YESTERDAY, schools in the American south and, of course in Hitler's Germany, taught a mythical view of the "white race." In this view the people of Northern Europe, somehow destined to become the true Christians, descended from an ancient and nobel root. Mixing the fruit of that root with inferior seed merited a 12 letter word, "miscegenation." The worst of European racism, the KKK, the Aryan nations, and the Nazis based their most odious policies on these mythical beliefs.
Do such beliefs exist in Islam? In one vital way the answer is no. One of the glories of Islam was the Prophet's teaching that all Muslims are one people. Indeed he taught that at one time in the past all people were Muslims and knew the truths of the Quran. Once a person reverts to Islam. the Quran teaches, there must be no distinctions based on race. Of course, as we all see today, the implications for those of us to blind or arrogant to accept Islam may not be so kindly.
Nonetheless, there is within Islam a teaching eerily similar to White racism and that teaching too is antisemitic ... or to be more linguistically correct .. attempts to strip Jews of their Semitic heritage .
TODAY's Islamic school in Seattle teaches that Arabs are a true ancient people, while Jews are a false people comprised of Europeans and others who have usurped the Jewish heritage. For what it is worth, modern genetics shows that Arabs and Jews are pretty much the same people, likely descended from the Semitic tribes of North Arabia back some 10,000 years. However, a large part of "Arab" included people who are descended form non-Semitic North African peoples.
This only matters if you are teaching your children to make racist decisions about others. There is much more in the Quran itself where Jews are depicted as siding with the (nonMuslim) Arabs against the Prophet, as rejecting his message (why not?), and as trying to poison him (in revenge for Jews he killed in battle). To cap it all, the Quran teaches that Jews exulted on the purported death of Jesus, " That they say (boasting): We killed Christ Jesus the son of Mary, the Messenger of Allah." , But they killed him not nor crucified him. Only likeness of that was shown to them” (Al-Nisa’ 4: 157),
The only purpose of the following text is to deprive Jews of our heritage.
This is based on text taken today from the web site of the Idris Mosque in Seattle. The author of the text is Jamil Abdul-Razzak.
Origins of the "Arabs"
"The indigenous people of Palestine were Arabs for over 5000 years. They migrated from the Arabian Peninsula and lived in the land of Canaan or Palestine"
This is utter nonsense. Semites, including many peoples, did arise in Arabia, but were no more "Arabs" then they were Hittites. Moreover, amongst early peoples of Canaan there were non Semites, esp. including the sea people .. the "Philistines" of the bible. These people were related to the Greeks, Minoans, etc and it is THEIR name that is the basis for the term "Palestine".
"The Israelites, progeny of Jacob, remained in Egypt and assimilated with the Egyptian population. In 1290 BC, Prophet Moses (peace be upon him) led his followers out of Egypt and into the land of Canaan. Prophet Moses received revelations from Allah (God) which he inscribed into the Blessed Torah."
Perhaps. Archaeology says this is unlikely. What we KNOW is that Semites, (I guess in the Muslim mind all Semites are "Arabs") moved into Egypt and eventually established their own Pharonate as a people called the "Hyksos." The Pharaoh of the Torah and Quranic story, Ramses II, may have conquered the Hyksos and driven them from Egypt.
"In 586 BC the Babylonian army invaded Canaan and took the Jews to Babylon and placed them in captivity. During the years of captivity (586-539 BC) the Jews reconstructed from memory the Torah which is different from the original Torah."
By this time Canaan had ceased to exist and the people conquered by the Babylonians were know as Hebrews. Modern Palestinians, if they really have ancient roots would be the descendent of Jews.
The same essay on the Mosque's web site claims that the Torah was written in Babylon from imperfect memories. This is nonsense. Whether the Torah was really revealed to Moshe, it was finalized in pre-Babylon Israel under King Josiah.(ruled 640–609 bce). Jews have been literate for a very long time and it would have been as bizarre for the Jews of 620 bce to restrict the torah to oral transmission as would have been 620 AM for Muslims not to write down the words of the Prophet. Still, the effect is to dismiss the Jewish holy book. Imagine the Islamic anger if the Jutlands-posten, along with the Muhammad cartoons, had replayed the Salmon Rushdie claim that the "satanic verses" of the Quran represent errors in the Prophets thinking?
To make matters worse, Mr. Jamil Abdul-Razzak teaches us that Jews are not true Jews (as opposed, I guess to all Arabs, regardless if their ancestors were .. as in the case of all North Africa, NOT Semitic at all.
Origins of the "Jews"
In 539 BC, King Cyrus of the Persians "conquered Babylon and freed the Jews from captivity. At this point we may say that the Israelites are descendants of Israel, the grandson of Abraham, and the Jews are the followers of Moses. This means not all Jews are Israelites or all Israelites are Jews."
This is an essential aspect of Arab antisemitism .. the claim that most of us are false Jews.
"Throughout the history, the Jews and Israelites coexisted with the Arab and Muslim majority in peace and harmony for hundreds of years."
Tell this to the Romans who defeated THE PEOPLE of Palestine in the JEWISH WARs.
Tell it to the Jews who suffered pogroms in Palestine in the era of a Muslim Majority.
Tell it to the Jew in Turkey who died after the Muslim world republished the charges of our drinking blood.
Tell it to the Jews of Arabia who were expelled from their ancient homes by the third caliph, Omar.
The saddest part of this all is that Jews and Arabs are ... beyond religion ... still the common descendents of the ancient Semites. Our religions share essential beliefs, as long as neither one denigrates the other simply for accepting or not accepting M. as a prophet. Can God really care which prophets a man follows if the man leads a moral life?
How can peace live with such bigotry taught to children?
Saturday, August 12, 2006
span.fullpost {display:inline;}
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
39 comments:
Since literal readings of the Bible claim that the world is only 6000 years old, doesn't that also attempt to misrepresent the heritage of all people?
Trying to claim that anthropological misrepresentations in Islamic literature is proof that Muslims are teaching their kids to hate Jews is so ridiculous I don't even know how to respond to it.
You would be correct if the Muslims merely claimed that all humans had a mythic progenitor. Instead, the claim is that the Arabs, and the alone, are the authentic heirs of the Abrahamic lineage ... incliding such "minor" issues as the right to live in Israel.
This is not all that far from the claim made by Aryans that Jesus was blue eyed white guy persecuted by non-aryans and that Chrsitinaity requires keeping the aryan blood line intact. I even have a Muslim friend who insists that hebrew is a modern language and that the ancient semites all spoke Arabic. This robbing the Torah of any validity.
How is it that you can see racism in whites who denigrate people of golr but not in Arabs who want to deny the exitance of the Jews as a people?
Furhtermore, just to keep us both hinest, my earlier post certainly did not blame all of Mr. Haq's behavior on his upbringing. However, it wuld be awfully good for Jews if the Muslims, like the Catholics before them, would voluyntarily expunge this sort of material from their curricula.
I do not know your ethnicity but lets assume you are Lummi. A proud Lummi, knowing the traditional stories and art. The along comes someone from the majority culture who wants to develop Fidalgo Island. He says to you ... why should you folks have this land? the Lummi aren't a real tribe, you ceased top exist 100 years ago. Would you side with the Euro majority or with the Lummi? Would the Euro behavior reflect her racism?
BTW, I checked your source site in re Arafat. Aside form whether he still had enough power to make peace, the site did not say he agreed to give up the claim to the Temple and the right of return.
Finally, do you know who granted the Muslims the authority over the Mount?
a. the Saudi Imanate?
b. The Israel Supreme Court.
c. The King of Jordan.
d. Moshe Dyan
e. The high rabbi of Israel.
You would be correct if the Muslims merely claimed that all humans had a mythic progenitor. Instead, the claim is that the Arabs, and the alone, are the authentic heirs of the Abrahamic lineage ... incliding such "minor" issues as the right to live in Israel.
And what does that have to do with Haq? He's not an Arab. He's Pakistani. You're having a side argument that has absolutely no relevance to what we're talking about and you keep pretending that you're somehow making sense. You're not. You're babbling about irrelevancies. I'll bet you any amount of money that Naveed Haq knows as much as about Wahabbiism as he knows as quantum physics.
How is it that you can see racism in whites who denigrate people of golr but not in Arabs who want to deny the exitance of the Jews as a people?
I'm not denying that racism exists anywhere Steve. What I'm saying is that seeing something in the text of an Islamic site that is anthopologically inaccurate is not proof that large number of Arabs want to deny the existence of the Jews as a people. You're unhealthily paranoid and this paranoia revealed itself when you assumed that Naveed Haq was just a minion of these nefarious teachers of hate, when in reality he was just a guy who arrived at a hatred of Jews in his own deranged mind.
Furhtermore, just to keep us both hinest, my earlier post certainly did not blame all of Mr. Haq's behavior on his upbringing. However, it wuld be awfully good for Jews if the Muslims, like the Catholics before them, would voluyntarily expunge this sort of material from their curricula.
It would be nice if Christians stopped believing that evolution is a sham and that the world is only 6000 years old. What's your point? You haven't proven to me how their silly beliefs actually lead to hate, especially Haq's. You just assume that it has without any evidence.
Also, if you read through the entire site, you'd know that they also have sections about teaching people to respect others and to live in peace.
I do not know your ethnicity but lets assume you are Lummi. A proud Lummi, knowing the traditional stories and art. The along comes someone from the majority culture who wants to develop Fidalgo Island. He says to you ... why should you folks have this land? the Lummi aren't a real tribe, you ceased top exist 100 years ago. Would you side with the Euro majority or with the Lummi? Would the Euro behavior reflect her racism?
First of all, I've mentioned several times what my ethnicity is. I'm an American with Jewish roots. Second, I'm opposed to any group who settles another land with the intent of overtaking the people of that land. I'm well aware of how often in history this has happened, but I believe that we can achieve a world where any further attempts by any group to do that can be met with global opposition. Other than saying that, I'm not sure what you're getting at with that hypothetical. It really doesn't seem to be relevant either.
BTW, I checked your source site in re Arafat. Aside form whether he still had enough power to make peace, the site did not say he agreed to give up the claim to the Temple and the right of return.
The article said that he agreed to Clinton's terms. Giving up the right of return was one of Clinton's terms, if I remember correctly.
Finally, do you know who granted the Muslims the authority over the Mount?
a. the Saudi Imanate?
b. The Israel Supreme Court.
c. The King of Jordan.
d. Moshe Dyan
e. The high rabbi of Israel.
Who cares? The fact that things like that matter to you explains perfectly why you don't understand this situation. A Palestinian with little resources and no hope doesn't give a crap about the Temple Mount. They might care about being able to return to an old home in Israel. But mostly they want freedom from an Israeli security apparatus that has basically started to resemble a prison camp. Arafat was a corrupt liar, but if you'd take the time to be honest about the reality of Israeli actions over the years, you'd understand why Palestinians considered him a protector anyway. Any time a moderate voice would arise, Arafat was always able to use Israeli paranoia about Islam to marginalize it. He did it repeatedly with Abbas in the years before he died. That's why he focuses so much on things like the Mount.
thehim said...
"And what does that have to do with Haq? He's not an Arab. He's Pakistani. You're having a side argument that has absolutely no relevance ...."
Have you read anyhting about current antisemitism? The claim by the Arabs that we are not really semites is a major part of MUSLIM claim that Israel must be expelled. This is no more irrelevant to antisemtism than the POTEZ.
"I'll bet you any amount of money that Naveed Haq knows as much as about Wahabbiism as he knows as quantum physics."
OK .. lets bet $50. Now you tell me how he manged ot grow up in an era where the Wahabis dominated the teaching of Islam in Pakistan and .. if you look at the FH report here too.
"What I'm saying is that seeing something in the text of an Islamic site that is anthopologically inaccurate is not proof that large number of Arabs want to deny the existence of the Jews as a people. You're unhealthily paranoid ..."
No, the "Steve" you keep putting words in may be paranoid but my fears are demonstrably real. Unless you think it is comfortable to live as a Jew today in Paris or London. I have also read a,ot of Arab literature and have anumber of Arab friends. They tell me that they have the same fears I do of their own people.
"and this paranoia revealed itself when you assumed that Naveed Haq was just a minion of these nefarious teachers of hate, when in reality he was just a guy who arrived at a hatred of Jews in his own deranged mind."
Uh huh. And you know this how???? Do you extend the same geenrosity to the folks in London or the OKlahoma guys? Hate is real my friend.
I said:
"my earlier post certainly did not blame all of Mr. Haq's behavior on his upbringing. However, it wuld be awfully good for Jews if the Muslims, like the Catholics before them, would voluyntarily expunge this sort of material from their curricula."
thehim said:
" It would be nice if Christians stopped believing that evolution is a sham and that the world is only 6000 years old. What's your point? You haven't proven to me how their silly beliefs actually lead to hate, especially Haq's. You just assume that it has without any evidence."
You really think no harm was done by the deicide charge? That hundreds of thousands od Jews were NOT persecuted for this charge? Do you give the same creedence to the harmless beliefs of Pat Robertson or Mel Gibson? Do you think John XXIII changed the catechism just to please me?
"Also, if you read through the entire site, you'd know that they also have sections about teaching people to respect others and to live in peace."
Yes, and if you read my postings I have said a ,lot of good about this. The world does not need any more Muslim Jihads or Xtian Crusades. I celebrate and express hope for the role of Muslims living here or in India and hope that out of their experience as succesful minorities a newe Islam will emerge.
BTW .. you still have not given me the name of a Muslim version of Peace Now.
thehim said.
" First of all, I've mentioned several times what my ethnicity is. I'm an American with Jewish roots." I do not remember your saying this. However, you were not repsnsive to my question. I refered to the habit of Euros declaring that brown folks really are not peoples. I assume from you statement that if you were a Lummi you wouold fight to retain your identity? Why do you not see thast tyhe struggle for Israel is the same thing? Aren't Jew a people?
thehim:
"The article said that he agreed to Clinton's terms. Giving up the right of return was one of Clinton's terms, if I remember correctly."
Not a very impressive answer.
Finally, do you know who
granted the Muslims the authority over the Mount?
a. the Saudi Imanate?
b. The Israel Supreme Court.
c. The King of Jordan.
d. Moshe Dyan
e. The high rabbi of Israel.
Who cares?
I gather you don't/ I do. Moshe Dayan. he rules that possession of the Mount was more importnat to the Muslims then to the Jews. The Jordanians took opver and tried to keep it out of Palestinain hands. I guess there is intra-arabic racism too.
thehe:
"if you'd take the time to be honest about the reality of Israeli actions over the years, you'd understand why Palestinians considered him a protector anyway. Any time a moderate voice would arise, Arafat was always able to use Israeli paranoia about Islam to marginalize it. He did it repeatedly with Abbas in the years before he died. That's why he focuses so much on things like the Mount."
This is utter bs. I have challenged yu to tell me about the Arab Peacenow, now you tell me it was the Israelis who prevented one from arising!!!! Yeh, and Black people sold thesleves into slavery too. If you think the Arabs are not attached to the mt. you are very uniformed. Do you even know any Arabs?
Have you read anyhting about current antisemitism? The claim by the Arabs that we are not really semites is a major part of MUSLIM claim that Israel must be expelled. This is no more irrelevant to antisemtism than the POTEZ.
What would this have to do with Seattle then? Even if Haq believed this wholeheartedly, why would that make him shoot Jews in Seattle? If the goal is to get Jews out of Israel, what would he possibly be trying to achieve by doing that?
OK .. lets bet $50. Now you tell me how he manged ot grow up in an era where the Wahabis dominated the teaching of Islam in Pakistan and .. if you look at the FH report here too.
He grew up in the Tri-Cities, you bonehead. He didn't grow up in Pakistan. I'll bet you $500.
No, the "Steve" you keep putting words in may be paranoid but my fears are demonstrably real. Unless you think it is comfortable to live as a Jew today in Paris or London. I have also read a,ot of Arab literature and have anumber of Arab friends. They tell me that they have the same fears I do of their own people.
Did you not see the Pew global surveys poll I posted? No country surveyed had a higher favorability rating of Jews than France. I know of Jews in both Paris and London, and it's news to me if they don't feel they live in a safe city. Opposing Israeli foreign policy is not anti-Semitism. The bottom line is that there's a higher percentage of Americans who have an unfavorable view of Jews than French.
Uh huh. And you know this how???? Do you extend the same geenrosity to the folks in London or the OKlahoma guys? Hate is real my friend.
Did I say it wasn't hatred? This is what I said: he was just a guy who arrived at a hatred of Jews in his own deranged mind. Do you have some kind of learning disability where you're unable to read the words I type and infer their basic meaning? I'm not sure how I could've been any clearer. His hatred is real, it just did come from anyone teaching him to hate Jews.
Continued...
You really think no harm was done by the deicide charge? That hundreds of thousands od Jews were NOT persecuted for this charge? Do you give the same creedence to the harmless beliefs of Pat Robertson or Mel Gibson? Do you think John XXIII changed the catechism just to please me?
No, I didn't say that. I was making a comparison between a different distinct brand of beliefs, in which particular creation theories are used to convince the believers that they are closer to God. Yes, beliefs like Mel Gibson's or of the Wahabbis do cross a line into making out Jews specifically as culpable individuals. But again, believing that Haq was inspired by Wahabbiism is a mistake. The reason I care so much is because Israelis (and American Jews) have drifted too far away from reality by always blaming these acts on Islam, when in reality their own foreign policy also drives people to hate them. It's a fact, and we need to deal with that.
BTW .. you still have not given me the name of a Muslim version of Peace Now.
Yes I did. I gave 3 examples in the earlier thread.
I do not remember your saying this. However, you were not repsnsive to my question. I refered to the habit of Euros declaring that brown folks really are not peoples. I assume from you statement that if you were a Lummi you wouold fight to retain your identity? Why do you not see thast tyhe struggle for Israel is the same thing? Aren't Jew a people?
Can't you see that the struggle of the Palestinian people is exactly the same thing too? That's why I didn't really understand this example. I thought you were actually arguing a pro-Palestinian position. Are you really that blind that you can't see that in your example the Lummis are the Palestinians?
Not a very impressive answer.
Sorry, here's another source. Try me again, I'll find another...
I gather you don't/ I do. Moshe Dayan. he rules that possession of the Mount was more importnat to the Muslims then to the Jews. The Jordanians took opver and tried to keep it out of Palestinain hands. I guess there is intra-arabic racism too.
Of course there is, numnuts. You're the one that thinks that it all has to do with what's in the Koran. I've been trying to explain to you that it's about politics, which means that any two groups of Arabs or Muslims can be brought to hate each other if it's politically useful for certain leaders.
This is utter bs. I have challenged yu to tell me about the Arab Peacenow, now you tell me it was the Israelis who prevented one from arising!!!! Yeh, and Black people sold thesleves into slavery too. If you think the Arabs are not attached to the mt. you are very uniformed. Do you even know any Arabs?
I've already posted links to Muslim groups related to Peace Now, and you've even responded on that thread since then. But yes, they don't exist in the Palestinian territories. That's because there's no established democratic framework in the Palestinian territories to protect basic freedoms like freedom of speech as there is in Israel. But the Israelis shoulder a large part of the blame for the lack of freedom in the Palestinian territories. With growing desperation, you have more and more people who look to the past for meaning, and you end up with a society that can't support moderate movements. So yes, I do believe that the Israelis are absolutely to blame for why peace movements in the Palestinian territories are short-lived. I'm terribly sorry if the greatness of Moshe Dayan is overshadowed by that. That's life. Deal with it.
Lets try to find a better way of talking starting by stopping with the demeaning comments. I really do not like being called names like "bonehead,numnuts, etc" . You can do better!
In that spirit:
1. Muslim equivalents of PeaceNow.
You claim to have posted three before. Sorry, I must not have read those posts. I have looked hard for such groups and even asked Muslim fiends. Are these real peace sites, like PeaceNow devoted to cooperation?
2. Islamic curriculum
I am not sure where it is worth going with you in re the teachings in Islamic schools in the US. My stand is simple .. there is enough reason to be concerned that it would be good to know more. Do you agree? Would you like to visit el Idris some weekend?
Can it hurt to learn?
3. Haq.
My bet was that he attended Islamic schools in an era when the Wahabis dominated the teaching. I do not know how old he was when he came from Pakistan, do you know?
And no, I do not dismiss Haq's education any more than I dismiss the role of Christianity in the education of the territorial governor, Stevens, of this state whose concept of natives was horrid. People DO learn things in school.
4. Have you attended shul in France?
The synagogues are surrounded by barbed wire and guards with assault weapons. However, my point was not exclusively about antisemitism. My point was that there are clear problems with what is taught in the French Islamic schools .. just read the papers.
5. because Israelis (and American Jews) have drifted too far away from reality by always blaming these acts on Islam
This may astonish you but I agree that the hatred of Israel is a result of the foreign policy. BUT, the dilemma that you dismiss is that there may not be any way out of the dilemma other than a second holocaust or at least ethnic cleansing of Israel. In the years since the Balfour declaration I am unaware of ANY Muslim or Arab effort to peacefully accommodate Israel's existence. That irredentist POV, just or not, leaves Israel with few real choices.
In your posts you make ample generalizations about it is the Jews/Israelis or Americans fault. I do not disagree. I also think horrible mistakes have been made. For example, for far less than a few weeks in Iraq, we could help King Abdullah build an economy in Jordan that would be so attractive that the Palestinians would have a real alternative to working in Israel. I also think that we have been fools for not following Pres. Carter's energy plan. By now we would be rid of the Saudi albatross and maybe able to help other Arab states relieve their horrid economies.
Why can't we discuss such things rather than generalized dissing of the Israelis?
6. Lummis as Palestinians
No. The Lummis are a reasonably prosperous few thousand people who hang onto increasingly valuable land wanted by the millions of non-Lummis around them. Lummis can either fight for their land, hopefully using the courts, or give in and become white folks.
The white folks, some of them, to make it worse, argue that there are no real Lummi, after all we are all Americans and many Lummi have intermarried.
The Lummi, bit for scale and choice of weapons are a lot like the Israelis.
As for the Palestinians, here are some facts (if you want to check them read Eduard Said).
1. Until 48 no Arab referred to himself/herslef as a Palestinian. The term referred mainly to Jews living in the Mandate. E.g. the Jewish group serving under the Brits in Italy was called the "Palestinian Brigade."
2. Under the Turks, there was essentially no sense of nationality (other than Arab) for the Arabs living in the large Syrian province Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, and Israel were all carved out of this province. When the Zionists began to come to Palestine, their perception that this was a "land without a people" really reflected the European equation of people and nation. There was, in fact no "nation" of Arabs that identified itself with Palestine.
Said makes the important point, however, that nationalism had not yet come to the Arabs so the lack of a Palestinian people did not mean that there were not people who associated themselves with the land. So by bringing OUR nationalistic ideas to the area, we Jews created a disparity that exists to today.
3. Even then, Peace might have come except for the Brits needs to award the original King Abdullah, a Saudi, Hashemite princeling, with a "nation" of his own. Transjordan. Ethnically, the people on both sides of the Jordan were the same and considered themselves one people. Again, if the British had not f'd up, today we might have two states on either side of the Jordan.
The Hashemites have been dreadful players in this game. It was they, NOT the Israelis, who first "occupied" the putative Palestinian state .. creating a new country called "Jordan" but ruled by the Hashemite minority. BTW, the current "Arab" quarter of Jerusalem was, until the Jordanian conquest, actually the Jewish quarter. The Jordanians turned synagogues into urinals and did other horrid tings during their "occupation" of Palestine.
Even then, in the 70s, Arafat tried to overthrow Hussein and create a Palestinian state, That just might have solved the problem too.
BTW .. I did read your link to the Guardian. First. can't we both be honest .. the Guardian is hardly a neutral paper on this issue. A cite there is a bit like referring to the Washington Times from the other side. In any case, the cite only says that Arafat was thinking of this, not that he was ready to make such an offer. Given his history of pulling disaster from the lap of success and neglecting the welfare of his long suffering people, I think it is hard to take a comment to Haaretz and the enthusiastic interp. in The Guardian as evidence that peace could have been made.
So, FWIW, this is a lousy history of mistakes made. Now, where would YOU go to make peace?
A Challenge
OK ..
post your specific idea of how to make peace. I know you mean very well and expect you are as pained as I am by the violence on both sides. So, if we can avoid the dumb name calling, I will be all ears.
BTW, it would be nice if you had a name?
3. Haq.
My bet was that he attended Islamic schools in an era when the Wahabis dominated the teaching. I do not know how old he was when he came from Pakistan, do you know?
He was born in the United States. He attended school entirely in Eastern Washington. He converted to Christianity last year and rebelled against his more devout Muslim parents. All of this has been known from a day or two of the actual shooting, but what have you been doing? You've ignored all that and instead bent over backwards trying to implicate Muslim groups for his crime. Why?
I have no problem with trying to discover what is being taught in a mosque. What I have a problem with is going on witchhunts and being convinced that people are being taught hate before even knowing some basic facts. The Stranger profiled Haq last week and it's abundantly clear that he had no affiliation with any Islamic groups or was influenced by any Islamic teaching. You're eagerness to implicate local Muslim groups in this crime has convinced me that you're nothing more than a bigot out to victimize Muslims. How else is one supposed to interpret your actions?
4. Have you attended shul in France?
The synagogues are surrounded by barbed wire and guards with assault weapons. However, my point was not exclusively about antisemitism. My point was that there are clear problems with what is taught in the French Islamic schools .. just read the papers.
And my point is that if you allow that to convince you, because hate is taught in some Islamic schools in France, that all French Muslims are anti-Semitic, then you're the one promoting racism. The reality is that 71% of French Muslims have a favorable view of Jews. Be honest with me right now. Did you believe that number before? Or did the barbed wire outside the synagogue color your perception a bit too much?
This may astonish you but I agree that the hatred of Israel is a result of the foreign policy. BUT, the dilemma that you dismiss is that there may not be any way out of the dilemma other than a second holocaust or at least ethnic cleansing of Israel. In the years since the Balfour declaration I am unaware of ANY Muslim or Arab effort to peacefully accommodate Israel's existence. That irredentist POV, just or not, leaves Israel with few real choices.
The amount of history you have to ignore to come to that conclusion is stunning. Egypt and Jordan already accommodate Israel's existence. The Saudis were offering up full diplomatic ties with Israel in 2002 and most smaller gulf states were ready to go along.
You act as if the foreign policy of Israel has been this immovable object that could never be altered. This is an unrealistic view. Sadly, I think the Israelis have relied on America to be the big stick rather than undertaking some hard choices, and right now America doesn't have leadership that can protect Israel any more as it moves in the direction it needs to go. In 2002, when the Saudis were offering up diplomatic ties to Israel, one of the conditions was that the U.S. not invade Iraq. Cheney said no. The rest is history, and sadly, yes, I also think that this situation may not have any possibility of a happy ending for Israel any more.
The larger point that I'm making here is that the mindset that you've exhibited here when it comes to Naveed Haq is just as bad as the mindset of the Arab who sees an instance of Israeli aggression and seeks to blame all Jews for it. It's the actions of people like you on both sides who have made the conflict as intractable and difficult as it is. Until you figure that out, I have no problems calling you a wingnut.
Oh, and by the way, my real name is on my blog. It's Lee Rosenberg. You know who I am. You called in when I was on the radio with Goldy and pretended to know what you were talking about concerning net neutrality.
Sadly, I give up. Your bigotry and bad mouth are more than I can deal with.
If you ever want to have a rational discussion without name calling, I am here.
So, I will leave it at this:
1. Haq calls himself a Muslim. If you want to beleive and clal him a Christian, that is your choice.
2. He attended Islamic schools. It does seem likley that the Imans coming to England and the Imans coming to the US were educated in the same schools.
2. I have NEVER made any claims about all Arabs but based in YOUR posts I wonder if you have read the Quran or know anyone who isa devout Muslim? I do and her beliefs are wonderful.
3. Whatever pole you got that claims 70% of French Muslim hold Jews in high regard, I suggest has at least some fatal flaws.
4. I have waited aptiently for your claim that there are 4=3 Muslim equivalents of PeaceNow..
It seems like whenever you disagree with me (and others I'll bet too) your approach is to move the good ship broadside and fire off all cannons. I would rather l;aunch the dink, find an Island and picnic. Must be something about being Jews rather than "of Jewish roots."
I wish there were a better way to talk. I have found some of your thoughts worthwhile .. certainly I will make an effort to learn more of what is being to taught to Muslim children and, if I find a good source, will either cite it here or ask someone to write something I can publish. That is a hell fo alot better than joust calling others names.
BTW, I honestly do not know who you are ..
I did not skim your blog, etc. to see your name, nice to know you Lee. I went to the tavern last night, thinking we might have few pleasant word , maybe even become friends. I guess you weren't there. To bad, I would have bought you a free beer!
BTW, I am curious. Someone called the UW to complain about this Blog. That sounds like something you would do. Was it you? No, don't answer. I would rather just forget there are Jews with your level of ugliness for the Jewish people.
BTW, I am curious. Someone called the UW to complain about this Blog. That sounds like something you would do. Was it you? No, don't answer. I would rather just forget there are Jews with your level of ugliness for the Jewish people.
It wasn't me. I have no interest in getting involved with your employment. I simply think you're a bigot. And apparently, I'm not alone.
1. Haq calls himself a Muslim. If you want to beleive and clal him a Christian, that is your choice.
Haq sees himself as a Muslim ethnically not spiritually. It's the same as how I see myself as a Jew, even though I never had a bar mitzvah and I know next to nothing about Jewish holy texts.
2. He attended Islamic schools. It does seem likley that the Imans coming to England and the Imans coming to the US were educated in the same schools.
No, he didn't. He attended public school. Where are you getting this from?
2. I have NEVER made any claims about all Arabs but based in YOUR posts I wonder if you have read the Quran or know anyone who isa devout Muslim? I do and her beliefs are wonderful.
Again, that's not the point. You are seeing conspiracies where there are none and making accusations against local Muslim groups without any proof that they're doing the things you've accused them of. You're also intentionally lying about Haq in order to promote these theories. I don't have to have read the Koran to recognize when someone is engaging in guilt-by-association.
3. Whatever pole you got that claims 70% of French Muslim hold Jews in high regard, I suggest has at least some fatal flaws.
It's from the highly-respected Pew survey on global attitudes. You can see it here.
4. I have waited aptiently for your claim that there are 4=3 Muslim equivalents of PeaceNow..
One that I posted was here. I'm not exactly sure why you're so convinced there aren't any. You have Google. They're not hard to locate. You choose to stay blind.
I made it to the Montlake at around 8:30, but didn't get to talk to you. I was talking to Darryl for a little bit, and a few others.
Lee ,,,
1. So you know nothing about Jews, have never read anything but hold forth about Jews being biggoted, hmmm. Anytime you want, you are welcome to come over. I have a large library about Jewish and Islamic history including intrductions to the Quran and Talmud. You might even like reading dome Buddhism or Christianity.
But then, I am the biggot!
2. OK, you believe that Mr. Haq never attended Mosque or Islamic school and I will believe that your hero is George Bush.
3. Sorry buddy, no one complained to the UW, they called out of concern for my safety. Knowing your level of comapasion I guess I will still believe it was your phone call.
3.
1. So you know nothing about Jews, have never read anything but hold forth about Jews being biggoted, hmmm. Anytime you want, you are welcome to come over. I have a large library about Jewish and Islamic history including intrductions to the Quran and Talmud. You might even like reading dome Buddhism or Christianity.
But then, I am the biggot!
Do you even understand what the word 'bigot' means? I don't think that Jews are bigots. I think that YOU are a bigot. If you think that that somehow means that I think all Jews are bigoted, then I give up. You're full-on insane.
2. OK, you believe that Mr. Haq never attended Mosque or Islamic school and I will believe that your hero is George Bush.
You said nothing about Mosques, you said "Islamic school". It's not automatic to believe that someone who is Muslim also attended Islamic school. In fact, it is KNOWN that Haq attended public schools. I guess it's possible that he attended weekend classes of some type at the Islamic center, but I've heard nothing of it, and considering that it's well-known that Haq was not a practicing Muslim, it's not likely he took to heart anything that he may have been taught as a youngster. Again, all of this speculation from you has one apparent goal - to make an entire community or ethnic group share the guilt for an individual's actions. That is what bigots do, by definition.
3. Sorry buddy, no one complained to the UW, they called out of concern for my safety. Knowing your level of comapasion I guess I will still believe it was your phone call.
Dude, are you insane? In the comment above, you say that someone called to complain. Now you say that they were calling for concern for your safety, but you still believe it was me that called to complain? What!?!
Look man, I'm not happy that this has escalated like this, but you really, truly, need some psychological assistance. I don't know what to do to help you. I generally trust that just explaining things logically makes people sober up to a mental block of some sort, but you're just spinning out of control into madness. This is not rocket science. I'm simply pointing out that you're engaging in the same kind of collective scapegoating of Muslims that you and I would both decry if a Muslim were doing it to Jews. Do you truly not see the hypocrisy here?
Again.
Anytime you want to learn something about Judaism or Islam, rather than comndemning Jews for creating the current Islamic hatred, I will be happy to lend you books form my library. Assuming you are not likley to seek my help, let me at least direct you to an author who has tried hard to seek the good in the three Abrahamic faiths. Karen Armstrong is, imo, a saint. But then, she teaches in a Jewish school so I have a hunch that would make her trafe for you.
On a second issue, your link to three Islamic peace groups like PeaceNow is nothing of the sort. It is a link to a perhaps admireable Muslim Peace Fellowship that is intended to promote Islam. There is not a word on the site about rapproachment with Jews and Christians, about efforts to make peace in Israel, ending slavery in Islamic countries, etc. etc. Worse, links on the page are to pro-Iranian groups ... anout as "peace" loving as the bizzare terrorist serving as President of Iran.
In the odd case you might have any interest in PEACE ... I really urge you to visit PEACE!NOW. The group .. unlike ANY ISLAMIC GROUP I CAN FIND:
1. represents a very large proportion of Jews, in Israel it may be a majority.
2. advocates creation of a Palestinian State
3. advocated joint economic development and education between the two semitic peoples.
But then, this is a Jewish organization so it must be evil? Or have you ever even looked?
So lets see .. you have called me insane, a wingnut and a bigot. Pretty good way to seek >>sane<< discussion.
As far as I can see about you,
1. you think there is no problme with how Islam is taught.
2. do not believe there is Wahaabi influence in American or European schools.
3. Mr. Haq grew up without attending Islamic instruction and is not a Muslim despite his claim that he is.
4. have not read the Koran, the Torah, any contemporary Jewish writings, but somehow know Jews are bigotted and Muslims are tolernat.
5. And I am an insane, bigoted, wingnut.
Have your read Der Besuch der alten Dame? It is by Durrenmatt and readily available in English. Try it .. maybe it would be a good basis for a discussion.
Anytime you want to learn something about Judaism or Islam, rather than comndemning Jews for creating the current Islamic hatred, I will be happy to lend you books form my library.
Again, you are choosing to pretend I'm saying things I'm clearly not saying. I'm not condemning Jews for creating the current Islamic hatred, I'm condemning Israeli foreign policy heavy-handedness (along with meddling external powers and Arab political leaders). As I've said SEVERAL TIMES ALREADY, there's enough blame to go around here.
Second, if I simply blamed 'Jews' for these issues, I'd be doing exactly what you're doing, blaming an entire ethnic group for something done by only a small subset (or a single individual) of that ethnic group. I'm not a bigot, that's why I don't do that. And I resent your attempts to put words in my mouth to make me sound as if I'm a bigot.
Assuming you are not likley to seek my help, let me at least direct you to an author who has tried hard to seek the good in the three Abrahamic faiths. Karen Armstrong is, imo, a saint. But then, she teaches in a Jewish school so I have a hunch that would make her trafe for you.
A few comments ago, you admitted that you understood that the hatred was not rooted in religion. In fact, here are your exact words:
This may astonish you but I agree that the hatred of Israel is a result of the foreign policy.
If this is the case, then who cares about what Karen Armstrong says about religion. How is it relevant? If you and I both agree that this is about Israeli foreign policy, then why are we still talking about religion?
On a second issue, your link to three Islamic peace groups like PeaceNow is nothing of the sort. It is a link to a perhaps admireable Muslim Peace Fellowship that is intended to promote Islam. There is not a word on the site about rapproachment with Jews and Christians, about efforts to make peace in Israel, ending slavery in Islamic countries, etc. etc.
Did you even read the site? Here's from their mission page:
To expose the falsehood of the popular stereotype that Islam is a religion that teaches terrorism and violence.
To reach out to people of other religious traditions in an effort to create mutual understanding, tolerance, and respect.
How is that not referring to "rapproachment with Jews and Christians"? How blatantly are you going to stick your head in the sand on this one? Seriously, man, your willful ignorance is truly terrifying.
Worse, links on the page are to pro-Iranian groups ... anout as "peace" loving as the bizzare terrorist serving as President of Iran.
Where? Which pro-Iranian groups are you referring to? I see one that is dedicated to a peaceful resolution of the standoff between Iran and the U.S.
In the odd case you might have any interest in PEACE ... I really urge you to visit PEACE!NOW. The group .. unlike ANY ISLAMIC GROUP I CAN FIND:
1. represents a very large proportion of Jews, in Israel it may be a majority.
I can't find any information confirming this, although it seems that since Israelis have been voting for candidates who don't share Peace Now's mission that they're not a majority of Jews.
One thing I do know is that you're not someone who I take very seriously lecturing people about peace as long as you engage in baseless accusations of the Muslims of this area.
2. advocates creation of a Palestinian State
3. advocated joint economic development and education between the two semitic peoples.
How does that not describe the Muslim group I linked to? Do you really think they don't support Israel and joint economic development? If so, we can double-or-nothing the $50 bet you've already lost to me and I'll email them.
But then, this is a Jewish organization so it must be evil? Or have you ever even looked?
OK, dude. That's it. I'm really pissed now. I do not think Jews or Jewish organizations are evil. I simply think that you (Steve Schwartz) are a bigot. I do not think you're a bigot because you're a Jew. I think you're a bigot because of what you've done to impugn local Muslim groups in the wake of the Jewish Federation Shooting. I'm not blaming any other Jews of being bigoted. Not Matt Rosenberg. Not Das from Sunbreak City. Just you. You're the bigot.
I'm a Jew. I love my Jewish friends, my relatives (in New York, Israel, everywhere), and just about every Jewish person I've ever met. I'm not sure what your problem is, maybe you've just always reflexively convinced yourself that when someone criticizes you that they're anti-Semitic. Whatever it is, get some help. I'm not anti-Semitic. I don't hate Jews, and I have no animosity at all towards Jewish organizations or people with Jewish faith. My beef is with you, not your religion or your ethnicity.
I think Peace Now is wonderful and admirable organization, but you're a bigot if you think that Muslims are not capable of being advocates for peace.
As far as I can see about you,
1. you think there is no problme with how Islam is taught.
Islam is taught in millions of different ways across the globe. I have a problem if it's taught in a way to foster hate towards others. But that's not the norm, and it's practically non-existent in the U.S. And I have a problem with those who assume that Muslims are taught that way somewhere without any evidence at all and trying to assert it as fact.
2. do not believe there is Wahaabi influence in American or European schools.
I didn't say anything about Europe, other than just showing you the actual polling of their attitudes towards Jews (which is admittedly poor in England and Germany). As for America, there may be places where there's Wahhabi teaching going on, but without actual proof that it's being taught, it's irresponsible to accuse people. And from what we clearly know, Haq was not influenced by this. WE KNOW THAT!
3. Mr. Haq grew up without attending Islamic instruction and is not a Muslim despite his claim that he is.
He obviously grew up with some kinds of Islamic influence, but it's also KNOWN that he rebelled against his parents, including a refusal to observe Ramadan and converting to Christianity. He saw himself as a Muslim purely ethnically, just as I consider myself a Jew. How many times do I have to explain this to you before you understand it?
4. have not read the Koran, the Torah, any contemporary Jewish writings, but somehow know Jews are bigotted and Muslims are tolernat.
NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, NO. Are you the stupidest fucking person on planet earth?!? I DO NOT THINK THAT JEWS ARE BIGOTED. I THINK THAT STEVE SCHWARTZ IS BIGOTED. There's a HUGE difference there. Are you not capable of understanding that you are an individual person and not an entire ethnic group? You are not JEWISH PEOPLE. You are STEVE SCHWARTZ, and STEVE SCHWARTZ is a bigot because of something that STEVE SCHWARTZ did.
5. And I am an insane, bigoted, wingnut.
Finally, you've said something that makes sense.
Steve, I'm done. Speak your peace. I'll be at DL next week. If you want to defend yourself, feel free.
You really need to come down.
1. You say you are a Jew? I have no idea what that means given the rest of your comments. Is Lani Guinier a Jew too? How about Madeline Albright? Eduard Said? Did you know there is a Lakota chief who is a Jew? Is the Bishop of Paris Jewish?
Have you ever been to a seder? visited the camps? joined other Jews in the civil rights struggle? Do you know who the Missippi three were?
2. You over and over and over again blame the Jews for Islamofascism. That is bigotry akin to the charge by the Polish communists that the Jews caused the Holocaust.
I know a Polish fellow, a Jew like you be descent, who still believes what he was taught in Polish schools.
If, you really think you are a Jew, why would you think that about other Jews? This is the Jewish equivalent of being an Uncle Tom.
But then, given your other comments I wonder if you have ever been a active in civil rights. Maybe you do not know about the Uncle Toms?
How do you feel about the Jews who are not allowed to emigrate from Syria or Iran? Do yo feel any kinship? Do you think our brothers and susters in China should be allowed ot identify thelmselves as Jews or is it OK that being Jewish is illegal is you are racially Chinese in China?
If you are not kust a self hating Jew, bt somehow care about the rest of us, why not be positive? Why not tell me what you think we all should do? Hay ... why not join Peace!Now? I am a member, but don't let that bother you.
3. The request for your three Muslim Peace movements remains open. Or if you want another example that might dilute your dislike of the people you call your roots, take a look at the Givat Havivah Institute. I do not think there is any comparable Muslim institute.
BTW ... among the things I take the most pride in as a Jew is Medecin sans Frontiers ... another one of those organizations the Jews founded and a favorite charity of many people like me. But, of course, unlike you we are bigots.
Again. I am really a nice guy. Anytime you want to talk, share a beer, etc, please do contact me ... but not till you stop with the name calling. That is a bit much!
Maybe it would help us both if tried a segue. Siddartha Gautama is one of my teachers .. at least reading his words has helped me understand part of the world. I like to use this name, rather than Buddha because all Siddartha claimed to be was a person who had thought hard about life. I am not a Buddhist but think it is wonderful that once someone thought deeply enough to say:
As Siddartha said:
Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.
Sure, I'll buy your beer.
Or, if you want to get together in a quieter place, come join us for shabbat. A little challah, some candles, a good shabbos chicken .. might do you some good.
Another quote (ain't the Inet cool?"
If I am not for myself, then who will be for me? And when I am only for myself, what am I? And if not now, when? Hillel
You say you are a Jew? I have no idea what that means given the rest of your comments.
The first time I met you, you explained that you don't have to believe in god to be a Jew and you said that I was a Jew. I'll take your word for it.
This boils down to one very simple question. Do you think that Naveed Haq was taught by others to hate Jews under the banner of Islam, or do you believe that he arrived at that hatred without any influence from Koranic teaching? Those of us in reality know the answer to that question.
How do you feel about the Jews who are not allowed to emigrate from Syria or Iran? Do yo feel any kinship?
I feel kinship with ALL people, not just Jews.
I find the argumnent that claims that the current Jews are not genetically related to the ancient ones quite pointless. It doesn't really mater whether or not a person is genetically related to a certain ancient people as long as they associate with them culturally and/or religiously. In Egypt (especially copts) people will often claim that they are descended from the pharaohs and some people in Pakistan (or elsewhere) will claim they are descended from the prophet but they would deny the Jews a similar claim.
Also, the whole "semite" or "hamite" division is rather old-fashioned. It is based on the Bible which is hardly a historical document. Even if it were true, it is quite absurd not to think that almost everybody's a mutt after a few thousand years (excuse my french) !
The inheritance Issue
This is more complex than it seems. First, you are partly wrong genetically. There are lineages that can be traced for hundreds and thousands of years. More important than genes, however, there are linguistic and cultural heritages. So, a modern Tamil who claims a connection to the Harrupans ...ancient folks of the Indus, is also claiming to protect an ethnic heritage. The same for Jews, Koreans, Aztecs, and Lummi. It seems to me that ethnicity, if it does not cross over to racism is a good thing.
When does it become racist? To me racism occurs when one identifies heritage with superiority and esp rights over others.
That is the problem with the Aryan myth and the Islamic Arab myth. In the former case, the Aryans claim that their race has rights over the rest of us because it is genetically superior. In the Arab case the claim is that Jews can't live in the Arab homeland because the Jews aren't real Jews, Same thing.
Lee
Sad. . I did not ask you whether you are the all-loving, just about people who are enslaved. You dismiss them .. I guess because they are jews?
I guess you feel the same about the Ethiopean Jews .. they should have stayed as slaves?
Lee ..
Lee, the quote I gave you from the Buddha was meant to take us both out of the conrontational mood into a learning mood. If you have the time, read some Armstrong .. she is truly wonderful and closer to your side, in her opinions of Islam, than to mine. I also recommend that people interested in the Palsetinians read Eduard Said ... their major intellectual supporter, for the facts about how e all got into this mess. Should you want to know more about the sitation of Jews living in Muslim lands, I recommend Bernard Lewis. It can not hurt to learn more!
May I suggest we just leave this off? I am always willing to talk.
Thehim ...
Seems as if you need to cool down. You have points but, like Arafat also seem too good at seizing failure ut of victory. Why not pick up on the offer to jointly look into what IS taught in the mosque?
I also endorse the reasing of Armstrong. She is the premier author of literature trying to bring Mulsims and Jews together.
Steve,
I'm not questioning Karen Armstrong or Edward Said. I'm questioning YOU. After the shooting of the Jewish Federation, it was YOU who made attempts to blame Muslim groups in Washington State for inciting violence after it was already very clear that Haq was not influenced by those groups.
What I'm asking is very simple. Why did you do that? If you can't explain yourself, the only explanation that makes sense to me is that you're a bigot. Explain to me why that's the wrong conclusion.
You keep talking about peace, but your words are meaningless if you don't care about justice. And accusing people of things that they are not guilty of shows a lack of respect for justice. People in this country are innocent until proven guilty, even the Muslims.
This whole discussion has nothing to do with Palestinians, Lummis, slavery, Ethiopia, the Koran, or the Talmud. It has to do with the fact that YOU, STEVE SCHWARTZ, accused Islamic groups in this state of spreading hatred without any proof. Stop the persecution complex crap and cop to what you did. You engaged in an attempt to assign collective guilt for a purely individual act. Nothing that happened to Jews in the past is a valid excuse for your actions.
Why not pick up on the offer to jointly look into what IS taught in the mosque?
Ben, I have no problem with finding out what happens in mosques if there's a reason to be suspicious. But there's no reason to be suspicious here. It was well known that Haq was not a practicing Muslim and he had no established ties with any mosques. Feel free to read the Stranger article from Josh Feit and Brendan Kiley. They did the investigation that Steve didn't do and discovered that Haq was simply a mentally unstable man who internalized the widely accepted Jew-vs-Muslim narrative and snapped. That's the whole point, and it's one that Steve is blithely ignoring.
Lee ..
For whatever eason you want me to call myslef a bigot. I am not one .. at least not in the ways you seem obsessed with. If you are not concerned with antisemitism amongst Muslims I suggest you read the materials I have recommended to you and then tell me I am a bigot.
As for the rest of this, you are the one who keeps insisting that these events are due to what Jews have done. Then you try to tell me about Islamic peace movements that do not, when I look, exist. I feel you really are ignorant of a lot of things you talk about ... Islam, Jewish history, etc. Soi, before calling me a bigot, it seems to me you ought either to decide you just aren't interested or do some learning. BTW, WADR to an article in the Weekly, that is hardly a substitute for a trial or for reading more meaty stuff on your own.
Other than that, let me buy you a beer.
If you are not concerned with antisemitism amongst Muslims I suggest you read the materials I have recommended to you and then tell me I am a bigot.
I'm not saying that I'm not concerned about anti-Semitism amongst Muslims, what I'm saying is that you accused very specific Muslim groups in this state of being responsible for teaching Naveed Haq to hate Jews - after it was already well-known that it was not true. The fact that anti-Semitism exists is irrelevant. By implicating groups here as being involved with anti-Semitism, you demonstrated a form of bigotry.
As for the rest of this, you are the one who keeps insisting that these events are due to what Jews have done.
The current violence in the Middle East is due to the actions of Jews, Muslims, Christians, and many others. It is not the fault of one ethnic or religious group alone. But again, none of this is relevant to the situation here. We're talking about why you were so intent on pinning blame on local Muslim groups for what Naveed Haq did.
Then you try to tell me about Islamic peace movements that do not, when I look, exist.
Did that web page not render for you? I linked to a webpage of a Muslim Peace organization which had a clearly stated mission of reaching out to people of other faiths. Do you think it's some illusion? Is it pretend? What FACTS do you have to show me that it's all just a sham that doesn't really exist?
I feel you really are ignorant of a lot of things you talk about ... Islam, Jewish history, etc. Soi, before calling me a bigot, it seems to me you ought either to decide you just aren't interested or do some learning.
Exactly what part of Islam or Jewish history gives you the right to accuse people of inciting violence without any factual basis? Is that in the Talmud? Is there a part in the Talmud that explains why collective punishment is ok? Are there passages about how to associate guilt to innocent people? Does God like it when we make baseless accusations?
Soi, before calling me a bigot, it seems to me you ought either to decide you just aren't interested or do some learning.
What don't I know yet about this? This is what I know:
1. Several weeks ago, American-bord Naveed Haq walked into the Jewish Federation building in Belltown, shoot a half-dozen people, killing one of them.
2. Within the next 48 hours, it was discovered that Naveed Haq was a mentally unstable man who had recently converted to Christianity and was not a practicing Muslim.
3. Steve Schwartz writes several posts trying to link Haq's shooting with Islam, calling it an evil religion and claiming that some Washington state mosques are contributing to Muslim intolerance of Jews.
4. Daniel Pipes writes about Haq and references Steve Schwartz to make the claim that Haq was inspired by an Islamic center in the Tri-Cities, something which we already know is blatantly untrue.
What holy books do I need to reference now? Which part of the Talmud explains how Steve Schwartz didn't really do these things and that it was all just in my mind?
BTW, WADR to an article in the Weekly, that is hardly a substitute for a trial or for reading more meaty stuff on your own.
Show me the proof then! If everyone else is getting it wrong, and Steve Schwartz is exactly right, then prove it! I don't need to read more about the history of Islam to know what everyone else except you knows, that Naveed Haq was just some dipshit who wasn't taking his meds.
Other than that, let me buy you a beer.
You can by me 10 beers, you still owe me $50.
Lee,
You are chasing your tail. No matter how many times you insist that I call myself a bigot I am not going to help you.
I am not sure why you brought Pipes into this, he certainly does not work for Freeedom House or the Idris Mosque.
Insisting that you can hold forth on how guilty others are WHILE insisting that you have no need to know anything is ... well, not impressive. I am glad you read the Weekly but that won't get you a lot of my respect for your expertise in Islam.
And yes, yes I did go to the MPF website. It is an effort to portray Islam in a certian light and, as I said elsewhere there is nothing wrong with that. The idea of a peace mission to the Islamo-fascist state of Iran is a bit worrysome though, don't you think?
In contrast the sites I suggested you look at provide real world support for Jews and Muslims to study and work together .... can't you see the difference? Or do you suppose it has something to do with the line of the Quran quoted in the Freedom House document that discourages Muslims from mixing with others unless it is to revert the others? (BTW do you know why I say revert?)
Or, do you have any sites where Muslims deal with their issues of slavery? Or, for that matter, Muslim sites raising funds to rovide an alternative to the al Qaeda, Hizbollah or Wahabi inspired education that dominates education in Pakustan, SA, Lebanaon, Palestine, Nigeria, etc etc? (BTW some very cool things are happening in North Africa, esp in Morocco. They seem a lot more interested in counteracting Islamic bigotry then you are, but then they even have some Jews still living there willingly.)
But .. if we are to agree on anything,m you can keep calling me a bigot and I will accuse you of being ill read.
The beer offer is still open.
The answers get closer to revelations in the book “Rise of Empires” www.LegendsUntold.com
Where we are today, in the 21st century, is essentially where we’ve already been. Technology, wars, politics, expansion, and ideologies today are not new. They have only been conveniently repackaged for our benefit. All we know today, man has already known.
Simply put … if you want to have a grip on today, look into the past. “History repeats itself.” If you want to prevent from making gigantic earthshattering or life-changing mistakes, look into the past. Someone has already made them for you! Learn from their sorrows.
Generals and Chiefs have also conquered and died. Wars have been, and are still, fought. The Middle East wars fought today are reflections of thousands of years. They have just been packaged differently today. The argument is the same. Only the characters have 21st century bodies and faces, and gadgets. Otherwise, they are reminiscent of past leaders, theorists, fanatics, lunatics, evolutionists, and reactionaries; Genghis Khan, Hannibal, Nero …
Moses parted the seas. Did he? Or did he have technology that went unrecorded? Armies today use cardboard and crystal shard, disposable bridges. Are we so sure, Moses and the ancients didn’t have technology beyond the rod and staff?
David slew Goliath with a pebble. Valiant, indeed. But what contraption did he use? Ah, yes … the sling of David … that’s right! Was it just a tool of worn leather? That’s what we’ve been told, but do we know that for sure? How can we be so egotistical to believe that there was not greater technology than the wheel and fire then? We have effective, low impact weapons today that operate on the sling-shot principle. They are no more complex than David’s weapon, and require average skill.
And what of Alexander’s acute vision? One of the greatest military strategists of the times looked into the sun, which blackened his eye. His one eye was blue and the other was black. The black eye afforded him telescopic vision. He could see the eagle carry caught prey up to lofty mountain nests. Many lay claim to inventing processes and enhancing high-powered telescopes. But who’s credited with the initial creative insight to use the eye’s magnification?
The arts were practiced in Mesopotamia, Islamic Caliphates, Babylonia and Persia, Alexandria, China, and India; in the jungles of the Amazon and on the plateaus of the Andes. We still use many of the techniques today. Why? Because they have withstood the test of time. Who showed the ancients how to mix, interpret, and heal? What prompted instinct and clairvoyance to become fashionable in Freud’s, Jung’s, Casey’s, and Adolf Hitler’s days, when Nostradamus had to conceal his writings, and Rasputin was feared, literally, to death?
Politics and politicians, leaders and supporters, human strengths, pitfalls, and addictions, have evolved into our 21st century world. But time has recycled the basic principles. The question is … who, or how, did we acquire the basic principles, and developed mechanisms, in the first place? How did they - the ancients know?
How did the Romans and Greeks have such sophisticated technology more than 2000 years ago, which, only now, modern engineers have finally “reinvented” and embellished to suit our time? The architect of the pyramids has not been revealed. And, every continent has pyramids.
What about the wars? Why are we still fighting wars? Politics aside … wars are part of the time cycle. Each generation for thousands of years has experienced several wars in their lifetime.
What’s all the fighting about? Land? Natural resources? Dominance? Ideology? Why have certain governments banded together, while others remain separate? Why did the west invade Iraq? Saddam? Are you sure? Oil? Have you seen any increase in supply? Human rights? Have you watched any less suffering? Why was the first structure to be secured during the initial Iraq invasion, the Museum of Baghdad?
“I know not with what weapons World War III will be fought, but World War IV will be fought with sticks and stones” – Albert Einstein.
The answers get closer to revelations in the book “Rise of Empires” ww.LegendsUntold.com
I am not sure why you brought Pipes into this, he certainly does not work for Freeedom House or the Idris Mosque.
I want to apologize for that. It turns out that it was actually a different "Stephen Schwartz" that Pipes was referencing. I've updated my own post as well.
Insisting that you can hold forth on how guilty others are WHILE insisting that you have no need to know anything is ... well, not impressive.
That's the funniest thing ever!! That's exactly what YOU did in trying to hold Muslim groups responsible for teaching Haq to hate Jews. You didn't do a damn thing to investigate even the basics of Haq's background. You didn't even know he was born in America until we had this discussion!! But you were adamant that he'd been taught to hate Jews by some Muslim group somewhere. Are you really blind to your own hypocrisy here?!?
This discussion has never been about whether or not Muslims are teaching hatred in various parts of the globe. You'd have to be crazy to deny that it happens. This discussion has been about Naveed Haq and whether or not HE was taught to hate Jews by people in this state. He wasn't. Period. We know this.
The reason it matters so much is because targeting innocent people as a result of ethnic profiling is the seed that ALL ethnic violence sprouts from. People of ALL backgrounds do it - Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, Hindus. And in the parts of the world where more desperation exists, it happens more often because people have less to lose by following an extremist path. You can hide behind all these books, but it's very clear that you don't even have a basic understanding of how the world works if you can't acknowledge that fact.
Lee ..
You are still chasing your own tail.
There is something wrong with your ugly views of Israel and Jews while your wilingness to accept uncritically the behavior and teachings of Muslims.
I have read through the posts and there is nothing here I can not defend. Islam is a religon with major problems. You would need ot be either a muslim or a naif not to understand this.
Of course I do not know to what extent Mr. haq was motivated by his Islamic upbringing, but I have given you ample sources to read for yourself about the problmes in those schools. So, you can join our dead predecessors, the naifs of Poland, Germany, France, Holland .. who believed, as you do, that their was no awful problem.
Me? I would rather seek the truth. I have also offered you oppotunites to join me in that effort. Lets call elIdris and ask tom visit, maybe we will both learn something!
There is something wrong with your ugly views of Israel and Jews while your wilingness to accept uncritically the behavior and teachings of Muslims.
I'm not saying anything about any of those things. I'm talking about one thing and one thing only: STEVE SCHWARTZ and WHAT HE DID AFTER THE SEATTLE SHOOTING.
I have read through the posts and there is nothing here I can not defend. Islam is a religon with major problems. You would need ot be either a muslim or a naif not to understand this.
Again, this is not the point. The point is what STEVE SCHWARTZ did.
Of course I do not know to what extent Mr. haq was motivated by his Islamic upbringing, but I have given you ample sources to read for yourself about the problmes in those schools.
OK, now we're getting somewhere. I assume then that you're ready to take back your insinuation here:
Naveed Afzal Haq, an American Muslim invaded the Jewish Federation of Seattle and shot six people. No doubt he said, Praise be to Allah, as he shot at a pregnant woman. HE KILLED THE JEWS
Although I still haven't seen any proof that there are 'problems' in any of the schools around here. Random passages posted online that could potentially be misconstrued as a way to identify Jews as lessers is far from being evidence that children are being taught hateful things, ESPECIALLY since there are other passages about respecting others.
Me? I would rather seek the truth. I have also offered you oppotunites to join me in that effort.
I don't believe this for a second. You have absolutely no interest in the truth. You put forth no effort at all to even find out the basic facts about Haq before making all kinds of accusations. Now you owe me $50.
Lee, you really are intent on proving something!
Anyhow, the text you cite is almost verbatim what Haq said. Haq identified HIMSELF as an American Muslim. You want to decide he was not because he dipped a toe in the baptismal font. I guess you must believe in the Xtain idea that once he washed himself his Islamic identify was ... absolved? removed????
BTW, FWIW I did go to the web and found out what is known about Haq's upbringing. He was raised by a very devout family, his Dad helped create the local mosque with help from a national organization that is or was funded from Saudi Arabia. (So one ASSUMES that the mosque did have the books in the Freedom house report). Haq had a normal Muslim upbringing and did attend Islamic school ... as well as public school.
Wasn't the $50 for your finding a Muslim site like Peace!Now? Must be hard to do, hunh?
Before leaving this, the saddest part of this thread are your antisemitic comments and your effort to paint Islam as if Muslims were nobel savages. Have you read Rousseau .. I assume not. But it was once and still is fashionable amongst liberals to idealize lesser peoples. Even Jefferson thought (like you) that Jews were mean spirit but the great President thought Indians were naturally noble. He was wrong on both fronts ... because he, like you, was ignorant.
There is a lot you could learn form Islam and I recommend that sometime you try. The Umma, if you are a member, is a wonderful community ...ALL men (we won't discuss women here) are equal, no race or national issues. The insistence on science as a basis even for the Quran certainly surpasses anything Jesus or my own folks back then taught.
As for Jews, I really wish peole like yuo would lok at Seattle Kadimah or Peace!Now. I remain hopeful that someday their efforts will bear fruit ion the form of a Muslim hand of peace.
But then you think I am a bigot.
Anyhow, the text you cite is almost verbatim what Haq said. Haq identified HIMSELF as an American Muslim.
But he was not a religious Muslim, so the idea of his saying "Praise to Allah" is absurd. He would have never said that, and it's ridiculous to even suggest that he would say it.
Wasn't the $50 for your finding a Muslim site like Peace!Now? Must be hard to do, hunh?
Nope, here's the exchange:
Lee: "I'll bet you any amount of money that Naveed Haq knows as much as about Wahabbiism as he knows as quantum physics."
Steve: "OK .. lets bet $50. Now you tell me how he manged ot grow up in an era where the Wahabis dominated the teaching of Islam in Pakistan and .. if you look at the FH report here too."
Now that we already know that Haq was born and raised in the Tri-Cities and never exposed to any Wahhabi teaching, I assume you'll have my $50 on Tuesday?
BTW, FWIW I did go to the web and found out what is known about Haq's upbringing. He was raised by a very devout family, his Dad helped create the local mosque with help from a national organization that is or was funded from Saudi Arabia. (So one ASSUMES that the mosque did have the books in the Freedom house report).
The mosque was also well known for being very involved in inter-faith programs and community service. No one cares if there's some book on the shelf there that no one reads that could potentially be used in a way to paint Jews in a negative light. You could make an accusation like that in one way or another at ANY Christian church in the U.S. And to even suggest that Haq was taught Wahhabiism as a child simply because the mosque was built in part with funds from a Saudi-based organization is so paranoid, it's funny.
Dude, get some help, and please don't show up on Tuesday without my $50. I've been re-posting the funniest stuff you've been saying on my site, so many of the DL regulars have already seen the exchange above.
Even Jefferson thought (like you) that Jews were mean spirit but the great President thought Indians were naturally noble. He was wrong on both fronts ... because he, like you, was ignorant.
HAHAHA!! So you believe that Indians weren't the noble people that Jefferson thought they were, but I'm the one who's ignorant?! HAHAHAHA!! My god, you're retarded.
As for Thomas Jefferson, the American Jewish Historical Society gets it right:
Despite his reservations about the perceived “defects” in Judaism, Jefferson never wavered in his commitment to civil and religious freedom for Jews. Jefferson’s most notable achievement in establishing religious and civic toleration for American Jewry was his 1779 Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom in Virginia. Adopted in 1785, the Bill proclaimed: “No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer, on account of his religious opinions or belief; but that all men shall be free to profess. . . their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise . . . affect their civil capacities.”
Two years later, in 1787, the U. S. Constitution was adopted. Article VI contains the following, Jefferson-inspired phrase: “No religious test shall ever be required as a qualification to any office or public trust under the United States.”
Despite his attitude toward Judaism as a religion, Jefferson’s advocacy of the rights of Jews –and those of other religious minorities – has become the law and custom of the land. Toleration of all religions, the absence of an official government religion, and the right to practice and express religious thought freely are the hallmarks of Jefferson’s legacy. Despite his private views of Judaism, he was indeed a most “righteous Gentile.”
Thomas Jefferson's efforts to ensure religious freedom in this country are the reason why this country is so safe for Jews today. Of course, you'll never understand that.
citations:
Steve: "OK .. lets bet $50. Now you tell me how he manged ot grow up in an era where the Wahabis dominated the teaching of Islam in Pakistan and .. if you look at the FH report here too."
Now that we already know that Haq was born and raised in the Tri-Cities and never exposed to any Wahhabi teaching, I assume you'll have my $50 on Tuesday?
The bet was that he grew up without an Islamic education that included Wahabi-ism.
As far as I can see and from a lot of discussions in the Muslim community, including by Irshad Manji, this was the way Islam was taught. What are your sources that he was not taught the way she was?
On Jefferson
1. Noble savages
So you do not thnink Jefferson's view that American natives were of a superior culture was racist? You really are a white guy!
2. Jefferson
I admire Jefferson greatly and feel the world owes democracy to this amazing man. And yes, his insitance on eulaity is why I am alive.
That said, his comments on the Jews were terribly bigoted. As in your own case, I believe Jefferson was ignorant. I know of no evidence, for example, that he had ever read Maimonides or Spinoza.
Spinoza is very interesting because he was well to the left of Jefferson in a religous sense. I wonder how much more radical jefferson's bible might have beocme if thiis great mind had read Spinoza?
Your site:
How about calming this down? I do not know if I can get to DL this Tuesday, but if I do letrs try to find some middle ground. I think otherwise we may need to call in the Forest Service to extingush a fire.
Post a Comment