This week in Islam

[Michael Hardner]

No, I'd say the morals involved in the social structures that organized families, clans, tribes, etc. predated the creation of religions.

As soon as tribes got to the size of a few hundred, you needed a governor/priest/judge to run all of it. Money and writing created modern society in Sumeria including organized codified laws, religions and the business world. The money being spent in that economy is still in circulation today.

I know you want to make religion into an evil force, but it's not rational. It was part of human history and inextractable from the good as well as the bad that humans have created.

[Bonam]

I know you want to make religion into an evil force, but it's not rational. It was part of human history and inextractable from the good as well as the bad that humans have created.

Communism, fascism, the black death, slavery, war, etc, were all also parts of human history, and inextricable from how we got to where we are today. But just because we like the outcome that we have today, doesn't mean that these things cannot be criticized, or even considered to have caused more harm than good. Even though the world may have turned out differently, perhaps worse, without some of these things, doesn't mean that these things themselves were not bad.

[Michael Hardner]

But just because we like the outcome that we have today, doesn't mean that these things cannot be criticized, or even considered to have caused more harm than good. Even though the world may have turned out differently, perhaps worse, without some of these things, doesn't mean that these things themselves were not bad.

For something as pervasive to our social development as religion calling it bad or good is just too much of a simplification, and is really used for people to disdain contemporary zealots, not that they don't deserve that.

[Mighty AC]

I know you want to make religion into an evil force, but it's not rational. It was part of human history and inextractable from the good as well as the bad that humans have created.

Like legend it was a way to explain the unknown and useful to control the masses, though never the source of morals. It certainly was an effective tool for ruling classes, though it is now unnecessary and often evil. Like many old ideas and technologies religion's time has passed. It is healthy for people and societies to believe as many true ideas and discard as many false ideas as possible.

[AngusThermopyle]

Like which ones ? I actually learned this Maxim on MLW from BC, Morris and others...

Seriously? Well how about Afghanistan then. Obviously the Taliban don't give a rats ass about economics but seem to really really give one about religion.

[eyeball]

I don't know, the Taliban seemed to get over their religious hang-ups over dope once the economics of growing it instead of eradicating it sunk in.

Our Taliban is still in the dark ages on that score.

[Michael Hardner]

Like legend it was a way to explain the unknown and useful to control the masses, though never the source of morals.

"Control" ... perhaps, but laws are a method of "control" too. It sounds too insidious, I think the idea is that codification of rules assured objectivity and set up the basis for creating large functioning city-states.

And "source of morals", yes I agree with you here. Morals came from tribal mores, but were codified with laws. Religion bundled that idea with the idea that the high priests had direct communication with the invisible spirits.

It certainly was an effective tool for ruling classes, though it is now unnecessary and often evil.

Unnecessary for an ordered society, yes I agree. "Often evil"... is subjective, unquantified, and unmeasurable. How often ? How evil ? How much good is done by it ? We can never know.

Like many old ideas and technologies religion's time has passed. It is healthy for people and societies to believe as many true ideas and discard as many false ideas as possible.

I think it is fading away, and will continue to fade away on its own.

[Michael Hardner]

Seriously? Well how about Afghanistan then. Obviously the Taliban don't give a rats ass about economics but seem to really really give one about religion.

Those in power want to retain power. Individual Taliban may be crazy enough to throw themselves into the fire, but it's not economically sustainable to do so. You can bet that the warlords and opium exporters know how to keep themselves in business.

[Rue]

I enjoy both view of Michael H and MightyAc on religion and think both are equally as valid.

I am going to incorporate both classic sides of their debate. I personally believe religion is a primal behaviour.

I believe we created religion as a way to reinforce the pack rules of primates, i.e., we homo sapiens, a primate life form and therefoe pack animal and so they address primal fears such as fear of the dark, lightening, predators, death.

We know religion is a pacifier.

Religion is one of many ways we created behaviour codes to prevent from killing each other or dying off from incest or cannibalism. It served to help repress our otherwise self destructive urges.

Religion is but one of many group or pack behavioural devices we used to try control our pack and individual behaviour. It's also the classic battle between negative and positive energy within all of us and our ability to evolve and use logic and rational methods of thought process that require we repress our basic primal urges, ie., do what is right, not what feels right.

The very art of learning to be civil or follow religion and keep the pack from turning on itself is to repress what feels good in favour of a vision that believes there is more than just our own immediate need to be gratified that matters-and that everything we do has reprecussions on others. Its the building block of any society,

That said, terrorism, as we see it today in classic Muslim terrorism causing the news to chatter with constant stories of violence in Canada, Ausralia, Paris, on and on, isn't it just an example of the battle we have engaged in since humans began trying to evolve past simply being creatures who live to please themselves in the moment?

In the case of Muslim extremists, they believe we are all primal beasts in the West. They see us as corrupted because they have been taught we embrace uncivil concepts such as sexual promiscuity, homosexuality, materialism, nudity, equality of the genders, on and on. Muslim extremists see themselves as purer than us-they see themselves as holy and morally superior and on a mission to cleanse the world. They are displaying the same morality superiority complex Christians once did in South America or North America at one level. They see Westerners the way once civilized Christians viewed Africans or American indigenous people-as lesser humans.

Christians evolved past that. They went through many bloody phases. We all know that. In one sense what Muslim extremism does reminds me at times of Oliver Cromwell or the inquisitions.

Terrorism-attacking and killing innocent civilians is nothing new. Jews in Europe remember terrorism with the word "pogrom".My grandmother's village was attacked. As was typical each Easter, the passion play was described, the Priest cried out how the Jews forsake Jesus and condemned him to death and how the descendants of Jews still to this day were cursed and must carry the collective guilt until they attone and give their souls to Jesus.

Then out went the parrish in a frenzy to burn down the Jewish village or ghetto because Jews were not allowed to live where Christians were.They burned down the village and left people impaled and alive on wood stakes. Women who were pregnant would have their babies cut out of their wombs and flung against walls while the women were then left to bleed to death.

In my grandmother's case they hid her under a pile of dead people so know one could see her and she was found days later under the bodies.She never spoke of it. I found it out from others where she came from, some Jewish, some Christian.

Ironically my grandmother lived through the worst primal behaviour humans could manifest expressed through Christian religious beliefs by certain Christians and yet in that same chaos of history and in a series of what seemed unrelated events would go on to survive and come to Canada sometimes because of the kindness or what we Jews call righteousness of other Christians. I learned in the same people that were monsters were also righteous gentiles and so I have to believe while religious beliefs encouraged and served as a pathogen to encourage people to be monsters , that monster behaviour may have always been inherent and so that inherent behaviour then led to the using of religion in a monster way and yet in those where goodness was inherent, they would use their religious values in a positive way. So I really am not sure what came first, the chicken or the egg-I have to believe the religion itself was just words, and the choice to use those words as either tools to destroy or love, came from the person using them, not the words themselves. I believe each one of us has free choice to decide to use religion for evil or good. That begins and ends with us on an individual level.

So for example, when I have seen what I have seen, I have seen Muslims on the West Bank who have no morals. They kill their own people they steal and collect money earmarked for the poor for themselves and get children to fight for them.Those people to me are monsters. They see life as devalued and meaningless unless it someone consolidates their own power over others and they believe power is best achieved by killing and terrorizing your subjects so they never question.

Then I come on this board and see people trying to defend them as freedom fighters and speak as if they are victims defending other victims.

What a crock. I have also seen Muslims from the exact same village who refuse to engage in violence and whose answer is to share their food and water, tell their children do not fight, use your brain do not give in to anger and blood.

Those Muslims to me are the ones I believe are most endangered by Muslim extremists and are insulted by Western Liberals who have the audacity to believe Muslim extremists express their views. They do not.

I know Israelis and Palestinians on the most basic level, as farmers. They are not political monsters. Their struggle is to find water. Period. They don't claim to be religious, political, this or that. They just want to survive.

We have hijacked their lives and so many like them all over the world in the name of our own religious values, beliefs, stereotypes.

We create a dialogue about them ironically that knows nothing about them nor does it even ask them what they think.

Religion to me therefore is exactly what both Mighty AC and Michael H said. Its both and I am convinced myself it is a primal behaviour used to express both our death (thanitos) or negative energy drive inherent in us, and our life (eros) positive energy drive inherent in us.

We use religion as a way to express what ever energy type in us seems to be possessing us at the moment.

That's why me I just believe for example the Bible has many meanings not just the literal one, and that perhaps say the story of Adam and Eve could be a codified allegry for the inherent structure in any cell, in any atom-that class between the positive an negative energy elements that is required to create light or life.

I believe the pith and substance of life is found in the battle between good and evil, between positive and negative, and the clash, that constant tension as the two conflict, is what sets our stage so to speak, it creates the never ending sequences of actions, behaviours, movements, and while at one level it appears chaotic, overwhelming and therefore insane, at another level we can get glimpses of how infinitely beautiful it is as well because of when it connects and spreads positive energy.

I believe for example in the blood and misery of terrorist deaths, while some many be inspired to copy it, (as appears to be the case in Paris with the shooting of another police officer the day after the massacre) others will be inspired to reject it and come up with ways to evolve past it and so through the pain and misery it causes, will come better ways to deal with one another and we just can't see that in the heat of the moment.

Terrorism is obscene. It makes a mockery of life. It makes one so angry. You don't see Muslim or Jew or Israeli or Palestinian. You do not see that at all. All you see is flesh and how absolutely stupid it was to blow up a body for any reason.

And so when people talk religion its curious because religions say, learn to let go, learn to forgive yourself and others, and in the end, its all about battling emotions to survive.

Edited January 9, 2015 by Rue

[Argus]

Saudi blogger sentenced to years of weekly floggings... He dared to criticize Saudi clerics and their rigidly conservative interpretation of Islam

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30744693

[WIP]

Saudi blogger sentenced to years of weekly floggings... He dared to criticize Saudi clerics and their rigidly conservative interpretation of Islam

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30744693

Right! And, what burns my ass is I don't here any of the Neocon-supporting 'let's fight Muslim extremism' crowd addressing the fact that there wouldn't have been a retrenchment into Islamic fundamentalism in the first place if it wasn't for the arrangement that U.S. governments have had with Saudi Arabia!

Saudi Arabia is an evangelical Muslim nation that spends a sizable portion of its oil revenues on 'spreading the faith' abroad in other Muslim nations and abroad. In Pakistan, the governments allowed their public education system to wither and die out almost completely and be replaced by free schooling from Saudi Arabian-trained teachers. So, who's to blame for the spread of Wahabbism? The last thing we need now is a bunch of stupid nitwits being herded and stampeded into another Neocon war against the Islamic terrorist nations, when it's America's no.2 friend in the region (if Israel can be considered a friend) that spreads Wahabbism and arms and trains their own surplus young men (a problem for polygamous societies) to go off and wage jihad.

As long as the jihadis are attacking Russian, Iranian, Syrian, or other enemies, they are never called terrorists! It's only when America gets bitten in the ass by blowback, whenever the jihadis decide to attack western infidels, then there's a problem!

*Same goes for France! Who never stopped meddling in West Africa, even after they gave up their colonies!

Edited January 10, 2015 by WIP

[bush_cheney2004]

Right! And, what burns my ass is I don't here any of the Neocon-supporting 'let's fight Muslim extremism' crowd addressing the fact that there wouldn't have been a retrenchment into Islamic fundamentalism in the first place if it wasn't for the arrangement that U.S. governments have had with Saudi Arabia!

Meh....you conveniently ignore the much earlier relationship between Britain/Commonwealth nations and the House of Saud. Canadians were British subjects until 1947. God Save the Queen !!

[Shady]

As long as the jihadis are attacking Russian, Iranian, Syrian, or other enemies, they are never called terrorists! It's only when America gets bitten in the ass by blowback, whenever the jihadis decide to attack western infidels, then there's a problem!

*Same goes for France! Who never stopped meddling in West Africa, even after they gave up their colonies!

Complete nonsense. These jihadis have been referred to as terrorists when they've comitted terrorist attacks, like the theatre in Moscow, or the Mall in India, etc. These attacks were only blowback for not fully submitting to the wishes of the radical muslims. Nothing more. Just more of the blame the west, make excuses for the rest again.

[jacee]

Right! And, what burns my ass is I don't here any of the Neocon-supporting 'let's fight Muslim extremism' crowd addressing the fact that there wouldn't have been a retrenchment into Islamic fundamentalism in the first place if it wasn't for the arrangement that U.S. governments have had with Saudi Arabia!

Saudi Arabia is an evangelical Muslim nation that spends a sizable portion of its oil revenues on 'spreading the faith' abroad in other Muslim nations and abroad. In Pakistan, the governments allowed their public education system to wither and die out almost completely and be replaced by free schooling from Saudi Arabian-trained teachers. So, who's to blame for the spread of Wahabbism?

This is a really important point that many don't know, and others gloss over.

http://www.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/icc/situations%20and%20cases/Pages/situations%20and%20cases.aspx

Washington welcomed the Saudis opposition to Nasserism (the pan-Arab socialist ideology of Egypts second president, Gamal Abdel Nasser) and to Soviet influence. After the Iranian Revolution, it gave tacit support to the Saudis project of countering Shia radicalism by Wahhabising the entire Muslim world.

The soaring oil price created by the 1973 embargo when Arab petroleum producers cut off supplies to the US to protest against the Americans military support for Israel gave the kingdom all the petrodollars it needed to export its idiosyncratic form of Islam.

does-saudi-arabia-fund-terrorism

Saudi Support for Extremism

A number of sources have reported that Saudi private entities and individuals, as well as sources from other countries, are allegedly financing or supporting Islamic extremism. However, U.S. agencies are still examining Saudi Arabia's relationship, and that of other sources in other countries, to Islamic extremism. For example, in July 2005, a Treasury official testified before Congress that Saudi Arabia-based and funded organizations remain a key source for the promotion of ideologies used by terrorists and violent extremists around the world to justify their agenda. In addition, according to State's 2005 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, Saudi donors and unregulated charities have been a major source of financing to extremist and terrorist groups over the past 25 years.

So the US supports 'Wahhabizing of the Muslim world'

to fight tooth and nail

against the slightest hint of

... oh the horror!!

socialism.

:/

Edited January 11, 2015 by jacee

[msj]

Saudi blogger sentenced to years of weekly floggings... He dared to criticize Saudi clerics and their rigidly conservative interpretation of Islam

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-30744693

Here is a video of it.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/01/10/someone-got-video-of-raif-badawi-being-lashed-by-a-saudi-official/

I'm relieved that it isn't as bad as I thought it would be (but I thought it would involve naked skin and a whip with the striker putting his back into it so it's still not good).

Anyway, 1 down and 19 to go.

Of course the Saudi's we're going to punish him by making him look at Charlie Hebdo cartoons but decided that 1,000 lashes would be more humane.

And surely this is all the fault of American foreign policy too.

Edited January 11, 2015 by msj

[jacee]

Here is a video of it.

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/01/10/someone-got-video-of-raif-badawi-being-lashed-by-a-saudi-official/

I'm relieved that it isn't as bad as I thought it would be (but I thought it would involve naked skin and a whip with the striker putting his back into it so it's still not good).

Anyway, 1 down and 19 to go.

Of course the Saudi's we're going to punish him by making him look at Charlie Hebdo cartoons but decided that 1,000 lashes would be more humane.

And surely this is all the fault of American foreign policy too.

As Saudi allies the US certainly has played a significant role in supporting and encouraging the spread of Wahhabism.

http://m.thespec.com/news-story/5250551-the-cost-of-insulting-islam-1-000-public-lashes/

The American-allied Saudi government, which is part of the U.S.-led military coalition confronting the Sunni militants of the Islamic State, brushed aside eleventh-hour urgings from the Obama administration against carrying out what State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki termed a "brutal punishment."

Like other hereditary monarchies in the Persian Gulf, Saudi Arabia has scant tolerance for political dissent, particularly in the wake of the Arab Spring uprisings that shook the region four years ago. The kingdom employs harsh criminal penalties based on Islamic law, or sharia, including beheadings and amputations.

...

Prior to Friday's flogging, the State Department called for a review of Badawi's case and sentencing, asserting he had exercised his "rights to freedom of expression and religion." His online debate forum, Free Saudi Liberals, has been shuttered.

Edited January 11, 2015 by jacee

[msj]

Note that I am being sarcastic when I make the comment about US foreign policy.

The Koran plays a much bigger role than Anglo foreign policy ever does or did.

[Bob Macadoo]

Note that I am being sarcastic when I make the comment about US foreign policy.

The Koran plays a much bigger role than Anglo foreign policy ever does or did.

If you describe sarcasm.....it kinda loses its definition.

I would think hereditary monarchy would have more to do with it than the Koran >>> US foreign policy. Should we dismiss the Koran now that we have a larger culprit?

[msj]

Given that I used the word "bigger" I think it is clear that Anglo foreign policy has some role to play.

As does Saudi political history and Mongol history, for that matter.

The Koran, however, is "the mother lode of bad ideas" to borrow from Sam Harris.

It is neither the British nor the Americans' fault that these people embrace such beliefs.

It is very easy to make a society as pathetic as Saudi, or Iran, based on such a book and I recommend you follow Sam as he is very good at showing the link between belief and behaviours.....

[WIP]

Complete nonsense. These jihadis have been referred to as terrorists when they've comitted terrorist attacks, like the theatre in Moscow, or the Mall in India, etc. These attacks were only blowback for not fully submitting to the wishes of the radical muslims. Nothing more. Just more of the blame the west, make excuses for the rest again.

Well Mr. O'Keefe, I can't help noticing that you did not even address the Saudi/American connection!

[WIP]

Given that I used the word "bigger" I think it is clear that Anglo foreign policy has some role to play.

As does Saudi political history and Mongol history, for that matter.

The Koran, however, is "the mother lode of bad ideas" to borrow from Sam Harris.

It is neither the British nor the Americans' fault that these people embrace such beliefs.

It is very easy to make a society as pathetic as Saudi, or Iran, based on such a book and I recommend you follow Sam as he is very good at showing the link between belief and behaviours.....

Right now, our empire....yes, we are part of an empire...that's how we get all the oil and cheap slave-labour produced imports....has the world teetering on the edge of global economic and environmental collapse; while we are also overpopulated and exhausting the supply of non-renewable resources.

So, who's to blame? Is it the Muslims, the communists, the environmentalists, or the collective authors of all religious texts, for the fact that in our brilliance, we built an empire based on exploitation of resources and human capital, and all this under the assumption of unlimited and unrestrained growth, while not recognizing that we live in a finite world with finite resources?

So, who's the geniuses now? The secular humanism that is supposedly leading us towards an ever-improving techno-utopia, is instead pushing all the levers that are fomenting new and worsening conflicts as the system starts breaking down. And, we may never get the time to deal with these issues because the U.S. is either deliberately or stupidly pushing towards full scale war with Russia! We thought we at least dodged the bullet of nuclear annihilation with the end of the Cold War, and even that one is back and bigger than ever, and unlike years past, it never even makes the MSM news cycle anymore!

[msj]

Deleted and moved to appropriate thread.

Edited January 11, 2015 by msj

[msj]

Not going to bite WIP....

[WIP]

This is a really important point that many don't know, and others gloss over.

http://www.icc-cpi.int/en_menus/icc/situations%20and%20cases/Pages/situations%20and%20cases.aspx

Washington welcomed the Saudis opposition to Nasserism (the pan-Arab socialist ideology of Egypts second president, Gamal Abdel Nasser) and to Soviet influence. After the Iranian Revolution, it gave tacit support to the Saudis project of countering Shia radicalism by Wahhabising the entire Muslim world.

The soaring oil price created by the 1973 embargo when Arab petroleum producers cut off supplies to the US to protest against the Americans military support for Israel gave the kingdom all the petrodollars it needed to export its idiosyncratic form of Islam.

does-saudi-arabia-fund-terrorism

Saudi Support for Extremism

A number of sources have reported that Saudi private entities and individuals, as well as sources from other countries, are allegedly financing or supporting Islamic extremism. However, U.S. agencies are still examining Saudi Arabia's relationship, and that of other sources in other countries, to Islamic extremism. For example, in July 2005, a Treasury official testified before Congress that Saudi Arabia-based and funded organizations remain a key source for the promotion of ideologies used by terrorists and violent extremists around the world to justify their agenda. In addition, according to State's 2005 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report, Saudi donors and unregulated charities have been a major source of financing to extremist and terrorist groups over the past 25 years.

So the US supports 'Wahhabizing of the Muslim world'

to fight tooth and nail

against the slightest hint of

... oh the horror!!

socialism.

:/

Yes, and there is so much that could be added to the pile, but the editorial that really jumped out at me today is from Robert Fisk at the UK-Independent, where, at the start of a long essay summarizing the history (never mentioned elsewhere) of France's imperial history in Algeria through to its present support of so called "moderate rebels" in Libya and Syria, and how it all connects with the Charlie Hebdo shootings, he adds:

Maybe all newspaper and television reports should carry a “history corner”, a little reminder that nothing – absolutely zilch – happens without a past.

That, in itself is the best suggestion I've read in months! Because I'm shocked every time I hear people discussing a whole range of issues, and they have no clue about any historical context as to how they got to the present situation in the first place. But, not only would the corporations running MSM not likely be in favour of a history corner, I doubt our political leaders would want an informed public either!

Some more food for thought regarding this simplistic "this week in Islam" theme, comes from a blogger named Tony Cartalucci, who picks up a recent story from Deutschewelle which indicates the Turkey/ISIS connection is even deeper than being reluctant to help Kurds in their fight against them:

It was reported recently that Germany’s broadcaster Deutsche Welle (DW) investigated what turned out to be hundreds of trucks a day carrying billions of dollars in supplies, flowing into Syria and directly into the hands of the so-called “Islamic State” (ISIS).

Turkey, a NATO member since 1952, has played a pivotal role in the destabilization and destruction of neighboring Syria. Since 2011, Turkey has allowed its territory to be used as a transit and staging point for sectarian terrorists flowing from around the world and into Syria in what could be described as a defacto NATO invasion by proxy.

First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2014/12/17/isis-bloody-footprints-lead-from-nato-territory/............................................................

Contrary to Western propaganda, Al Qaeda was intentionally organized and directed by the US, Saudi Arabia, and Israel to engage in a regional confrontation aimed at Iran and its powerful arc of influence. Exposed by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist Seymour Hersh in his 2007 article, “The Redirection: Is the Administration’s new policy benefiting our enemies in the war on terrorism?” it was stated explicitly that (emphasis added):

To undermine Iran, which is predominantly Shiite, the Bush Administration has decided, in effect, to reconfigure its priorities in the Middle East. In Lebanon, the Administration has coöperated with Saudi Arabia’s government, which is Sunni, in clandestine operations that are intended to weaken Hezbollah, the Shiite organization that is backed by Iran. The U.S. has also taken part in clandestine operations aimed at Iran and its ally Syria. A by-product of these activities has been the bolstering of Sunni extremist groups that espouse a militant vision of Islam and are hostile to America and sympathetic to Al Qaeda.

First appeared: http://journal-neo.org/2014/12/17/isis-bloody-footprints-lead-from-nato-territory/

What looks suspicious to me about the ISIS phenomena, and how...in an age of global surveillance and U.S./allied military supremacy over most of the world, this ISIS group could start up and within a matter of weeks overrun half of Iraq and Syria. And what draws the most suspicion is that, among their long list of enemies and people to kill, they never seem to get around to mentioning either Israel or Saudi Arabia! Maybe that's part of later plans, and they recognize the collapse of Al Qaeda coincided with directly attacking Saudi Arabia and then reaching right into the United States as well.

There certainly is a mountain of evidence that these evil jihadis were being at least indirectly supported by the U.S. and American allies in the Middle East, but it's not until they lash back and bite their masters' hand, that they get whacked! And, instead of learning their lesson, the policy planners in the White House, the State Dept. and Congress rush off to look for the new useful jihadis to use to attack other enemies.

[WIP]

Not going to bite WIP....

Your choice. Because one of the reasons why I gave up on the atheist/humanist activist crap is because I can see how it is entangled in the present status quo we have now. Maybe if I really believed we were on the right track regarding culture, economic and environmental progress, I would still be doing the (religion is the root of all evil, and Islam is the worst religion) bs.. But, I don't buy it anymore!