interesting point way above about parents sending their kids off to pakistan/( replace with any country in the indian sub-continent) and then later getting a nasty shock. its a very silly thing for parents to do- because one of the problems i can see ( and this is generally the case for most diasporic cultures all over the world) is that these parents are harking back to some ( probably imagined in the first place) golden era of their youth or sth and they imagine everything ‘back home’ is still the same. Oh so safe and innocent. ‘Pure’.

Wake up and smell the coffee.

i know my parents used to think the same thing. i lived ‘abroad’ since i was a baby and when i was a little terror they used to say to me if i was naughty ‘we’ll send you off to bangladesh!’ and then later, after i’d spent 2 teenage years living in dhaka and running wild ( given the chaos and crazy nature of the of that country ( and generally the sub-continent)- not surprising) by the time we’d left it again the poor things gave a sigh of relief and you know what – i never heard them utter that threat again! ha.

as someone wise once pointed out coventry is much less of a trouble spot than karachi.

–
oh and in the comment above – i meant over and above the laws that already exist ( e.g. killing etcl) i guess i the meant social policing type thing.

I do get to hear examples of people committing crimes in other communities, but the difference is that the likes of Ian Huntely etc did not commit crimes in the name of their religions.
Here, the situation is a bit different.
We have a group of people, who repeatedly quote (mis-quote?) Quran and go around killing innocent people, and even try to justify it.
Also, these are not just one-off cases, it’s happening with an alarming frequency.
In this scenario, definitely some responsibility does fall on the whole community’s shoulder to stop them, not because we are guilty of “their crimes” but because they are “using our religion for their own benefits.

b’shalom

bananabrain

I would, but I don’t really believing in constantly dredging up history to play tit-for-tat games. Though its important to know that for a more broad perspective. The only ones who need such history lessons are those who think western enlightenment is phenomena that has been around for centuries.

I’d like to see evidence that people here actually care, other than those who want to villify him, and those who want to defend him.

He did not want to be dictated to by the media so he keeps defending Qaradawi against the more aburd claims, though I agree he is not exactly a savoury character.

The issue with the Jewish Deputies making a big fuss over the Standard Reporter was though truly rubbish. The Deputies are like the MCB in the sense they get so easily annoyed, when they could not see it was a simple analogy. I cannot see a man like Ken being an anti-semite and to paint him as that is pure stupidity. It was just the Mail and Standard grinding their own axes and they lost in the face of public opinion. So the only real issue here is that of Qaradawi I’d say.

i do have to say, though, without meaning to cause offence, that actions – historical or contemporary – speak louder than words. simply saying “these guys don’t represent us” is not enough. if you want islam to be associated with non-violence, you’re going to have to make the effort to rein in the people who think that putting the boot (and the axe/ball-bearing/bullet) into the kuffar is the answer. saying “they’re not real muslims” is just evading the issue and comes across as weaselly. plenty of people (muslims and others) think they *are* “real muslims” and they themselves certainly believe they are doing something islamic. we’ve all – not just muslims – got to take back our religions from the extremists. actively, not by whinging about it. when someone in my own community says to me, “well, those muslims, they just all want to kill us”, i can say right back to them “that’s absolutely wrong” – and be able to speak from personal experience from my own muslim friends, because i *know better*; i’m not just relying on self-serving victim-speak.

b’shalom

bananabrain

btw: i hope i’m not coming across as too strident – i actually work quite a lot in interfaith dialogue, but it seems that people are able to be a bit more forthright on this site. i certainly welcome anyone who wants to visit http://www.comparative-religion.com, where i moderate on the judaism board.

I think that Blue Mountain was indicating which hardline Islamist groups disagree with Sufism, as indicated in his/her last sentence.

Historically, many orthdox Islamic groups and religious authorities have regarded Sufism as being heretics. One of the reasons why many Sufis ended up in the Indian subcontinent was because they were persecuted in certain parts of the Middle East.

Some of their beliefs are in direct contradiction of orthodox Islam, whether we’re talking historically (eg. the example in my previous paragraph, along with Aurangzeb and his supporters amongst the Islamic clergy at the time), or more recently, eg. Wahabbism, the Taliban, etc.

You are humourless dry person.

Stephen, here is a link detailing some similarities and differences between Sikhism and Sufism:

http://www.sikhs.org/relig_su.htm

The writings of a number of Sufi saints are included within Sikh scriptures; also, some notable Sufis like Bulleh Shah (his poems are very famous in northern Indian and Pakistan) joined the last human Sikh Guru’s army in the struggles against the fanatical OBL-type Emperor 300 years ago (just to give you a better idea of the history of this sect and some of its adherents).

Sufism or Tassawwuf is the spiritual aspect of Islam and is as old as the religion iteself. To equate it with the malformed neoCon ideas of HuT, as this site has done, does not mean they are the same thing. Bear in mind that the HuT regard the Sufis as the enemy as well!