless inferiours...He holds what he imagines as debauched white Canadian secularism - it utter contempt - Not once has he ever bothered to find out if any of us are of principle or if we believe in goodness God and real civlity....frankly he is so prejudice that he will never converse with the white trash out back - If there is one Muslim that dispises us there must be thousands...so why did we bring them here? I am sure there are moderates - but I can tell if this big imposing jerk had his way he would behead us all!

Yah but under the right circumstances so would you. Your point?

If it is don't upset 6'2" angry men, I figured that out already. Then again I know some nasty short guys too.

[Rue]

The point he is trying to get across is that fundemental Islam is inherently backwards and as such it's ignorant, uneducated, generally poor masses are so hooked into the religion for lack of better option. Islam, because of it's own practices, has created a volitale and sometimes deadly culture. He just goes to far in his reasoning.

I would be one of the first to argue that fundamentalist Islam has promoted violence and intolerance. But then again I would be the first to argue that exact same point about my own religion, Judaism and Christianity and for that matter Hinduism and Sikhism as well.

What we do know is humans (usually men) of all religions who engage in strict, rigid and literalist views and particularly those that teach people they are to repress their natural feelings create the pathogen for violence.

Yes I think it could most certainly be argued that since fundamenalist Islam is prevalent in much of Muslim society it is responsible for violence and intolerance both within Muslim societies and when such Muslims come into contact with other societies.

But no, if you are asking me to stereotype Muslims with the preconceived idea they are all violent and intolerant no thanks. I hate it when people do that with Jews or gays or women or other groups for the same reason I hate it when its done to Muslims.

These posts of course provide stories where people share both positive and negative experiences of interacting with Muslims? Uh yah? Could we not do that with any group we choose to identify?

I am just not comfortable with any exercise that tries to suggest in general terms one society is more violent then the other even if it is true. How does it help prevent violence making it more acceptable to think badly of an entire group of people? To me that does the exact opposite-it enables negative stereotypical thinking which is a fuel for violence.

Oy I agree with BC Chick on this one. Lord what next. No I will not vote for Jack Layton. Stop that.

But I do agree with her point. Canadian society has its share of violence. I am not to quick to point fingers at this point. I still see a lot of us men walking around on our knuckles shooting and killing and flinging our poo.

I of course would never suggest women are like us. I am a gentlemen and defer to their graces although I do know some women who fling poo with the rest of us swine.

[Guest American Woman]

Touche. Show me where I have said that "all Muslims are fundamentally violent subhuman creatures". Isn't that statement your effort to "simply throw all manner of crap at the wall in hopes something sticks"?

So if you weren't saying that all Muslims are fundamentally violent creatures, what exactly were you saying when you said Muslim's "[religious] ceremonies are ... almost invariably bloody messes..?" Were you saying that Islam is the religion of peace and we all just misinterpreted it as something negative?

[jbg]

No I will not vote for Jack Layton. Stop that.

Count me in as a Layton voter.

[jbg]

Those people: usually a dead giveaway.

Comparing Muslims to cattle?

When it comes to Muslims, you're as even-handed as Julius Streicher.

Go here for a discussion of the impact of Nazi analogies. Excerpt below:

1. What is Godwin's Law?

Godwin's Law is a natural law of Usenet named after Mike Godwin

([email protected]) concerning Usenet "discussions". It reads, according to

the Jargon File:

As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison

involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

So if you weren't saying that all Muslims are fundamentally violent creatures, what exactly were you saying when you said Muslim's "[religious] ceremonies are ... almost invariably bloody messes..?" Were you saying that Islam is the religion of peace and we all just misinterpreted it as something negative?

I am responding to you and the similar "BlackDog" post simultaneously.

The fact is that Muslim events, Muslim groups and Muslim nations have a disproportionate tendency not only towards violence but to violence on a mass or sickening scale. And the fact also is that the leadership in the community is very quiet if not silent about it.

Also, their apologists in non-Muslim communities to some extent are well-intentioned enablers. It is understandable given our peace-loving upbringing. No, the lion usually does not lie down with the lamb. Unless it's eating the lamb.

[Black Dog]

Go here for a discussion of the impact of Nazi analogies. Excerpt below:

1. What is Godwin's Law?

Godwin's Law is a natural law of Usenet named after Mike Godwin

([email protected]) concerning Usenet "discussions". It reads, according to

the Jargon File:

As a Usenet discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison

involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

Meh. Look, you seem to dig spouting dehumanizing and intentionally provocative language that would be right at home ion the pages of Der Sturmer. You need to own that shit.

The fact is that Muslim events, Muslim groups and Muslim nations have a disproportionate tendency not only towards violence but to violence on a mass or sickening scale. And the fact also is that the leadership in the community is very quiet if not silent about it.

If that was your point all along, maybe you should use actually relevant examples instead of nonsense about Haji stampede (again, an organizational issue not a cultural one).

I would also suggest backing it up with some kind of quantifiable data. After all, the same argument could apply to the United States and the appalling toll extracted by violent crimes in cities across the country, as well as a culture that glorifies militarism and violence. Hell, one could also point to the numerous European wars of the past century (which consumed more lives and caused more destruction that Islam has in its entire history) as evidence of their inherent savagery.

Also, their apologists in non-Muslim communities to some extent are well-intentioned enablers.

Like who? Names, quotes, links or STFU.

Edited September 25, 2008 by Black Dog

[jbg]

Like who? Names, quotes, links or STFU.

House Rules prohibit naming names. This board has many examples.

[BC_chick]

Oy I agree with BC Chick on this one. Lord what next.

Rue, this may come as a shock to you, but I don't see Israel as some evil entity who is the root cause of all the violence that it begets.

The same way that I feel there are good Muslims and there are bad Muslims, I think the same can be said about the citizens of any nation, including Israel. I've met far too many Jewish Israelis here in Canada who fled Israel because they felt the decisions of some of leaders endanger the lives of their citizens while resonating with only a certain fringe group of society. Likewise, I've met Palestinians who do not accept the FACT that Israel is here to stay, and they want to cling to some 60 year old battle instead of making peace with their neighbours.

Still, another fact that remains is that there are many Palestinians who want peace, and there also many Israelis who take a very uncompromising stance in their approach to Palestinians.

Essentially, I see right-wing ideology as very uncompromising as well as fearful of people who are different. They are the ones I blame for much of the ethnic wars we see today. Be they Republicans who want to bomb Iraq for what Bin Laden did, to Islamic Jihad's blowing up of innocents during a truce (which enrages even Hamas), to some Likud party members who not only feel the settlements and occupied territories belong to Israel, but they feel all Palestinians must be expelled from all of Israel.

There is a vicious *cycle* of violence going on and no one side is innocent. That's all I try to say around here, I don't know why you take that as shifting all the blame onto Israel.

I'm sure you also see some of Israel's actions as counter-effective, yet I've never seen you criticise Israel. Does that mean you think all Palestinians are poo? No, it just means that you have an ethnic connection to Israelis and you do not want to give ammunition to the other side whom you feel is painting an unfair picture of Israel, and by extension, Jews.

The very same can be said about me.

Please stop throwing my name out there in you "xyz says Israel is poo" rants. I do not see Israel as the sole irresponsible player in the game, no am I under some preconceived notion that all will be well if only the occupied territories are given back and the walls are torn down.

[Black Dog]

House Rules prohibit naming names. This board has many examples.

First: cop out.

Second: anonymous posters on a web board? That's your "enablers"? You realize "enablers" are people who, uh, enable others' behaviour in some way. I can't say for sure, but I don't think it's too much of stretch to argue that MLW has limited influence at best on the Muslim world.

So, let's try this again: who are these persons who, by acting as "apologists" for Muslim violence, actually enable it?

[guyser]

Show me where I have said that "all Muslims are fundamentally violent subhuman creatures".

Do you own these words? I know they had your moniker infront of them....

The Muslim world needed to be fought.

[Black Dog]

Show me where I have said that "all Muslims are fundamentally violent subhuman creatures".

The fact is that Muslim events, Muslim groups and Muslim nations have a disproportionate tendency not only towards violence but to violence on a mass or sickening scale. And the fact also is that the leadership in the community is very quiet if not silent about it.

Hmmm.

[jbg]

So, let's try this again: who are these persons who, by acting as "apologists" for Muslim violence, actually enable it?

Jean Chretien, his September 11, 2002 interview maybe. The one where he said that the West is too affluent and thus merited being attacked. He's not a MLW poster to my knowledge so that's a name I can name.

[Black Dog]

Jean Chretien, his September 11, 2002 interview maybe. The one where he said that the West is too affluent and thus merited being attacked. He's not a MLW poster to my knowledge so that's a name I can name.

He said nothing of the sort. I don't know why it is so difficult for you to distinguish between trying to understand why an event occurs and approving of that event.

Edited September 29, 2008 by Black Dog

[JB Globe]

The fact is that Muslim events, Muslim groups and Muslim nations have a disproportionate tendency not only towards violence but to violence on a mass or sickening scale.

Another baseless allegation, pulled straight out of JBG's rear end.

Go ahead big boy - prove that you're not an idiot and back up this assertion with some facts.

Otherwise it's about as solid as the following:

The fact is that Jews have a disproportionate tendency not only towards oppression of Muslims but to oppression of Muslims on a mass or sickening scale.

[jbg]

He said nothing of the sort. I don't know why it is so difficult for you to distinguish between trying to understand why an event occurs and approving of that event.

I give up. What did he say? Or couldn't you understand his garbled Franglish?

[Oleg Bach]

Nothing sadder than a guy that should have been a mailman trying to speak a language other than factoresse. Layton sounds silly speaking french - The representative of white trash blue collar society should stop speaking bad french.

[Black Dog]

I give up. What did he say? Or couldn't you understand his garbled Franglish?

Shall we add "really fuckin' lazy" to your list of flaws. Google is easy to use.

You cannot exercise your powers to the point that of humiliation for the others. And that is what the Western world, not only the Americans, the Western world has to realize, because they are human beings too, and there are long term consequences if you don;t look hard at the reality in 10 or 20, or 30 years from now. And I do think that the Western world is going to be too rich in relation to the poor world. And necessarily, you know, we look upon us being arrogant, self satisfying, greedy and with no limits. And the 11th of September is an occasion for me to realize that even more.

Disagree with the sentiment all you like, but there's no honest way to interpret that as saying the west deserved to be attacked.

[jbg]

Disagree with the sentiment all you like, but there's no honest way to interpret that as saying the west deserved to be attacked.

I think it comes dangerously close to saying "yes, violence is horrible but you can understand how angry they must be".

Please cease the personal attacks. It is not becoming of you since normally you debate well.

L'Shana Tova.