Just happened across this article. Ive read a few from him before, but he does explain it in a way that makes sense to a non-muslim like myself. I genuinely learnt more about it by reading it.
www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-1332210/Why-does-Britain-turn-blind-eye-medieval-zealots-peddling-lessons-hate.html
|
|
Another learning for me was listening to a guy called Ed Hussain - he's also written a book called "The Islamist"
|
If only this Dr Taj Hargey spoke for the Palestinians there would be no Middle East conflict. He understands that to live in this world you can't have two things: -
1. Everything you want; and
2. Your way in one place and someone else's way elsewhere.
|
|
I think he'd need to speak for both sides Espada.
|
What if he spoken to the Jewish terrorists in 1947? I don't think they understood.
They still dont under your 1 & 2 criteria.
|
Don't start on the Israel issue. We'll be here in 2160.. as will it.
|
>>Don't start on the Israel issue. We'll be here in 2160.. as will it.<<
2160 is 10 o' clock madf - didn't they teach you nuffink in school :)
|
I don't think the Jews got everything they wanted. If we had, Israel would include Lebanon and Jordan (to include the whole of Israel and Judea in biblical times).
The Jews did not arrive in the UK (either due to pogrom in Eastern Europe or post Holocaust) demanding changes to the way the country was run. We fitted in and made fortunes for UK plc.
There are many moderate Israeli politicians who are desperate for a solution and a solution now; its just the BBC will not let you hear them.
|
I'm not sure what to make of this. I don't want to be antagonistic, especially on a subject of which I know so little. I was going to reproach Zero for harking back to 1947 but, if I'm reading this correctly, you are harking back 2,000 years and beyond? Surely not?
There is no chance for peace until all concerned look to the future instead of harking back to the past.
Incidentally, in a similar vein, did you read the report of Ian Blair's lecture on religion and it's faults? www.theosthinktank.co.uk/mainnav/theos-news.aspx A very intelliget comment.
John
|
>>
>> Incidentally, in a similar vein, did you read the report of Ian Blair's lecture on
>> religion and it's faults? www.theosthinktank.co.uk/mainnav/theos-news.aspx A very intelligent comment.
>>
>> John
>>
Sir Ian said "All religions have, as their core belief, the need for love, for respect for others, for tolerance," "
which is absolute rubbish...
and which typifies Sir Ian: a man whose judgement is not to be trusted based on performance.
Last edited by: madf on Tue 23 Nov 10 at 16:01
|
Well that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. As a non believer it looked like a pretty fair summing up to me. You've only rubbished one point out of many. Do you feel the same way about the rest? What's your take on the situation? We're not going to get it from one liners.
John
|
Mos>> Well that's your opinion and you're entitled to it. As a non believer it looked
>> like a pretty fair summing up to me. You've only rubbished one point out of
>> many. Do you feel the same way about the rest? What's your take on the
>> situation? We're not going to get it from one liners.
Most religions teach that if you are not of the true faith you're not acceptable.
Some state unbelievers should killed and it's the duty of believers to do so...
( and for only one example see.. www.truthdig.com/images/diguploads/verses.html).
For Lord Blair to say that they don't is either gross ignorance on his part or deliberate lying.
As for tolerance of other faiths, Lord Balir is an Anglican. Fine. Tolerant? Well as the Anglican Church supported the laws which prevented a Catholic becoming the Monarch of the UK - I would say hardly true.. And that's not a change in religion just another version of Christianity...
I am NOT in any way trying to attack any one's religion beliefs. I am , however, taking issue with Lord Blair's lecture and claims...
"Lord Blair added that people of all faiths should move "beyond arguments between and within different religions and recover their confidence in the beneficial nature of religion per se."
So all religions are good by definition. Bring back pagainsim, moon worship and human sacrifices? Of course not.. But that is what he impicitly said. It's rubbish.
There: a long response.. my one liner was based on a carefully considered judgement ...
Last edited by: madf on Tue 23 Nov 10 at 16:32
|
madf,
I'm not trying to wind you up and this may be better over a pint but I think you're only disagreeing with the idea "All religions have, as their core belief, the need for love, for respect for others, for tolerance"? Surely the rest of it is pretty much right;
"religion could be a source of intolerance and violence"
"Speaking about religiously inspired violence, Lord Blair argued that it was born out of a certainty of being in the right".
OK I'm guilty of picking words and phrases to suit my arguement, but one of the things that bugs me about any religion is the "I'm right, you're going to hell" attitude. Apply any sort of logic to that and it just doesn't stand up. The inhabitants of the continents which the various prophets didn't visit all went to hell for thousands of years because God didn't turn up and say "'scuse me chaps...."? Potty.
At one extreme you have the (nowadays) wishy washy C of E, though even they wear bumper stickers "I'm not perfect, only forgiven" (smug eh? and another dig at where you're going) through to the ones that want to chop your head off because it guarantees they'll go to heaven. And don't fool yourself that there aren't "Christians" in that lot.
Remember the old Dave Allen joke? A man goes to heaven. After a few days he bumps into God. "Everything ok?" asks God. "Oh yes. Just a question though. The wall. The one that seems to run forever. What's on the other side?" "Ah said God. That's for the Catholics. They like to think they're the only ones here."
With apologies to Catholics, they don't have a monopoly on the idea.
Are we violently agreeing perhaps madf?
John
|
>> on a subject of which I know so little. I was going to reproach Zero
>> for harking back to 1947 but, if I'm reading this correctly, you are harking back
>> 2,000 years and beyond? Surely not?
Alas its valid, the seeds of the current unrest in the Middle East, and now globaly through Islamic based fundamentalist terrorism is firmly routed in the fallout of WW2, and the events in palestine in the late 1940's.
I rate fundametal Jewish figures and military hawks as the same creation as Iranian Ayatollas
Except the Jewish despots are better funded than the Iranian despots.
And as for claiming BBC bais, that frankly is the work of people wishing to hide the truth.
Edit, When both sides say the BBC is lying, you know its telling the truth.
Last edited by: Zero on Tue 23 Nov 10 at 16:42
|
...its just the BBC will not let you hear them...
High-level anti-Israeli conspiracy in the BBC?
Cobblers, they haven't the wit or invention to pull it off.
I'm sure I've heard Palestinians bleating about their media coverage.
The coverage cannot be biased against everybody.
|
>> There are many moderate Israeli politicians who are desperate for a solution and a solution
>> now; its just the BBC will not let you hear them.
OK, lets accept for a minute the BBC is to blame for muffling the moderates. But are there not enough immoderates, given influence beyond their numbers by Israel's electoral system, to ensure any solution accpetable to even moderate Palestinians sinks??
|
>> >> There are many moderate Israeli politicians who are desperate for a solution and a
>> solution
>> >> now; its just the BBC will not let you hear them.
>>
>> OK, lets accept for a minute the BBC is to blame for muffling the moderates.
>>
>>
So the Israeli Government is not democratically elected? How interesting..
Last edited by: madf on Tue 23 Nov 10 at 16:03
|
Mdf,
I was responding to Espada's suggestion that the BBC prevent us hearing from Israel's moderate politicians. And then saying 'even if it did.....'
Of course I understand that the Knesset is democratically elected. Whether the governments produced by coalition building with a range of religious parties is representative is a different question. I am in some doubt.
It's also one on which, based as it is solely on observations of the UK media (but not just the BBC), I'm not going to get into debate.
|
"But are there not enough immoderates, given influence beyond their numbers by Israel's electoral system, to ensure any solution accpetable to even moderate Palestinians sinks??"
The Israeli electoral system is dreadful and the country suffers as a result. Weirdly though its not security or peace that causes the problems. Its the small power blocks of right wing religious Jews who are not bothered about the Peace Process on a day to day level. They want government money for their own groupings in terms of hand outs for large families where the fathers are in religious colleges all day and will not get a proper job. A bit like Hizbollah in Lebanon really!
|
Articles like the above are what is needed.
If the moderate Muslim community spoke up more often and showed their disdain for terroist extremism then this would show real integration in this country.
If everyone were to believe the news then every Muslim is an extremist and every 'white British' person is a member of the BNP.
This is wrong on so many levels that I would not know where to start.
Remember the Christian's and Muslim's lived together in relative peace for over a 1000 years.
Why can't we do this now ?
I do fear that things will get worse before they get better and innocent people will suffer / get hurt just because they look like (insert race / religion here).
Last edited by: diddy1234 on Tue 23 Nov 10 at 18:21
|
I fear things will get worse in the UK, if the British born Muslim children are anything like those in the news last week
news1.capitalbay.com/news/facebook_death_threat_boys_and.html
|
>Remember the Christian's and Muslim's lived together in relative peace for over a 1000 >years.
When was this? I am scratching my brains to think when that was, can you provide the from and to dates?
|
|
That's about the strength of it.
|
No!
The golden era of Europe was before the Spanish Inquisition. Jews, Christians and Moslems lived in total harmony in Spain and France from about 700AD to 1400AD. It was only after the marauding Christians started to invade Spain that things broke down. Moslems were sent packing to north Africa and Jews were massacred or forced to convert to Christianity.
The Christians were as bad as the Wahabi Moslems are now and probably as bad as the Childred of Israel were after 40 years in the desert and about to invade Caanan.
During the period 1000AD to 1250AD there was a huge outpouring of Jewish theologial texts from Spain and southern France, mainly by people who were not just Rabbis, but also had day jobs like doctors (Maimonides).
So all religions have their terrible times but in general, they can get on with each other without the hotheads.
|
|
I think you will find that from 790 the moorish, IE MUSLIM period was an invasion and occupation, of Europe not peaceful co existence.
|
I believe sometime after the the Crusades believe it or not.
I learned this once when watching a BBC series called the Normans.
Very good series.
Also shows why the Muslim world are a bit suspect of Christians.
|
And then didnt the christian / islam struggle pulse backwards and forwards across the near east?
Nope there has never been peace between Islam and christian merely conquest and control
|
Yes - with Jews stuck in the middle being attacked by both sides!
It has taken 2000 years for the Christians to understand that Jews are not a threat. Maybe in 600 years time, Moslem will feel the same way?
|
|
Eh ... where was I, oh yes - Divide & Rule.
|
"The golden era of Europe was before the Spanish Inquisition. Jews, Christians and Moslems lived in total harmony in Spain and France from about 700AD to 1400AD."
Hmm so the invasion of Spain by the Moors never happened in 711AD..!!!!
And the ongoing wars lasted till 1492 never happened as well?
spainforvisitors.com/archive/features/moorishinvasion.htm
BTW in the middle of all this Were the Crusades... See Kingdom of Heaven for a portrayal - recommended.. on TV tonight i think.
Last edited by: madf on Wed 24 Nov 10 at 09:11
|
>> "The golden era of Europe was before the Spanish Inquisition. Jews, Christians and Moslems lived in total harmony in Spain and France from about 700AD to 1400AD."
tinyurl.com/aonqzf
|
And this thread makes me realise why I hate organised religion so much.... why can't people just live together and allow other to live their own lives without having to force their views down our throats... and Muslims, Christians, Jews, etc are all guilty of that.
I've always taken a view when travelling of "when in Rome, do as the Romans do", its about time immigrants realized that we don't want to be changed, we are quite happy as we are... If you want to live in a country where your religious order controls the Law and how you live then go to a country where thats the case, don't try to change ours!
|
I agree with Hobby. A plague on all your houses.
John
|
|
Ooo! Have I got more than one, then? :)
|
As we're clearly talking about our English Heritage, shouldn't that be "a plaque on all your houses"?
|
|
Dentists are for plaque, not English Heritage.
|
I've got two slants on this problem:
1) Can it really be true that all people on earth have a claim to the land where their ancestors lived 2000 years ago? Or is it only some people who have that right?
2) There are dozens of religions in the world. If they are all "a good thing" and to be respected, and which one you subscribe to is just a matter of chance birth, then why do people get so worked up about "their" religion? Why not just choose another one, or none? We are all free to believe anything we want.
|
>> We are all free to believe anything we
>> want.
>>
Not according to some religions we aren't... they insist that all non-believers are either converted or....
|
Anybody see that Panorama program? Apparently some Muslim cleric issued an edict stating that watching TV and videos was sinful.
If that's the case then radical muslims shouldn't be watching Bin Laden videos!
Last edited by: Chris S on Wed 24 Nov 10 at 12:36
|
>> >> We are all free to believe anything we
>> >> want.
>> >>
>>
>> Not according to some religions we aren't... they insist that all non-believers are either converted
>> or....
>>
Then they are agreeing with me, that it is possible to change one's belief, and opt to believe in one set of rules rather than another. If they didn't think that belief was optional, then why would they ever attempt to convert anyone?
|
Religious belief is something which cannot be "proven" like Einstein's' theorems.
So the only way to judge a religion is by the acts of the its believers and how the religion treats them AT THE TIME they were carried out..
On that basis, almost all major religions fall apart.. and we should all become Amish..
I cite as evidence :The Crusages, persecution of Catholics by Protestants and vice versa, Shintoism in WW2 , sharia law and the treatment of women, Jews and non believers , abuse of children by priests, etc.. All religion supported evil doing.
Last edited by: madf on Wed 24 Nov 10 at 12:57
|
>>I cite as evidence :The Crusages, persecution of Catholics by Protestants and vice versa, Shintoism in WW2 , sharia law and the treatment of women, Jews and non believers , abuse of children by priests, etc.. All religion supported evil doing.<<
Jehovahs Witnesses never went on the Crusades, persecute the Catholics, Jews, Muslims etc.,
or committed atrocities in WW2, or any war.
|
>>> Then they are agreeing with me, that it is possible to change one's belief, and
>> opt to believe in one set of rules rather than another. If they didn't think
>> that belief was optional, then why would they ever attempt to convert anyone?
>>
Not so sure, Cliff, my take is that they believe that you are either a believer or not, and if you aren't then you have to convert or die, that is not the same as being free to believe anything you want, they are saying that non-belief is not an option, therefore you have no freedom to believe in anything else.
|
>> >>> therefore you have no freedom to believe in anything
>> else.
>>
OK, the freedom to believe is a little bit circumscribed, but they are saying that the human brain has the power to chose to believe something that formerly it didn't.
Aren't they worried that in different circumstances, it might chose to believe something completely different?
|
>> If only this Dr Taj Hargey spoke for the Palestinians there would be no Middle
>> East conflict. He understands that to live in this world you can't have two things:
>> -
>>
>> 1. Everything you want; and
>> 2. Your way in one place and someone else's way elsewhere.
It sounds like you know very little about the history of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, or that you are taking a one side Israeli line. In truth both sides will have to compromise, and accept that each has valid grievances for which they will not receive compensation. In a sense the current conflict arose from a combination of old style emperialism (British meddling) and the Nazi persecution, combined with anti-semitism that was rife throughout Europe.
I suspect that the Europe, with the help of the US, could have 'encouraged' a solution decades ago had they taken responsibility for their role in creating the modern mess.
|
Leif
I do take an Israeli side. I'm Jewish and a passionate supporter of the cause that Jews should have a homeland. It is correct that the UN plonked the Jews into the Middle East in the 1947 vote, but where else could they go? There have been Jews in Canaan, Israel, Judea and Palestine since at least 500BC - a continuous presence albeit in smaller and larger numbers.
I wish I could get you all in front of a screen and present to you a history of the middle east. You would surprised at what you would learn - and it would not be all one sided. I wish I could take you to Israel so see what good Israel does for its Arab citizens and people round the world.
But I won't have that opportunity so I am backing out of further discussion. You know where I stand. I am not an Arab or Moslem hater. If you understood how similar Jews and Moslems are you would understand the dilemmas that exist.
|
>> It is correct that the UN plonked the Jews
>> into the Middle East in the 1947 vote, but where else could they go?
>>
The UN were avoiding the real issue of states persecuting their own citizens and the reluctance of others to do anything about it.
If Israel has any moral right to exist then it's because of the Jewish populations forced to leave Arab countries and not as a reparation for German genocide.
|
Espada III said:
>>
>> I do take an Israeli side. I'm Jewish and a passionate supporter of the cause
>> that Jews should have a homeland. It is correct that the UN plonked the Jews
>> into the Middle East in the 1947 vote, but where else could they go? There
>> have been Jews in Canaan, Israel, Judea and Palestine since at least 500BC - a
>> continuous presence albeit in smaller and larger numbers.
>>
>> I wish I could get you all in front of a screen and present to
>> you a history of the middle east. You would surprised at what you would learn
>> - and it would not be all one sided. I wish I could take you
>> to Israel so see what good Israel does for its Arab citizens and people round
>> the world.
I am aware of the history of the Middle East, which is more than can say of many British Jews I have spoken to. One Jewish lad said I was evil because of my views on Israel, but as a result of discussions he did some reading, and he has a much more moderate viewpoint. I know there is much good to say about Israel. The fact that a modern largely democratic industrialised nation with world class universities was set up in such a short time is incredible. It does have a law system, non-Muslims have almost equal rights, and non-Jewish Israelis do have a much better life than Muslims in most of the surrounding Arab states. But the Arabs in the occupied territories cannot vote, and have land forcibly confiscated. Yes, in about 1900 the number of Jews in the area was tiny (a few % of the population I think), and as you say, post 1945 Europe was full of homeless Jews whose neighbours had often helped the Nazis murder their friends and relatives. Yes, where else could they go is a good question. The whole history is a tangled mess. By the way I fully support the state of Israel, and I can understand the very real existential concerns of Israelis. But I do think both sides must compromise. And of course there is Hezbollah and Iran who actively try to destroy Israel. What a mess.
Last edited by: Leif on Thu 25 Nov 10 at 23:19
|
>> Just happened across this article.
Very interesting. There are a number of Muslims who are quite vocal in their dislike of these nutters. Ed Hussain is one who has already been mentioned. I think he helped found the Quilliam foundation. I think one of the Guantanamo Bay inmates also speaks out against them. Ironic really.
|
I dont normally read all the columns but his stood out so I had a look.
Ive always been of the opinion that Muslims are better to judge other Muslims as they understand their own faith better. I actually read that article and came away with a better basic understanding of the general issue.
Interesting the rock and a hard place re the Saudis. Id never really made the connection having only made a slight effort to understand extremism.
|
The story so far Re: USrael and Palestine in a condensed 3 minute video.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=p9r9ACkpFVk&feature=player_embedded
|
A very intelligent article on extremism - R.P.
