Iranian President in need of slap


by Al-Hack
16th December, 2005 at 8:41 am    

Siddartha at Golmal Press puts it like this:

When MPACuk makes horrendous racist and anti-Semitic statements in the UK, Muslim Brits should know that at some point they stop speaking on behalf of Muslims and, instead, on behalf of and paying lip service to European ultra-right wing movements. So when Ahmadinejad spouts anti-Semitic garbage, Muslims especially should know that it, and the subsequent political fallout is part of some fucked up political dance of his own making.

Ain’t that putting it nicely? I say the brotha needs a slap. Or get laid. But I prefer the first option. Oh, and well said.


              Post to del.icio.us


Filed in: Religion,The World






114 Comments below   |  

Reactions: Twitter, blogs
  1. Pickled Politics » Iran wins Arab Elections. “Mission Accomplished!”

    [...] It wasn’t that long ago that PP was discussing Iran. As many have been predicting since The War on Terrorâ„¢ started to go astray, Iran is now frequently uttered in the same breath as Iraq. [...]


  2. Pickled Politics » The Return of Anti-Semitism

    [...] I say return, but had it ever left? Asians blogs or similar discussion fora often debate the undeniable rise in Islamophobia which has occurred over recent years. But, due to the obvious fact that there are less Jewish Asians, the issue of anti-semitism is not frequently addressed. Pickled Politics has objected to overt anti-semitism from the Iranian president and also criticised bodies like the MCB, who manage to overlook Ahmadinejad’s idiocy. We’ve come to expect anti-Jewish rhetoric from similarly-minded leaders, but is Europe following suit? [...]




  1. raz — on 16th December, 2005 at 8:58 am  

    Disgraceful comments by the Iranian PM. Makes me proud that, in stark contrast to Ahmadinejad, Musharaf has been making a concerted effort to engage with Israel, which should see full diplomatic ties between Pakistan and Israel established in the not too distant future.

  2. Bikhair — on 16th December, 2005 at 9:18 am  

    (My comments from the Indigo Jo Blogs- Big Up! Bro. Yusuf)

    “I am far more insulted by the fact that this dirty Shiite in Iran insults the companions of Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) and makes the most disparaging remarks about our noble mother Aisha (radiyallahu anhu). I wish we Muslim would talk about that.

    As Muslims why should we care what this guy says about anything else knowing the Rafidah Shiite understanding or lack thereof of the Sahabah? What could be more important than them?

    Let the Holocaust people deal with his comments about the Holocaust. As Muslims, it isnt our fight, it isnt our concern, we have Allah to fear and Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) to obey.

    Way too much Hizbiyah going on on this forum.”

  3. rain man — on 16th December, 2005 at 9:21 am  

    It’s no worse than Israel saying Iraq had WMD so other countries would attack the place and led slaughter over 100,000+ civilians. Israel is pushing America to do the same with Iran and has actually threatened to nuke Iran’s nuclear ambition.

    We all know who the real criminals are here.

  4. Unity — on 16th December, 2005 at 9:55 am  

    Come on, folks, get with the context.

    Ahmadinejad’s been stumbling from crisis to humiliation and back to crisis since his election, hamstung at every stage by the byzantine complexities of the Iranian political system – how many candidates for Oil minister has be put up so far?

    Ranting about Israel is just a bit of good old fashioned bread and circuses – he’s getting nowhere fast with the political classes so he rolls out a bit of inflammatory anti-Israeli rhetoric which he knows will play well with the mob.

  5. BushDone911 — on 16th December, 2005 at 10:16 am  

    Ranting about Iran is just a bit of good old fashioned bread and circuses – he’s getting nowhere fast with the political classes so he rolls out a bit of inflammatory anti-Iran rhetoric which he knows will play well with the mob.

  6. Steve M — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:06 am  

    BushDone911, you’ve quoted an example of Holocaust Denial that was originally published, anonymously, on a site that brought us “Israelis Kidnapped Christian Peacemakers” and “The group loyalty of Jews was problematic for nations long before the advent of the State of Israel”. The site contains other racist items that I will not link to here.

    What’s your point?

    rain man, it’s time you went back to your medication, mate.

  7. j0nz — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:09 am  

    My god rain-main you are a serious dumbass. 100,000+ civilian deaths? Retard! Try the left wing site

    http://www.iraqbodycount.net/

    Thanks.

  8. TottenhamLad — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:16 am  

    You never know, a few more comments like this and the IDF might give him a little slap – they do have the technology:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/4528696.stm

    …unmanned Israeli drone…

  9. Siddharth — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:20 am  

    (Like Bikhair, I too would like to re-post my comment I sent to Indigo Jo Blogs)

    It has been said that there is a thin and permeable line between anti-Zionists and jew haters; just as there is such a line between those who produce critiques of Islamism and those who are simply racists. Muslims who complain about the real and pervasive anti-Islamism which is often borne of plain and simple racism do not have a leg to stand on when they themselves buy into anti-Zionism but are at the same time willing to tow the line of anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial.

    It is possible to be anti-Zionist without being anti-Semitic just as Muslims are correct to demand anti-Islamist voices without the ignorant racism. Muslims should be aware that they do not need to be anti-Semitic in order to support the rights of Palestinians. South Asian Muslims who live in the West come hard-wired for Hindu-Muslim sectarianism seem only too willing to add on the additional baggage of anti-Semitism which they accept carte blanche from the legacy of anti-Semitism which is active in the West. I am not sure why that is because Jews were never part of the social make up of communities in South Asia. Muslim immigrants are willing to absorb some of the best traits of the West, why are they so willing to absorb anti-Semitism, which is undoubtedly one of the worst?

    When Muslim politicians like Ahmadinejad deny the Holocaust and speak in the voice of anti-Semitism, he speaks for the entire Muslim world, whether they want him to or not. Muslims should be able to reject this kind of reactionary real-politik as Ahmadinejad’s sentiment and not the sentiment of Muslims such as you or I. They should know that Ahmadinejad is making these remarks for political reasons and not because he is a Muslim. This applies to any politician or organisation who speaks on “behalf of Muslims”.

  10. TottenhamLad — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:20 am  
  11. BushDone911 — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:27 am  

    “What’s your point?

    rain man, it’s time you went back to your medication, mate. ”

    Does the Truth hurt your thick skull that much Steve?

    I certainly don’t deny the holocaust but it has been fully exploited by some groups for their nefarious ends.

  12. Steve M — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:49 am  

    “When Muslim politicians like Ahmadinejad deny the Holocaust and speak in the voice of anti-Semitism, he speaks for the entire Muslim world, whether they want him to or not.” – Siddharth

    Of course I agree with your post but I do feel that your comment above is a little harsh. Few people, Jews included, feel that Ahmadinejad speaks for all Muslims. Even so, as a Jew I am concerned when I read commenters on this forum who echo his views, just as I’m reassured when I read the views of the thinking majority of PP posters who condemn him.

    This Christmas my family are going, as usual, to my wife’s parents in Germany (she’s German). We will stay in a village where the overwhelming majority of people are friendly to me although they are of course aware of my ethnicity. The village is just one, like many hundreds of others throughout Germany and this year like most others, someone is bound to point out to me the dozen or so houses that once belonged to Jewish families or the plaque on the site of the burnt-down synagogue, since converted to a bank.

  13. Steve M — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:56 am  

    Does the Truth hurt your thick skull that much Steve?

    Absolutely not. It’s just that I don’t see it much in your posts, the sites that you link us to or, come to that, your name.

  14. raz — on 16th December, 2005 at 12:06 pm  

    This is why Musharaff’s dialogue with Israel is so inspiring.. Hopefully relations between the most powerful Islamic nation Pakistan and Israel can act as a catalyst for others in the Muslim world to take heed and abandon their anti-semitism.

    http://www.pakistanisraelpeace.org/

  15. BushDone911 — on 16th December, 2005 at 12:16 pm  

    Look how much shit Israel talks…

    Saddam’s WMD Moved to Syria, An Israeli Says :
    http://www.nysun.com/article/24480?access=724617

    If at first you don’t succeed, lie, lie again!

  16. Steve M — on 16th December, 2005 at 12:20 pm  

    Indeed raz – nice site.

    As I’ve said before on this forum, there are rights and wrongs on all sides in most political debates. However, as long as we view the world through the lenses of racism, we will never see clearly or truly.

  17. Don — on 16th December, 2005 at 12:21 pm  

    Once the cospiracy nuts get in, the holocaust deniers can’t be far behind.

  18. BushDone911 — on 16th December, 2005 at 12:59 pm  

    Don – read a dictionary moron.

  19. Bushdidintifadairaqiinsuregencealqaedakilledbobbyewing — on 16th December, 2005 at 1:06 pm  

    We all know who the real criminals are here

    If only it were that simple.
    We seem to beheading inexorably towards another war. I don’t think it can be avoided.
    Iranians have a right plonker for a president but a dangerous fool nonetheless.
    Still, he had one valid point and that is that the creation of Israel and Israeli attitudes cannot be understood without reference to WW2 and the holocaust. What the Persian plonker needs to realise, though, is that Jewish links to Palestine stretch back further than anyone else in that area. Israel is here to stay.

  20. Don — on 16th December, 2005 at 1:20 pm  

    Bush – coded message to my secret masters. Twat.

  21. Col. Mustafa — on 16th December, 2005 at 1:31 pm  

    Great, more dumb comments from muslim leaders.
    Way to go Iranian man, forget about the state of your country , lets cuss the jews.
    Yep, that’ll help.

    “As Muslims why should we care what this guy says about anything else knowing the Rafidah Shiite understanding or lack thereof of the Sahabah? What could be more important than them?

    Let the Holocaust people deal with his comments about the Holocaust. As Muslims, it isnt our fight, it isnt our concern, we have Allah to fear and Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) to obey.”

    Another great method, just ignore the whole thing.
    Who cares what he says, he doesn’t represent us, we got enough problems as it is.
    So obviously the entire muslim global community doesn’t count here.
    This doesn’t help the situation, but then i suppose it depends if you think there is a problem in the first place.
    Many muslims feel as though theres no problem, were cool.
    Yeh sure, there do seem to be muslims in other countries that tend to strap explosives to themselves in order to kill other people, but that happens with all religions and people and cats and dogs and stuff.
    Thats not my problem, its thiers.
    There obviously not following the religion correctly, there using it to kill people.

    Im so tired of ignorance, and people talking shit just to satisfy thier immediate needs in whatever circle thier in.
    Ignoring aint the best way about this, but instead a muslim movement that not only condemns but also puts people like Ahmadinejad straight about the crap he talks must come out soon.
    I don’t mean some pussy foot muslims that just go, ” oh yes, very bad, we dont agree, they not muslim, they dont follow like we do, we condemn”. None of that bullshit, but substantial arguments to refute what these idiots are saying, and also speaking hopefully on behalf of muslims that just wanna live in peace.
    Muslims have to speak out properly against idiot muslims, its the only way.

  22. bananabrain — on 16th December, 2005 at 1:48 pm  

    first of all, i want to say that i am disgusted by the almost routine appearance of holocaust-denying conspiracy trolls on this thread. if you ask me, it should be a bit more aggressively policed – such things would not be tolerated in a dialogue forum, but then i’m not in charge of policy here.

    second of all, if anyone doubts the holocaust they ought to watch at least some of claude lanzman’s 8-hour memoir, “shoah” – it’s unemotional; hundreds of victims talk about what happened to them. the idea that anyone could make something like this up or exaggerate it frankly beggars belief. the idea that it’s a plot to get something for nothing is even more sickening.

    my wife’s father was in auschwitz. he has the tattoo on his arm. his parents, grandparents, uncles, aunts and cousins and his little sister of 5 were all murdered. the effects, physical, mental and emotional, on him and his brother, the only survivors – and on his subsequent life with his wife and daughter – are still coming out every day, sixty-odd years later. evidence? i’ll show you fecking evidence.

    not that i expect anything more from you, bikhair, but if you don’t think the holocaust is the concern of muslims, i can only say that whoever forgets history is bound to repeat it – and by the look of darfur, i can certainly say that some muslims (and not only muslims, but a lot of other people too) aren’t exactly learning the lesson.

    “rain man” and “bushdone911″ – you can blame israel all you like for whatever you like, make up whatever ridiculous conspiracies that help you blame other people for your own lack of intelligence or whatever it is you’re compensating for. goodness knows the jewish people are used to those like you, but 3500 years later we’re still here and the empires and regimes that sought to eliminate us are a memory.

    ahmedinejad’s bread and circuses routine (good simile, that) fails to take account of some basic realities. the most fundamental is the idea that jews should be “repatriated” to europe. what he doesn’t mention is that over 50% of the population of israel came from countries like egypt, morocco, turkey, yemen, libya, algeria, syria, lebanon, iran, iraq and afghanistan. in fact, the president of israel and its defence minister were both born in iran!

    one might even say, if one wanted, that by expelling the jewish communities of the arab world, (most of which, incidentally, had been there 1000 years before the arabs, not that anyone’s counting, the community in tehran in particular dating back to the persian empire of darius and cyrus the great) which was done in 1948 after the establishment of the state of israel, the resulting refugees were actually creating an even bigger problem for the arabs of palestine by swelling israel’s population. curiously, nobody ever seems to bring that up. i wonder if a home in germany or austria, the US or canada is really terribly relevant to those non-european jews, who were thrown out of their homes no less than many palestinians undoubtedly were. most of them, like my cousin’s wife’s family for example, had to walk across the middle east with nothing but a suitcase they were given 15 minutes to pack one friday night.

    long before the war in iraq, there was the 1941 “farhud” in baghdad. considering israel didn’t exist then and the palestinian refugee tragedy had not yet occurred, i wonder how much this did to sour relations?

    http://www.midrash.org/articles/farhud/

    i’m not trying to be controversial here. i just think that people who fail to realise the depth and complexity of the middle east and prefer to believe half-baked anti-semitic conspiracy theories are doing the islamic world a profound disservice. islam is supposed to be about doing the right thing, not using others as an excuse.

    b’shalom

    bananabrain

  23. BushDone911 — on 16th December, 2005 at 1:52 pm  

    Banananbrain – calling people names when the evidence infringes upon your fake glass world is neither original or mature.

  24. raz — on 16th December, 2005 at 1:56 pm  

    bananabrain – are you an Israeli? What is your opinion of the recent dialogue between Pakistani and Israeli diplomats? Is there political consenus in Israel about engaging with Pakistan? Do you think this will be well recieved by the Israeli public? I’ve stated before that Israel and Pakistan have more in common that most nations on earth – relations are long overdue. Hopefully it will be a boon not just for Pakistan and Israel but also the wider Muslim-Jewish relationship.

  25. Unity — on 16th December, 2005 at 2:22 pm  

    “the creation of Israel and Israeli attitudes cannot be understood without reference to WW2 and the holocaust.”

    Only to some degree – to get the full picture you have to track back to the Balfour declaration of 1917 which is where the inital promise to create a Jewish state in Palestine comes from.

    There is a very simple perspective on Western actions of the era which needs to be considered – Britain has a state religion (Christianity) while the US is notable for the religiosity of its population, even if it has a secular constitution.

    As such, neither could deny Jews the right to their ‘ancestral homeland’ without undermining their own religion.

  26. Steve M — on 16th December, 2005 at 2:27 pm  

    I think that closer relations between Pakistan and Israel will be an extremely good thing and will be well received by a large majority of Israelis. I also believe that it won’t damage the cause of the Palestinians and could do a lot to improve the wider Muslim-Jewish relationship, including here in the UK.

    I also think that because of the sensitivity of this issue amongst the citizens of many Muslim countries, a softly-softly approach will be adopted. One step at a time but let’s hope that we can see an Israeli cricket team giving the Pakistanis a sound thrashing some time soon.

  27. raz — on 16th December, 2005 at 2:34 pm  

    “Israeli cricket team giving the Pakistanis a sound thrashing some time soon”

    LOL Steve, after the massace Pakistan inflicted on England yesterday, you’ll be waiting a long time :)

  28. Bushdidintifadairaqiinsuregencealqaedakilledbobbyewing — on 16th December, 2005 at 3:00 pm  

    You have an agenda and we’re not willing to play.
    So fuck off back to chavsite bushdone911, or wherever it is you ply your faux philosophies.

    Bananabrain, if you want more people to read your posts dont make em so effing long.

  29. FOB — on 16th December, 2005 at 3:24 pm  

    Why are Iranians and subcontinenetal Musims so anti Israeli and anti Jew?
    I can understand Palestinian Arabs have some grievance against Jews but all Muslims?
    I suspect its some sort of “We are more muslims than the Arabs” complex which most converted (non Arab) Muslims have .To prove their Islamic credentials to the Arabs they chose the easiest way : hate Israel

    As far as Musharraf making peace with Israel, again I doubt that even 1% of the population of Pakistan support him. It is just a feeble attempt to throw a spanner in the works of the emerging India-Isreal axis.

  30. Al-Hack — on 16th December, 2005 at 7:42 pm  

    Have deleted some of the comments by conspiracy nuts.

  31. Bikhair — on 16th December, 2005 at 10:48 pm  

    Raz,

    About the only rational thing Pakistanki Musrhaf has been doing is having a civilized “dialogue” with the Isrealis. Unfortunately he needs to have a very serious and if need be ass whooping dialogue with all the bidah merchants in Pakistan. Thats another issue.

    It is one of the evils and ignorance of hizbiyah tpo boycot this country and that country. Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) had trading and diplomatic relations with Jews that we can use as a precedence of a just relationship between them and Muslims. Obviosly we arent at war with Jews, though some takfiris and hizbis would like to think that we are. In the meantime we should take from the example or rather the Sunnah of Prophet Muhammed (sallallahu alaihi wa salam) as a means to relate to the Jews. You guys may want to refer to the book of mortgages in Sahih Bukhari for details.

  32. Don — on 16th December, 2005 at 10:56 pm  

    Bikhair,

    Quite agree.

  33. Jay Singh — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:13 pm  

    raz

    Pakistan-Israel peace (huh? Peace? Have they ever been at war?) is motivated by the panic felt by the Pakistani Army rulers at the growing intimacy and friendship between India and Israel which is a cultural as well as an economic, political and military brotherhood. Of particular frightening nature is the military alliance between India and Israel.

    Pakistan also realises that the Arab nations couldnt give a damn supporting Pakistan against India and have probably begun to realise that Islamic brotherhood means jackshit in the global world of realpolitik and so wish to do damage limitation as far as the dissemination of economic-military ties between India and Israel are concerned. As with everything to do with Pakistan, it all comes down to India – that is the Islamic Republic’s mono-maniacal obsession.

    Israel gets friendship (because contrary to what the raging anti-semites of the Islamic world believe, Israel really does want peace and friendship) – and she also potentially gets another base for Mossad to open up an office.

    The Pakistani Army also has a proud record of killing Palestinians, of course, when General Zia ul Haq sent in the boys on the request of King Hussein of Jordan to crush a Palestinian uprising – thousands were massacred. Along with their exploits in Bangladesh, that makes the Pakistani Army and by implication the Pakistani state one of the biggest blood-letters of the modern ummah and Palestinian people. And they say Israel should be wiped off the face of the Earth ;-)

  34. Tanvir — on 16th December, 2005 at 11:34 pm  

    With the anti-semitism… i think we have seen enough to safely conclude that this Iranian president guy speaks his mind and if he hated the religion of Judasim he would have said it long ago.

    He really doesnt understand tact.. i mean half the stuff the said was basicly true, but he spoilt it all with an inaccuracy by saying the holocaust didnt happen…but at the same time contradicted himself!! – when he said, the Europeans committed the genocide so why did they make the Palestinians pay the price for thier crime.

    I still dont understand where this guy came from and his quick rise to power, if you’re George W Bush and you need to take over Iran before your term runs out this guy is your dream candidate for Iranian president, he should cause enough blunders for Bush to convince the world [not that the world requires much logical/truthful convincing with these issues..some lesser of the two evils excuse normally works to cover up a lie anyway] that you need to take over Iran.

  35. Mount Lebanon — on 17th December, 2005 at 1:29 am  

    Bikhair,

    It is one of the evils and ignorance of hizbiyah tpo boycot this country and that country. Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) had trading and diplomatic relations with Jews that we can use as a precedence of a just relationship between them and Muslims.

    Your joking right, is this before or after Muhammad murdered, enslaved or exiled the Arabian jewish tribes Banu Nadir, the Banu Qaynuqa’ and the Banu Qurayza.

  36. Bikhair — on 17th December, 2005 at 2:47 am  

    Mount Lebanon,

    “Your joking right, is this before or after Muhammad murdered, enslaved or exiled the Arabian jewish tribes Banu Nadir, the Banu Qaynuqa’ and the Banu Qurayza. ”

    You cant murder those you go to war with. Ensalvement, or banishment were conditions of lost battles and the victory of the Muslims over thier enemies. Ofcourse I was speaking about during times of peace and security not fitna and subsequent Jihad. Now before you get all relative on me point to the exception of Prophet Muhammed’s (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) actions. I certainly can and you will be very surprised about what I have to say.

    Now go and enjoy your kufrmas.

  37. fob — on 17th December, 2005 at 4:51 am  

    The emerging Indo Israeli alliance is going to be an important bulwark in the fight against Islamic fundamentalism in Asia.
    Israel is a democracy and the next democracy due East is India.In between are an assortment of fundamentalist mullahcracies, monarchies and military dictatorships of the Islamic Ummah.
    There is no way in the world that Israel would allow Iran to go nuclear.Expect airstrikes very soon…

  38. Vikrant — on 17th December, 2005 at 5:28 am  

    Israeli cricket team giving the Pakistanis a sound thrashing some time soon.

    Infact most Israeli cricketers are of Indian origin (Bene Israelis) who come from Muslim town called Alibaug which is just south of Bombay. I’ve been there, ironically it is probably the only place in the world where Jews and Muslims live side by side unaffected by anti-semitism that has griped Islamic world.

    As for Pakisan being most powerful Muslim country. I say bullcox. Turkey,Malaysia even UAE are far more powerful.

  39. FOB — on 17th December, 2005 at 5:35 am  

    Pakistan being the most powerful Muslim country means precisely squat ! Big fish in miniscule and stagnating pond.

    The real powers in the world today are the USA, EU, China and India.

  40. Sunny — on 17th December, 2005 at 7:57 am  

    Alright boys, stop waving your dicks around again – it’s getting tiresome. Somehow I don’t think all those millions of poor and starving people in India care which has a bigger GDP or more nukes or more standing at the United Nations. So enough of the silly bravado please, it makes us all look silly.

    Vikrant – your knowledge may not extend as far as knowing that Pakistan is the only Muslim country with nukes and a well developed ICBM capabilities. Anyway, this is a typically superficial and stupid conversation initiated by you guys. If you want to carry it further, go to bloody Bharat Rakshak.

  41. Vikrant — on 17th December, 2005 at 8:42 am  

    Sunny, if a country’s power power were to be determined by its ICBM’s and nukes then India would be powerful than most of the world.

    Moreover Pakistani Nuke program wasnt exactly indegenous. isnt it?

    Now that proves my point that you guys will never tolerate a single criticism of Pakistan and balance it out by criticising India.

  42. El Cid — on 17th December, 2005 at 9:02 am  

    Since you’re being silly, that was some Champions League draw huh? C’mon you XXXXXX

    No, no, stick to the thread. This statement looked interesting: Israel is a democracy and the next democracy due East is India.
    What about Iraq? *ducks for cover*
    Indeed, more to the point: what about Iran? It has a limited form of democracy. True, all those reformers were deemed ineligible and the result was skewed by that. But still…
    I can’t think of any example of two fully-fledged (i.e. not Iran) democracies going to war with each other — ever. But what if you blend democracy with a militant religion? Discuss.

  43. El Cid — on 17th December, 2005 at 9:13 am  

    I’ve been there, ironically it is probably the only place in the world where Jews and Muslims live side by side unaffected by anti-semitism that has gripped Islamic world.

    Vikrant, I wouldn’t say there isn’t any anti-semitimism in London. It’s far too big a city for that. But I know a street in Clapton, East London where a synagogue and a mosque are right next door to each. In fact, despite large Jewish and Moslem populations there are no tensions that I know of in north Hackney. You have to understand that the Jews in this area — as opposed to those in north-west London — are pretty fundamentalist. They wear their religion for all to see.
    In fact, I see Hassidic Jews getting on the tube all the time at Finsbury Park , right next to the mosque and an Algerian community that may have connections to some very extreme elements.
    Shame that people of all races simply getting on is not deemed newsworthy.

  44. Mirax — on 17th December, 2005 at 9:33 am  

    El cid, Iran is clearly a theocracy, not a democracy.

    The mere fact of ”elections” being held is not the singular defining feature of a democracy, but the fact of how free and open (to a variety of candidates) such elections are is, as is the actual executive power that is invested in a people’s parliament (not the case in Iran when a small unelected group of mullahs make the real decisions) as is the independence of the judiciary and press and the health of civic organisations.

  45. Sunny — on 17th December, 2005 at 10:28 am  

    Sunny, if a country’s power power were to be determined by its ICBM’s and nukes then India would be powerful than most of the world.

    Err no it wouldn’t Vikrant. India’s nuke arsenal isn’t even vaguely close to the USA, Russia or even the UK to a lesser degree. Even China has more in number. If you’re going to try and be clever, at least do a bit more reading first.

  46. Steve M — on 17th December, 2005 at 10:40 am  

    I would certainly call Iraq a democracy at this time. It would be an insult to its brave and long-suffering people not to do so.

    Clearly Iran is not democratic in any way that we would accept but, in any case it could not be described as free. Natan Sharansky’s ‘town square test’ is useful here. Can anyone go to a town square in any particular country and say whatever he wants without fear of punishment. This question gives a good quick guide to whether a country is free or not.

    The soap-box and the blog (it’s online equivalent) are the true measures of democratic freedom.

  47. Steve M — on 17th December, 2005 at 10:42 am  

    Sorry, thats its not it’s
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    .
    Sorry, that’s that’s not thats

  48. Mount Lebanon — on 17th December, 2005 at 12:46 pm  

    Bikhair

    “You cant murder those you go to war with.”

    What? Are you suggesting Muhammad’s murder of the males of the Banu Qurayza after their surrender was a just act of a prophet! In the immediate aftermath of the massacre, the Muslims benefited substantially from the Qurayza’s assets which they seized as booty. The land and property acquired helped the Muslims gain their economic independence. The military strength of the Muslim community of Medina grew due to weapons taken, and the fact that captured women and children taken as slaves were sold for horses and more weapons, facilitating enlargement of the Muslim armed forces for further conquests. Muhammad sounds more like a brigand.
    Conversely, the Jewish tribe of the Qurayza ceased to exist. Muhammad ever the ladies man, claimed as a wife a woman (Rayhana) previously married to one of the slaughtered Qurayza tribesmen. I would argue that Rayhana was raped as she surely didn’t countenance Muhammad’s advances while her murdered husband’s body was still warm. Considering that being “mocked” one of Mohammed’s favorite reasons for having people killed, is it any wonder his followers have a difficult time with humor?

    Bikhair, you sound like a convert or “revert” to Islam. In my experience I have found that those who convert to Islam are often the least impressive members of Western society, the most unable to cope (save for that special category –the innocent female who marries a plausible Muslim spouse, without really understanding the nature, or peculiar hold, of Islam)” Don’t forget Yvonne Ridley the dozy bint for whom the phrase ‘Stockholm syndrome’ could have been invented.
    Up to a point, I can see the attraction of Islam for disgruntled, rebellious or criminal men. They can justify their criminal or deviant behavior as a religiously sanctioned jihad against Kafir society, or working class rebellion against café society. The big attraction too, and I think Theodore Dalrymple mentions this, is the God given right to behave as they please while demanding the most stringent moral standards from their wives. This is something that thuggish, Neanderthal men of all religions and cultures would like, and Islam gives it to them and tells them it has Allah’s approval.
    What the attraction is for Western women I just cannot imagine. But it may, in some cases, be a kind of Marie Antoinette syndrome – assuming they are not so stupid as to marry a Saudi, they know that they can stop this nonsense any time they want.
    I guess Islam answered your Spiritual Search. You know, when you are looking for something to regulate your life and give meaning to existence and things like that. Lots of people are like that. It’s called finding The Answer. That’s always to have: The Answer. And if it can separate you, or signify your alienation from, the circumambient society with its certifiable dreck, so much the better. And the company, the companions, the umma. How few people are willing to attend the Party of Life unaccompanied by a creed, and the more manacling it is, the more totally regulating it is, the more, perversely, it can seem like freedom.
    Is that the only choice — the utter idiocy of Western decadence, or the utter idiocy of Islam? Is there no Third Way? Or for that matter, Fourth, or Fifth, or Sixth?

  49. El Cid — on 17th December, 2005 at 12:51 pm  

    Yawn.
    Yes, yes, Mirax, but ol’ Ahmadinejad does have some public backing thank you very much (just like Hitler did).
    As for your lesson on the fundamental tenets of a liberal democracy, that’s very kind of you, but I’m fully aware of the differences.
    It’s a question of degree. Clearly the promise of Khatami was not fulfilled but every reportage at ground level that I’ve seen suggests that there’s little more freedom in Iran that you would care to admit. There certainly seems to be a growing generation gap. Open your eyes more and you may see some of the subtleties out there.
    Hence, when you say, Stevie M, that “Clearly Iran is not democratic in any way,” I would have to say that I wholeheartedly disagree with you.

  50. lee y — on 17th December, 2005 at 2:33 pm  

    some people hate eminem but im a big fan i wouldnt dream of hurting another human being the person that did it is a low life (L)

  51. Mirax — on 17th December, 2005 at 2:50 pm  

    El Cid,

    It wasn’t my intention to sound patronising or give you a primer on what a democracy is but your insistence that Iran is a de facto democracy has to be backed up by facts. Perhaps you’d link to those reports that add so much nuance and whatsit, ah yes, subtlety, to your assesment of Iran. FWIW , I am quite familiar with Iran and have a very deep respect for persian culture and the people. That doesn’t mean i am willing to shut my eyes to the fact that the country is a backward mullah-o-cracy at the moment.

  52. El Cid — on 17th December, 2005 at 3:41 pm  

    It’s certainly not my kind of government but who am I to judge how other countries are run, unless of course my security interests are threatened (we’ll leave that thread for another day).
    The point is that political systems evolve and improve over time. Remember, the Swiss only gave women the vote in 1971. Does that mean democracy there is only 34 years old? (That would make Britain’s only 87 years old).
    Most blacks were effectively barred from voting in some U.S. states until the Voting Rights Act was approved in 1965 (so on a strict interpretation that would make the great U.S. democracy only 40 years-old — we’ll gloss over the fact that thousands of blacks in Florida were de facto unable to vote 6 years ago).
    Indeed, disabled Londoners were only granted the same rights as other commuters last week, when the Mayor phased out Routemasters!! You get my point?
    The fact of the matter is that the Iranian state is more sophisticated than you give it credit and relatively democratic if we compare it with, say, Syria or Saudi Arabia or, maybe even, China.
    It has a constitution (granted, not my kind of constitution) and a system of government and legal framework. There is the rule of law rather than the wielding of arbitary political power. That is crucial. It is akin to the social contract idea that underpinned Europe’s gradual transition from absolute monarchy to modern democracy. That gives me hope that there is sufficient slack in the Iranian system to allow for internal change. But of course as the failure of Khatami shows, there is also room to regress.
    I have no doubts that this won’t address your previous question either, but you may find this an interesting read too.
    If you’re still reading, I apologise to all for breaking my #1 rule and writing such a long post.

  53. El Cid — on 17th December, 2005 at 3:44 pm  

    Editor, my link to the Iranian constitution doesn’t seem to work. It should be this: http://www.oefre.unibe.ch/law/icl/ir00000_.html

  54. Tanvir — on 17th December, 2005 at 5:38 pm  

    Iran doesnt have free to field candidates just like the selection system in the UK has many barriers…look at the 4 yearly outcry on lack of women and ethnic minority candidates..and Mr Cameron making a big issue of it.

    Iran does have elected representatives and if the people wanted a more liberal form of governance they wouldnt have voted for this current guy would they? I still reckon if you did a nationwide poll where the people would have to make a choice between the current system and an american one… the current system would win by miles – and thats democracy for you.

    Some reports said that polls revealed the Iranians voted in this current president to stick up thier two fingers to the USA…. who knows what the real truth behind the situation is though.

    As for the town square test.. I think with the UK being getting closer to criminalising political dissent..we need to look at our own ‘town square tests’

  55. Steve M — on 17th December, 2005 at 7:56 pm  

    As for the town square test.. I think with the UK being getting closer to criminalising political dissent..we need to look at our own ‘town square tests’

    Tanvir, I don’t know what you mean when you say that the UK is ‘getting closer to criminalising political dissent’ but if you think for one minute that we’re in any way comparible with Iran then you’re hugely mistaken. The issue about countries that are governed by fear, whether Iran, Syria, China or Zimbabwe, is that it is quite impossible to get a true indication of people’s real opinions by asking them but if you really believe that most Iranians would have their ‘democracy’ over the US version then you’re living in dream land.

    Take advice from Sunny and travel. You’ve got a lot to learn.

  56. Jay Singh — on 17th December, 2005 at 8:44 pm  

    Steve M

    Tanvir is engaging in the Islamist rhetorical strategy of equating opposition to anti-semitic hate mongering, opposition to suicide bombing, and the imprisonment of those materially engaged in aiding and abetting terrorism like Babar Khan, as being equivalent to the precepts of extreme right wing dictatorial theocratic states like Iran, in the hope of pricking liberal conscience with the rhetoric of freedom of speech and so on.

    It also displays all the traits of Islamist narcisssism – locking up those plotting terrorism, or criticising repulsive anti-semitic hate mongering is, to people like Tanvir, tantamount to ‘criminalising political dissent’, as if this was a meeting of the local Fabian socialists we are talking about.

    Thankfully, most people have begun to wake up to this form of rhetoric and see it for what it is.

  57. Mustafa O'Higgins — on 17th December, 2005 at 9:58 pm  

    Salam brothers and Sister’s

    What the good neo-con-run o’USA needed but “lacks” was a “A Plan To Win The Peace” in the Middle East
    The reputzis went in there with guns blazing but they didnt have no PLAN for what comes after. Them neo cons, Wolfowitz and them, said we would be greeted with “open” arms as liberators but thats not how it turn out. Were imperialist occupiers in THERE Arab land every one can see that. Now Iraq is turn in to a terrorist “training camp” the whole dam country is a terroris swamp breeding terrists faster and faster. The “so”-called coalition of the willing cant do nothing. Coalition thats a laugh. Its AmeriKKKa uni lateral thats all.

    We progressives KNEW the Iraq War Was Wrong but BushCoâ„¢ wanted oil for blood. Now there is hell to pay. We cant win the war but we can do a better thing:

    How do you do it. Well, axe the decorated war heroes, Murtha and Kerry, they should know. They’ll tell you. You need a times table and a mile stone. And a plan. A plan to support are troops by TAKING the TARGET off there BACKS. Dont cut and run. No! Marines dont cut and run. In stead, re deploy them strategically over the horizon. Not right now of course. In about six month.

    I think it’s just now starting to hit me how enfuriating it is that when Bush did the Iraq War (in 2003), he sent are troops to be a in Iraq (envasion or whatever’s called) with no timetable or targets benchemarks for withdrawing troops from Iraq (afterwards). The assholes try to misinterpet but I think thats waht Dean was getting at.

    UPDATE: Since by now its abundanly clear that when he’s going to do a war on a country, Presidentes can no longer be trusted with doing the basics and making a withdraw timetable, maybe what’s needed is a Constitional amendment(or at least amend to War powers act): No wars without withdraw timetables first. Just branstorming but seems like a prudent and necessary check.

    Thanx for listening to my 2 cents

  58. Tanvir — on 18th December, 2005 at 12:01 am  

    I honestly am not a supporter of Mr. Ahmadinejad, I think he is a bit nuts, but I definitely like debating the issues concerned.

    Just look at the thread. Who is al-hack anyway? Sunny’s pen name??…just with an appropriate Muslim name to make it look like a good balance??! (sarcasm). I mean he accuses MPAC of anti-Semitism (by linking to an article which doesn’t accuse it of anti-Semitism) …. if you got issues with MPAC spell them out credibly…I don’t know much about MPAC myself…but when you just make up b-s to fill in the gaps to support your ideological biases it makes you look weak.

    Crying Anti-Semitism (im not referring to criticism of the Iranian president here but more in general) seems to be the Zionist rhetorical strategy of equating opposition to apartheid-monging war criminal occupationist brute that is Israel (and I can find you plenty of genuine facts to back those comments up)…………………………………..i can already feel the palpitations from the cold hearts of all you occupation-worshiping cockroaches as I make those criticisms….(anti-Semitism! anti-Semitism they cry!) That Louise Ellman idiot runs it all the time.

    Anyways..going back to the point of the debate… and the key issue is Holocaust denying by the Iranian President – what an idiot! I don’t see any other Muslim leaders in the UK or elsewhere in the world nodding ‘hear hear’ – do you? They are doing the right thing by not even acknowledging this fool hoping he will eventually shut-up. I mean come on…something is going wrong? Surely he has a PR team? It just seems all too good to be true for George Bush. His loony is in place…now all he has to do is get the UN to send in weapons inspectors (consisting of members of the Bush family and the rest CIA for good measure)…who demand to be allowed to dig up the Ayatollah’s back garden, or be let into some Mullah’s bedroom….and when the Iranians have a moan…send in the troops for not co-operating and bingo within 5 years you got half the world’s oil reserves (and also become Uncle Sam’s hero…heck he’ll become Uncle Sam himself… for dealing with just about every long term-grudge the US has had apart from the cold war!)

    …Anyways before those uninformed people out there start calling the Iranian President dictator again or getting him confused with Saddam Hussain or Augusta Pinochet or someone……. this guy was elected into office get over it.

    As for the UK vs Iran comparisons thing…its easy for people to sit on a high horse of righteousness and refuse to look within..at least just tell it how it is in a debate. The Iranians have acknowledged their need to reform and had voted in a reformist President previously..the people still have these desires, but I think when your next door neighbour is taken over by your worst enemy, and she has her troops on your doorstep…you have to take priorities.

    … in contrast, for those of you drowning in your arrogance/self-righteousness, compare the UK to Iran. The UK took over, in alliance with the US a whole country, causing hundreds of thousands of deaths giving pure internet copy and paste job lies as reasons! Dont even try and say good intentions were somewhere in this, cos ur just making lame excuses for yourself, there was no plan on how to manage the country, but clear plans on securing the Oil Ministry and their money. Its obvious what they went in there for, its not even worth debating cos its so obvious if you dare admit it to yourselves. If you in your town squares had a teardrop of conscience you’d be campaigning day and night for your government to pay reparations to the Iraqis. On the other hand….whatever rubbish this lunatic Iranian President says… A senior Iranian Minister reassured the world that there is still plenty of sanity in the regime and furthermore re-iterated that Iran has no intention of attacking Israel and any actions would only be defensive (not even the western ‘pre-emptive’ bullshit)… speaking of which the last time Iran was in conflict…was when the western poodle Saddam…armed to the teeth by America attacked it, pretty much for America’s benefit.

  59. Don — on 18th December, 2005 at 12:26 am  

    Tanvir,

    If it weren’t for being called an ‘occupation-worshiping cockroach’ I could find a lot to agree with in your post.

  60. raz — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:53 am  

    Funny how I mention relations between Pakistan and Israel as a positive step for Jewish-Muslim relations (with NO mention of India whatsoever) and suddenly Indian fanatics like Jay Singh and Vikrant are bashing Pakistan. Another pathetic example of the obsession which SOME Indians have with destroying Pakistan. Good to see Indian moderates like Sunny putting these hatemongers in their place.

  61. Bikhair — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:31 am  

    Mount Lebanon,

    ” Are you suggesting Muhammad’s murder of the males of the Banu Qurayza after their surrender was a just act of a prophet!”

    Well I dont know. Compare his actions to the actions of those Prophets that proceeded him. Pay particular attention to what these Prophets were given the authority to do with thier enemies. In this case Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) according to an unvarified source, by that I mean those not authenticated by Quran or Hadith, a certain Arab ally of that particular Jewish tribe by the name of Sa’d ibn Muad was given the honor of passing judgement on the Banu Qaurayza, and guess what it was. Only Allah knows why this guy would chose that fate for that tribe, but he did. I do wonder if the tables were turned what would have happened to the Muslims, Christians, or Pagan prisoners of war according to Jewish tradition.

    “Muhammad ever the ladies man, claimed as a wife a woman (Rayhana) previously married to one of the slaughtered Qurayza tribesmen. I would argue that Rayhana was raped as she surely didn’t countenance Muhammad’s advances while her murdered husband’s body was still warm.”

    Why would you consider such a humane thing as taking a woman as a wife after her kinfolk have been killed in a battle as something scandulous? What would have been scandulous was if the Muslims simply left those women and children to thier own devices in such a warm and hospital place as the deserts of 7th century Arabia. A Patriarchal, precarious, and oftentimes violent place, especially for those who had no kin to keep after them. What would a woman, without a man, or guardian have been during that time? Oh thats right, at the UN refugee camp.

    “Considering that being “mocked” one of Mohammed’s favorite reasons for having people killed, is it any wonder his followers have a difficult time with humor?”

    Was this an unusual precedence set by Muhammed? Or had it always been the case that when you blasphemed either God or Prophet you were punished?

    “Bikhair, you sound like a convert or “revert” to Islam. In my experience I have found that those who convert to Islam are often the least impressive members of Western society, the most unable to cope (save for that special category –the innocent female who marries a plausible Muslim spouse, without really understanding the nature, or peculiar hold, of Islam)”

    Mount Lebanon you should draw the same conclusions about my conversion as you would the conversion of Umar ibn Al Khattab. In fact he was converted to Islam on his way to kill Prophet Muhammed but took a detour upon hearing that his sister and husband had become Muslim. Knowing who Umar was, he most likely went to abuse, if not kill his sister and husband for running with the spurious Arab Muhammed who had insulted the dieties of his forefathers. I guess those pagan Arabs, like the Muslims “have a difficult time with humor.”

    You should also keep in mind that Umar (radiyallahu anhu) was unique in that he was feared by the people because he was known for his physical prowess and harsh and austere nature. It was only after the Arabs had found out that he converted to Islam that they backed off substantially. His sister and husband taking a stand against him was very brave.

    I find it very strange for you, as a Christian, to talk about the kinds of people who are drawn to Islam as not being the most impressive of Western soceity. What need did Jesus ibn Bible have for the most impressive of his society? What need did Jesus have for the tax collectors, the lawyers, the judges, the money changers, the big time Rabbis of his day? Jesus ibn Bible rejected this life, he said he was not of this world, and chose his fathers hood over this dunyah. Muslims are advised to be strangers in this world. I believe Jesus ibn Bible had a philosophy very simillar.

    You know, I know of a few men who were, five years ago, in prison or ten years ago out on the street gangbanging. Now they are with thier wives and children in Saudi Arabia studying thier religion, or they are living in abject poverty in Yemen just so they can study under the ulema in that part of the world. They may not be the best of Western soceity, but because they sacrificed all for the sake of Allah, which is so rare these days, they are the best of the Muslims. Allah knows best.

    “Up to a point, I can see the attraction of Islam for disgruntled, rebellious or criminal men. They can justify their criminal or deviant behavior as a religiously sanctioned jihad against Kafir society, or working class rebellion against café society.”

    My guess is that after understanding the truth of Tawheed and all its facets: ar-Rububiyah, al-Asmaa was-Sifaat, Uboodiyyah, they decide to submit to Islam. I am sure you are aware of the story of one of the companions who had killed a supposed enemy on the battle field even after he had testified that there is was no deity worthy of worship but Allah. After hearing this Prophet Muhammed asked this companion why he killed him, the companion responded that he had only taken the Shahadatan to save his life, which prompted the Prophet to ask whether he was able to see what was in that mans heart. I dont make judgements about why people convert to Islam as Allah is the only one who sees and hears what is in the heart.

    I am not sure which acts are deemed halal simply because it is against the kufar and not Muslims, but I will tell you that Islam is a rather centralized religion and much of the power rest with the leader of the Muslims. Until Muslims have the authority, which has been given to Imam, the undisbuted Imam, and there is alot of fiqh on that issue, they have no license to act in any way againts the kufar.

    “The big attraction too, and I think Theodore Dalrymple mentions this, is the God given right to behave as they please while demanding the most stringent moral standards from their wives.”

    Theodore who?
    Interesting, because I know that Allah speaks to both Muslim men and women about lowering thier gaze, not indulging in alcohol, protecting thier private parts, and establishing prayer. The man is the authority of the house hold and has a trust with Allah to keep it on the right path. He will be held accountable.

    Exactly what does behaving as they please mean? Was the punishment for various sins and transgressions not applied to the Muslim men during the time of Prophet Muhammed and his companions?

    “Is that the only choice — the utter idiocy of Western decadence, or the utter idiocy of Islam? Is there no Third Way? Or for that matter, Fourth, or Fifth, or Sixth?”

    Instead of mourning the loss of the Banu Qurayza why not mourn the loss of the people of Soddom or Gamorrah who chose the Fourth, or Fifth or Sixth way much to the chagrin of the Lord thy God. Why not mourn those Isrealites who chose the fourth or fifth way when they chose the golden calf and were punished as a result. Islam establishes one way. Surah Al Fatiha 6-7 “Guide us the straight way. The way of those whom you have bestowed your grace, not of those who have earned you anger nor of those who went astray.”

    Now unless the Constitution of the United States, the Bill of Rights, the Consititution of the E.U. the U.N charter can make the above claim of guiding those Allah has bestowed with grace and in addition granting them paradise, I either gotta go with my gut feeling, my emaan, or my innate criminal behavior. You know us converts.

    “What the attraction is for Western women I just cannot imagine. But it may, in some cases, be a kind of Marie Antoinette syndrome – assuming they are not so stupid as to marry a Saudi, they know that they can stop this nonsense any time they want.”

    Heretical Saracen, dont generalize about all Saudi men. Dont think for a second that because a woman or a man chose to stop the nonsense, they will stop the day of judgement. Dont ask the wrong question. For most women, it isnt a choice between a Western life or an Islamic one, but for every person, mankind, jinn and all that exist it is a choice between haqq and batil, paradise and hell fire. Why people would chose the hell fire is beyond me.

    Youre very materialistic Heretical Saracen.

  62. Bikhair — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:33 am  

    Sunny is Indian? The irrational hatred begins.

  63. Bikhair — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:33 am  

    Tanvir,

    Are you a Rafidah Shiite, because I feel my skin crawling?

  64. FOB — on 18th December, 2005 at 6:57 am  

    Iran may be a limited democracy ,but I would characterize it as a mullahcracy.

    To me a democracy is essentailly a LIBERAL democracy with guaranteed fundamental rights to citizens and CIVIL LIBERTIES to protect the citizen against the state.

    Democracy in Iraq hopefully will take root and serve as an example for the rest of the middle east.

  65. Bikhair — on 18th December, 2005 at 7:16 am  

    FOB,

    “Democracy in Iraq hopefully will take root and serve as an example for the rest of the middle east.”

    The way it is taking root for Muslims in Europe?

  66. Col. Mustafa — on 18th December, 2005 at 12:52 pm  

    ffs people, shutup.
    So many petty, bitchy fools here.

    Your prophets this, err your prophets that; my prophet was good, he sat around eating muffins allday.

    Do you think the prophets will pat you on the back after this little debate, or maybe take you all out for dinner and drinks?
    Pointless.

  67. Jai Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 1:00 pm  

    Colonel Mustafa,

    With all due respect, the historical and religious anecdotes which are being discussed here are proving to be very educational.

    Let’s let them hammer this out, assuming Al-Hack, Sunny etc don’t have a problem with it.

  68. Col. Mustafa — on 18th December, 2005 at 1:31 pm  

    Im sorry, i dont see how this is educational.
    What exactly are you learning from this apart from baseless facts about the prophets.
    This is by no means a history lesson, its just a simple bitching match by two idiots who think they know better than the other.
    This sort of crap is the only reason why religion is taken seriously even today by many individuals.
    Because they assume what was written back then somehow was the gospel truth.
    The Bible wasn’t written by jesus, it was written by men that were pushing thier propaganda forward in respective times.
    The many books in the Bible were stories much further back than we think, god knows how much bullshitting took place along the years before those stories got in the book.
    As for the quran, that was written by the man that made the religion.
    So you can see from what stance he was writing it.

    As for proving me wrong with half ass archaeologists who have tried to prove certain stories in the Bible to be accurate, they were just clutching at straws as they even admitted.
    So again, whats the point of this fight of the Prophets?
    Is it to somehow identify that there in lies the problem with islam, that the so called actions of our Prophet somehow had such an effect on the makeup of every muslim outhere that we were destined to be nothing but terrorists who want to kill, rape and pillage.
    And the fact that Jesus did none of that meant that Christianity was from there on a religion of peace and prosperity.

  69. Col. Mustafa — on 18th December, 2005 at 1:36 pm  

    Hmm hmmm, well thats clearly not true is it?
    As weve seen throughout history their both responsible for as much chaos and bloodshed as possible.
    So again shutup people.

  70. El Cid — on 18th December, 2005 at 1:40 pm  

    Did anyone read more than the first few lines of Bikhair’s and Mount Lebanon’s zzzzzzzzzz ding-dong? Nah, me neither.
    Tanvir, you make some good points (very good points), but you don’t half spoil your argument with flashes of rhetorical nonsense, playground insults, and downright inventions.
    And just in case I gave the wrong impression by stressing that there IS a limited form of democracy in Iran and the rule of law, let me make clear that democracy as we know it is clearly far, far, far more sophisticated and superior in Europe. You know that full well Tanvir.
    Now I don’t normally read this paper (honest) but if this is Iran’s version of three strikes and your out, then most of us here are fucked! The story link on the top right hand side of said article is also interesting and pertinent to this thread.

  71. Siddharth — on 18th December, 2005 at 1:43 pm  

    Jay Singh. In response to your comments on (56): I don’t think Tanvir is an outright apologist for Islamic racism. Muslims have yet to develop a nuanced language of dealing with politics which involve the narratives of religious doctrination, personal belief, migration and even political activism. And they are struggling to do this without any intellectual voices to shine a light for them. So to jump up and down on the guy’s ideas (“all the traits of Islamist narcisssism”) is to hamstring this flow of ideas without letting them develop, not just for Tanvir, but for Muslims in general.

  72. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 1:43 pm  

    raz

    Yeah right, I’m a fanatic! ;-) And the Pope’s a Buddhist.

    Dont be such a cry baby, grow up, be a man, dont use the language of rhetoric and sulk that devalues that language with its insipid and facile use.

    And be happy, dont be so paranoid, narscisstic and quick to nervous collapse!

  73. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 1:53 pm  

    Siddharth

    Yes – but it is difficult to gauge at the same time in that development of nuance and differentiation what does constitute anti-semitism or what is typical Islamist ideology grasping for cover.

    I understand your point – on the wider fringes of Sikh and Hindu theo-political “debate” (more like ranting)there is the same crudity and lack of subtlety of thought. But at the same time, would you not agree, that as Muslims have not yet developed the resources and subtleties of understanding to differentiate between the many different strands of understanding they contain that they need to address certain issues(as you say – personal belief, doctrine, politics, theology) , and this gets lost in the rhetoric and language articulated – if Muslims themselves are at a loss, how can those who are not Muslim gauge, discern and clarify in the terms of the language and paradigms used by outsiders when discussing the Islamist impulse? Do you understand the difficulty faced by people like me?

    In its most shrill form I am speaking specifically about those who cry “Islamophobe!” whenever a clumsy but well meaning attempt is made to off a critique of the situation.

    And then the question becomes, Siddhartha, how do we go about bringing this about? You know what the problem is, perhaps you can write an article for Pickle Politics about it.

  74. Steve M — on 18th December, 2005 at 1:56 pm  

    “Although there is a lot of anger over the Israeli issue, his sentiment was not a helpful one and not one that is shared by educated Iranians.” (the story to the right of El Cid’s link above).

    What proportion of the Iranians are ‘educated’?

  75. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:00 pm  

    Siddharth

    I am really interested in what you wrote. Please do write a main article about it for pickled politics. I think you are raising an important, but under-discussed and considered issue, and it is something we can all learn from. I understand where you are coming from – its a problem all Desis face when dealing with the atavism of religiosity and the inadequacy some of us face in getting to the heart of what matters and expressing this – and finding a language appropriate to do so.

  76. El Cid — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:02 pm  

    is that a genuine question or sarcasm?

  77. El Cid — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:03 pm  

    that last one is to stevie m

  78. El Cid — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:05 pm  

    I agree with Jay. I think you are on to something Sid.

  79. Don — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:07 pm  

    As so often (when he is coherent) Col. Mustapha is spot on. The exchanges between Bikhair and Mount Lebanon are like being stuck in a lift with two geeks arguing the relative merits of Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings.

    On the plus side, since she dropped the faux-arabic schtick and ‘fessed up to being a yank convert, Bikhair’s prose style has got a lot more coherent.

  80. Steve M — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:08 pm  

    El Cid, I’m generally concerned to know the proportion of the Iranian population who share the views of their president. I’m certainly not casting aspersions about the Iranian education system (about which I know nothing).

  81. Steve M — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:30 pm  

    Sorry. For generally please read genuinely

  82. El Cid — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:37 pm  

    I got this from one Google-driven source:

    The number of students (in Iran) standing at 175,675 in 1979, has increased to more than 344,045 in 1991-92, of which 96,969 (28.18%) were women and 247,076 (71.82%) men.

    For the record, Ahmadinejad got just over 17 million votes or 64 percent in a second-round runoff that. As we know, though, the choice voters got was very limited by order of the mullahs.
    Interesting fact: he is the first non-cleric to be elected president since 1979. He was something unlike his opponent Rafsanjani. And as Tanvir said, with the great satan camped on their borders, it is not that surprising that some of his hardline rhetoric appealed to the nationalist instincts of rank and file Iranians. If they knew then what they now, they might have voted differently. We’ll never know for sure, I guess, but would 37 percent, 33 percent, and 44 percent of Germans have voted for the Nazis in three elections in 1932 and 1933 if ……?

  83. Siddharth — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:44 pm  

    Jay Singh:
    Narcissist is a good word. Every religion and mono-culture will have more than its fair share of them. But whats the opposite of a cultural narcissist? A cultural self-hater? The problem lies in the fact that religions will label those who want to be objective about their faiths as, in the language of Islam, a munafiq (apostate) or in the language of Judaism, a self-hater (don’t know the Hebrew equivalent).

    Surely there must be a better word for these individuals? Surely their input is far far more valuable than labelling them as apostates and self-haters. I firmly believe that the peace will come as a result of dialogue between these individuals and their ideas and not that of the “narcisissts”. Especially when you realise that these “apostates” and “self-haters” probably love their religions and cultures more than the “Defenders of the Faith”, so to speak.

    The problem with the Muslim world is the violent reaction to such individuals. And unfortunately this often spills over to Non-Mulsims. This is often by Muslims who are not “Defenders of the Faith” by nature. And to be fair to them, the all-pervasive presence of anti-Muslim sentiment can often make people react wholly unrepresentationally.

  84. Mount Lebanon — on 18th December, 2005 at 2:50 pm  

    Thia is hardly suprising considering the sword wielding effluent pouring out of Teheran.

    Like in the embassy kidnappings, reason and diplomacy have no role to play with these scum who only understand Qur’anic violence.

    Maybe they will come to see reason when Qur’anic violence is applied en masse to them, and soon.

    As for sanctions: with half of the world at least run by governments of convenience and most of the remainder being eunuchoid, what is the point?

    Direct military action is the only choice but the gutless EU will never stop being selfish and parochial long enough to ever pull their weight. However when the EU becomes Eurabia expect much more agressive stances by the EU although this time it will be proIranian.

  85. Siddharth — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:01 pm  

    Mount Lebabon: There are Indian versions of you. They’re called sectarian racists – and they’re a fucking dime a dozen. You are also an apologist for the race riots that took place in Sydney last week. Pickled Politics is not right forum for you to be peddling your racist gobshite. Take yourself elsewhere.

  86. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:08 pm  

    Siddhartha

    Put it in an article for the front page for goodness sake – it needs to be out there read as widely as possible. You need to put it out there – I am being serious. You are making important points and they dont deserve to be lost amidst the mud of this thead.

  87. Bikhair — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:25 pm  

    Don,

    “On the plus side, since she dropped the faux-arabic schtick and ‘fessed up to being a yank convert, Bikhair’s prose style has got a lot more coherent.”

    Arabic is the language of the Quran. All muslims are advised to learn it. It isnt necessary though, but you should if you are going to advance in your studies. Heretical Saracen implied that I was a convert, so I gave him what he wanted. What difference does it make. We all have expiriences that we refer back to on blogs, and mine has been that converts are far more knowledgeable about Islam than people born into Muslim families. Its shocking what Muslims, even from Muslim countries dont know. Embarassing even.

  88. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:30 pm  

    Bikhair

    Shaddap you mad bleating goat.

  89. Mount Lebanon — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:37 pm  

    Siddhartha,

    “Mount Lebabon: There are Indian versions of you. They’re called sectarian racists – and they’re a fucking dime a dozen. You are also an apologist for the race riots that took place in Sydney last week. Pickled Politics is not right forum for you to be peddling your racist gobshite. Take yourself elsewhere.”

    Tsk, tsk, such lovely language. Actually you would be hard pressed to find an Arab Christian that has anything positive to say about Islam. Perhaps there are Indian versions of myself because there are historical reasons why some non-Muslim Indians loathe Islam and its followers. I am no apologist for race riots, it leaves a bad taste in my mouth, but using the same PC dogma of “root cause methodology” you guys on the left use to justify mass murder, I can certainly understand why white Aussies got fed up and acted as they did. As I can understand why the Dutch torched some Mosques after the murder of Theo Van Goe. I am sure similar scenes will be played out in Europe after the next Muslim outrage.

  90. Siddharth — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:46 pm  

    Mount Lebanon

    Actually you would be hard pressed to find an Arab Christian that has anything positive to say about Islam.

    From your milieu, I don’t doubt that could be anything else but true. But why are you wasting time proving your bigotry, as if the posts you have repeatedly made to PP don’t make that patently obvious?

    Like I said, there are other forums that such as LGF and Melanie Phillips’ lovely blog that will be more than happy to house your narrow as you like worldveiw. Tsk tsk indeed.

  91. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:50 pm  

    Mount Lebanon

    You know what would be hilarious after the next outrage? If you got your head kicked in by a racist mob looking for Muslims. You’d be screaming, “I’m not a Muslim! I hate them as much as you! Please dont hurt me! Please dont hurt me!”

    But then they’d kick your teeth out of your mouth for being an Arab Muslims bastard and you’d be crawling home with broken bones and saying “Its alright. I understand why they did it, an unfortunate mistake, thats all, I completely understand why they stabbed me and broke my arms and legs and face, no need to worry, I love you misunderstood racists, I am collateral damage, no problem, I deserved it, I absolutely understand why I had to be beaten to within an inch of my life, oh well, la-di-dah”

    And you know what? It will be really funny to us too ;-)

  92. Siddharth — on 18th December, 2005 at 3:54 pm  

    Ha ha. Nice one Jay Singh.

    Of course, Mount Lebanon is marking the fences and deliniating the borders for the very reason to protect himself of that eventuality.

  93. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 4:02 pm  

    Mount Lebanon would have his jaw hanging off his face, his testicles burst open, his finger broken, his spleen exploded, his nose gushing blood, his eyes puffed up and blackened, and the police would say, “What did your attackers look like?” and he would say,

    “Attackers? Whatever are you talking about? Oh you mean all this? Oh this is nothing, just a case of mistaken identity, nothing to worry about at all, completely understandable mistake to make, anyone could have done it, not to worry, probably my fault for being at the wrong place at the wrong time after that outrage, completely understandable mistake they made, completely understandable, my fault, dont want to make a fuss, toodle-pip!”

    Then he will lay down on the floor this brave Chritsian Falangist, and wait for the ambulance to reach him before he bleeds to death.

  94. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 4:06 pm  

    And as he lies there waiting on the floor, through blood spattered empty gums he’ll be saying “These bloody Muslims deserve everything they get. Bastards.” ;-)

  95. Siddharth — on 18th December, 2005 at 4:06 pm  

    woo hoo :-D

  96. Bikhair — on 18th December, 2005 at 4:18 pm  

    Jay Sigh (Non Muslim Asian)

    No. Telling someone to shut up on a blog is the worst thing you can do. Tell me I’m wrong, ugly, stupid, or naive but dont tell me to shut up. Its so inappropriate.

  97. Bikhair — on 18th December, 2005 at 4:29 pm  

    Mount Lebanon (Heretical Saracen)

    My guess is that Jesus ibn Bible would have been all nice and peacefull until he had enough Christians on his side to wage a perpetual war against Dar-ul Jesus and Dar-ul not Jesus.

    Since his life was cut short by the most impressive of his soceity, we will never know.

  98. Mount Lebanon — on 18th December, 2005 at 4:52 pm  

    Siddharth,

    “From your milieu, I don’t doubt that could be anything else but true. But why are you wasting time proving your bigotry, as if the posts you have repeatedly made to PP don’t make that patently obvious?”

    Why the unbridled contempt? What has Islam done for Christian Arabs that we should be so happy and grateful for that would send us dancing around maypoles? My contempt of Islam is probably mirrored by many Armenians, Nigerian or Sudanese Christians, or Hindus or Christians in Indonesia. Are these people racist too?

    Jay Singh,

    I always wear a nice prominent crucifix in public, as most diaspora Middle Christians do, and I’m quite tall and fit so a baying racist mob is the last thing on my mind.

    “Mount Lebanon would have his jaw hanging off his face, his testicles burst open, his finger broken, his spleen exploded, his nose gushing blood, his eyes puffed up and blackened,”

    How many Muslim Brits have suffered the above? Did any suffer this fate in the aftermath of the London bombings. It sounds more like(sans burns, or shrapnel) your describing a victim of these very bombings.

  99. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 5:25 pm  

    Discount Lebanon

    I’m quite tall and fit

    LoL!

    Do you have a six pack and muscles too – ooh wow.

    What if they come for you with petrol bombs whilst they’re on their way to burn down a mosque? (or a Sikh temple or Hindu temple as occasionally happens when these racist troglodytes decide to go lynch some Muslims)

    You better carry a fire extinguisher with you too then ;-)

    But come on, it really would be funny, wouldnt it? I mean that would be so hilarious, if you got your lights punched out by some lynch mob looking for a Muslim to batter or burn down his mosque. I think we all agree, it would be the funniest thing since Tommy Cooper (just like that!)

    The trouble with you is that you have no sense of humour ;-)

  100. Mount Lebanon — on 18th December, 2005 at 6:04 pm  

    I think the only thing burning in Oz was a church, which I believe was set alight by those peaceful Muslims you get so tearful about.

  101. Mount Lebanon — on 18th December, 2005 at 6:13 pm  

    “Fuck off you racist pus-hole. Is that better?”

    Ah, much better. Glaring proof why I would never send my child to an English comprehensive school.

    But I still don’t buy into your very eloquent accusation that I am a racist. Islamaphobe yes, but not racist.

  102. Jai Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 6:44 pm  

    For the benefit of Bikhair, M Lebanon, and everyone else on this thread, can I just clarify that I am not “Jay Singh” who has also been participating here (just in case anybody’s mixing us up, as Bikhair apparently did in post no. 97).

  103. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 7:00 pm  

    Mount Lebanon has children but he still calls for innocent children who happen to be Muslim to suffer under his version of collective guilt.

    You can see moral degenerates, vulgar bigots and idiots of a regular type all over the place. But a man who has children himself and knows the innocence of children and would still call for other peoples children to be victims of random violence simply on the basis of their religious background takes this man to a special level of degeneracy.

    What an utterly disgusting and repellent man. What a piece of scum.

  104. Mount Lebanon — on 18th December, 2005 at 7:01 pm  

    Jay Singh

    Why are you getting so exercised?

  105. Jay Singh — on 18th December, 2005 at 7:05 pm  

    Wank Lebanon

    You are the one calling for Muslims to suffer collective guilt, violence and arson, including Muslim children, even though you have children yourself.

    That means it is you that is exercised, not me. Get some perspective you half-witted moral pervert.

    In the meantime, let me tell you a joke. A skeleton walks into a pub and the bar man says “What would you like?” And the skeleton says, “Give me a pint of lager and a mop” ;-)

    Do you get it? :-)

  106. Don — on 18th December, 2005 at 8:09 pm  

    Jai,

    Trust me. No-one could mistake you for Jay. You are a consistent model of courtesy and reason; Jay is frothing at the mouth.

  107. jamal — on 18th December, 2005 at 11:26 pm  

    Although he does amuse me with his comments, he does need a slap. However, there is some scope in his words. The “Holocaust” has become over-exaggerated and engorged to an extent that the word has become exclusive to the Jewish atrocity, disbarring other races involved, and other genocides that have followed. The word “Holocaust” is not exclusive to Jews. Furthermore, this construction after the fact of “The Holocaust” has then been perpetrated by Zionists to justify their settlement in the Middle East, which has involved the slaughter, oppression and displacement of Arabs.

  108. Sunny — on 19th December, 2005 at 12:25 am  

    The “Holocaust” has become over-exaggerated and engorged to an extent that the word has become exclusive to the Jewish atrocity, disbarring other races involved, and other genocides that have followed.

    Jamal – please look up a word called perspective. Maybe you can give me examples where Muslims were killed on the same scale and with the totality of what happened then. Oh yes, there is one…. the massacre of the Armenians by the Turks. Funny that seems to have by-passed the selective memories of many Arab countries and even the MCB.

    As for the rest, please can you stop. This thread has turned into a stupid cussing match.

  109. Vikrant — on 19th December, 2005 at 5:02 am  

    I’d rather be an Islamophobe than a two bit pinko coward criticising his own darn country.

    If you havent noticed Sunny even raz is a bit over the line… but no… you would turn a blind eye to his…. only those god damn “communalists” like me are trolls isnt it?

    @Siddharth: What! you think only Indians (read Hindus) are source of religious fanacticism in South Asia) ? I thought the swamp is fast turning into a Jehadi utopia.

  110. Tanvir — on 19th December, 2005 at 9:20 am  

    I don’t think the general Arab Muslims have a problem with Christians, and that’s speaking from knowing scores of them personally, and keeping up to date with current affairs in the Middle East for a decade.

    The Coptics in Egypt are moving forward in even better relations and political co-operation with the devout politically active Muslims, shown by the progress before the recent elections. I have been quite interested in their plight, and learnt a lot from a Consultant I had to work under who was a Coptic.

    I don’t think Arab Muslims will ever have a problem with Christian Arabs, unless of course!……they, as a small minority of Arab population don’t try and take over the majority of Arabia using the ‘they were there first’ argument [although a lot of Palestinian Christians were converted by American and European missionaries during the colonial period], and then camp out there long enough to say ‘we are here to stay’ its too late. But I don’t think that’s how it is written to happen.

    Anyways…..historically, weren’t Arab christians persecuted under Byzantine rule? and then subsequently enjoyed enhanced religious freedom, under Muslim rule?

    Of course some rouge elements will try and go with a common anti-Muslim flow for their own gains. [Everyone seems to want their even minority group to get an upper or even dominating hand over majority Muslims, e.g. in places like Lebanon, Bangladesh etc. - their cause is undeniably helped by the outrages of stupid extremists hijacking the deen of Islam.]

    I think we should look ahead and see how things are getting better with regards to the issues there are between Arab Christians and Muslims. Mount Lebanon’s voice and presence is needed, because it is like a reality check to remind us and be wary that there are little cockroaches like him out there that will hold back progress.

  111. Siddharth — on 19th December, 2005 at 10:03 am  

    Vikrant:
    In the dirty dance of SubContinental sectararism, it takes at least two to tango. The very word implies Hindu-Muslim. So I don’t know how you manage to “read” Hindu only from my post.

    And whats with referring to Bangladesh as “swamp”? Coming from an Indian thats just poor form. You’re far too intelligent to lose yourself to that kind of chavy nationalism. Lets not lose you.

  112. Mount Lebanon — on 20th December, 2005 at 7:28 pm  

    “I don’t think Arab Muslims will ever have a problem with Christian Arabs, unless of course!……they, as a small minority of Arab population don’t try and take over the majority of Arabia using the ‘they were there first’ argument [although a lot of Palestinian Christians were converted by American and European missionaries during the colonial period], and then camp out there long enough to say ‘we are here to stay’ its too late. But I don’t think that’s how it is written to happen.”

    Sounds more like the behaviour of certain Muslims in Europe—If we have enough children, increse immigration from the Muslim world, admit Turkey into the EU. we will outnumber the silly natives by the middle of the century.

    In regards to Christian Proselytizing.. During the European Mandates or in protectorates Syria/Lebanon and Palestine their was Christian missionary activity among the locals but very few Muslims embraced Christanity, the few Protestant/Anglican communities you find in the Levant were in most cases Orthodox, Maronite Catholic or some other Eastern rite.
    “Anyways…..historically, weren’t Arab christians persecuted under Byzantine rule? and then subsequently enjoyed enhanced religious freedom, under Muslim rule?”

    The non-Orthodox were indeed persecuted by Emporor Heraclius , but remember almost half the Byzantine army facing the Mohmadeans at Yarmuk were Arab Christians or Armenians, so the persecution could not have been that heavy. Morever, during the partitial Byzantine reconquest of Syria in the 9th cent and during the Crusades a couple of centuries later, the local Christians welcomed these foreign Christians as liberators and were happy to see the backs of the Muslims. So it could be argued that they were quite pleased if not overjoyed to get rid of the Muslim yoke. So much for Muslim tolerance.

    If you were familiar with the history of Dhimmitude I don’t think you would be writing such nonsence. (Read something from Bat Ye’or an Egyptian Jewess) Remember it was the pioneering socialogist and historian Ibn Khaldun that explained the options for Christians in Dar al Harb: “It is for them to choose between conversion to Islam, payment of the poll tax, or death.” Some choice.

    The 12 th cent Syrian orthoxox patriarch of Antioch, chronicler Michael the Syrian recorded how crushing this burden was for the Christians in the time of Caliphe Marwan 11

    “Marwan’s main concern was to amass gold and his yoke bore heavily on the people of the county. His troops inflicted many evils on the men: blows, pillages, outrages on women in their husband’ presence.”
    Marwan’s successor, al-Mansur, according to Michael, “raised then doubled evey kind of tax on all the Christians in every place.”

    The tax burden(Jiza) was quite onnerous and led many if not most Christians to abandon their faith. This was always punctuated by the occasional massacre pour encourager les autres

    “Of course some rouge elements will try and go with a common anti-Muslim flow for their own gains. [Everyone seems to want their even minority group to get an upper or even dominating hand over majority Muslims, e.g. in places like Lebanon, Bangladesh etc. – their cause is undeniably helped by the outrages of stupid extremists hijacking the deen of Islam.”

    Do you really believe that Islam has been hijacked by extremists. I would argue that the founder of Islam would approve of every recent outrage commited by Muslims.

    “I think we should look ahead and see how things are getting better with regards to the issues there are between Arab Christians and Muslims. Mount Lebanon’s voice and presence is needed, because it is like a reality check to remind us and be wary that there are little cockroaches like him out there that will hold back progress.”

    Would you care to share some concrete examples of this growing tolerance with us?

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

Pickled Politics © Copyright 2005 - 2010. All rights reserved. Terms and conditions.
With the help of PHP and Wordpress.