Did you know that SO from the Middle East

[UmmSqueakster 54]

*cof cof cof* Manji is a moderate? Seriously, there is some disconect between how muslims view themselves and how non muslims view us. Even within the progressive muslim community, Manji is waaaaay out in left field. This is giving me bad flashbacks to the time Daniel Pipes labeled Salman Rushdie a moderate muslim.

On the subject of muslims and terrorism, should we do more? Certainly. Are we not doing anything right now? Heck no!

Muslims Condemn Terrorism - a pretty comprehensive list of responses to 9/11.

Zaytuna Podcasts - in several of these (can't remember which at the moment), Sheikh Hamza and Imam Zaid speak very frankly about needing to do something to address the malidese in the muslim community.

What is the solution from my point of view? Probably won't be popular for stating it, but re-establishing the caliphate. A strong, just central authority who keeps the muslim ummah in line. A true caliph, not the weak, watered down versions we had these last few centuries. A muslim ruler who follows the advice of Imam al Ghazali

1. The ruler should understand the importance and danger of the authority entrusted to him. In authority there is great blessing, since he who exercises it righteously obtained unsurpassed happiness but if any ruler fails to do so he incurs torment surpassed only by the torment for unbelief.

2. The ruler should always be thirsting to meet devout religious scholars and ask them for advice.

3. The ruler should understand that he must not be content with personally refraining from injustice, but must discipline his slave-troops, servants, and officers and never tolerate unjust conduct by them; for he will be interrogated not only about his own unjust deeds but also about those of his staff.

4. The ruler should not be dominated by pride; for pride gives rise to the dominance of anger, and will impel him to revenge. Anger is the evil genius and blight of the intellect. If anger is becoming dominant it will be necessary for the ruler in all his affairs to bend his inclinations in the direction of forgiveness and make a habit of generosity and forbearance unless he is to be like the wild beasts.

5. In every situation that arises, the ruler should figure that he is the subject and the other person is the holder of authority. He should not sanction for others anything that he would not sanction for himself. For if he would do so he would be making fraudulent and treasonable use of the authority entrusted to him.

6. The ruler should not disregard the attendance of petitioners at his court and should beware of the danger of so doing. He should solve the grievances of the Muslims.

7. The ruler should not form a habit of indulging the passions. Although he might dress more finely or eat more sumptuously, he should be content with all that he has; for without contentment, just conduct will not be possible.

8. The ruler should make the utmost effort to behave gently and avoid governing harshly.

9. The ruler should endeavor to keep all the subjects pleased with him. The ruler should not let himself be so deluded by the praise he gets from any who approach him as to believe that all the subjects are pleased with him. On the contrary, such praise is entirely due to fear. He must therefore appoint trustworthy persons to carry on espionage and inquire about his standing among the people, so that he may be able to learn his faults from men’s tongues.

10. The ruler should not give satisfaction to any person if a contravention of God’s law would be required to please him for no harm will come from such a person’s displeasure.

Also, in the interest of full disclosure - I am in no way attempting to set up a caliphate from here in the US. I'm a big fan of our form of government. Heck, if I had the time and money, I'd go to the best law school in the country and become an ACLU lawyer.

[Bosco 1]

I don't think giving verbal condemnations of terrorism does much than to try to convince people with prejudices we are not all the same. That really shouldn't even need to be stated. Even when it is done ad nauseum, Muslims are criticized for not speaking out more.

Terrorism is not really about religion. People have agendas, often political, that they are trying to push and they mask it in the name of religion to gain appeal with people who are feeling frustrated, disenfranchised, etc. I feel the most important thing Muslims can do is to reach out to fellow Muslims who are vulnerable and at risk to falling into the hands of these people who only seek to manipulate them for their own sick plans by promising them martyrdom, etc.

We can talk until we are blue in the face how we don't condemn terrorism, and it will still go on and the prejudiced people are unlikely to have their minds changed.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Prejudice often stems from ignorance. It's not an incurable disease. You deal with it thru education and I don't believe there is anyone on this board who isn't willing to listen if they're not always going to be attacked for what they say. Pleasent delivery, if you want it, you gotta give it.

[peezey 0]

btw i was using her as an example regarding this topic, and this topic alone. muslims who speak out against some of the atrocities their fellow brothers and sisters are doing!

talking about what is and who is and who is not moderate islam is another topic.

Do you claim to be a sister to whoever "your" brothers and sisters are who commit atrocities? I certainly don't and it's ludicrous you'd put all muslims in the same "family."

[peezey 0]

I'm asking WHAT IS THE SOLUTION. No one seems to come up with anything.

I posted my thoughts on the solution twice, I'm sure those weren't what you were looking for?

The solution goes farther back than airport checking. The solution is political and economic, not violence, humiliation and ignorance.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Let's be fair. There are Muslims who condemn terrorism who refer to Muslims with distorted, hateful views as "our brothers in sisters in Islam" even as they condemn their beliefs and acts. This is not anything new.

[peezey 0]

Let's be fair. There are Muslims who condemn terrorism who refer to Muslims with distorted, hateful views as "our brothers in sisters in Islam" even as they condemn their beliefs and acts. This is not anything new.

And if they come here and spew that #######, then they'll be told how ludicrous they are being, too.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

If nothing else, we all know how to spew #######. It's intellect and depth that missing. Those are the tools that change prejudice into understanding.

[peezey 0]

Irshad Manji is an example of what the media holds out as a moderate Muslim, and I mentioned before that, in mainstream media, Arabs and Muslims are talked ABOUT by non-Arab, non-Muslims, but rarely by themselves. It's no wonder that jen pointed her out. Why not? She's put out there in the public eye by those who purport to speak for us. She's becoming a hand-picked "Muslim leader" as are Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton picked to be "Black leaders".

And so if people choose to believe and live by everything they hear in MSM, then they will be challenged here, because most of us do not get our information or form opinions via that kind of source.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Peezy, challenging is not what often happens here. True challenging is done as a means to educate, not to humiliate. What happens here, more often than not, is blood sport, piling on, trading insult for insult, and it's a real turn off. It educates no one.

[Bosco 1]

Peezy, challenging is not what often happens here. True challenging is done as a means to educate, not to humiliate. What happens here, more often than not, is blood sport, piling on, trading insult for insult, and it's a real turn off. It educates no one.

Thank goodness we have you as our constant reminder of all our shortcomings

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Peezy, challenging is not what often happens here. True challenging is done as a means to educate, not to humiliate. What happens here, more often than not, is blood sport, piling on, trading insult for insult, and it's a real turn off. It educates no one.

Thank goodness we have you as our constant reminder of all our shortcomings

Not all, but as many as I can handle.

[sereia 0]

btw i was using her as an example regarding this topic, and this topic alone. muslims who speak out against some of the atrocities their fellow brothers and sisters are doing!

talking about what is and who is and who is not moderate islam is another topic.

Do you claim to be a sister to whoever "your" brothers and sisters are who commit atrocities? I certainly don't and it's ludicrous you'd put all muslims in the same "family."

its a figure of speech. all kinds of groups use it. are they really your brother or sister? not necessarily. but its used as a way to refer to someone in the same group as you are. why would muslims NOT be put in the same family/category. thats what they are: Muslims! people put their religion above their country. above all else.

seriously, i'm done with arguing. this is the last time i reply.

Edited February 16, 2007 by abdounjen

[peezey 0]

Peezy, challenging is not what often happens here. True challenging is done as a means to educate, not to humiliate. What happens here, more often than not, is blood sport, piling on, trading insult for insult, and it's a real turn off. It educates no one.

Ah, yes. You're turning a new leaf then? Who is humilated, exactly? I do see you continuing peripheral arguments like this that portend to make nice but really are jabs at people you don't agree with. Your perpetual use of hyperbole to describe an internet forum continues: "blood sport"? I don't even know how to make a fist let alone make someone bleed, so let's leave the dramatic statements home today.

[peezey 0]

btw i was using her as an example regarding this topic, and this topic alone. muslims who speak out against some of the atrocities their fellow brothers and sisters are doing!

talking about what is and who is and who is not moderate islam is another topic.

Do you claim to be a sister to whoever "your" brothers and sisters are who commit atrocities? I certainly don't and it's ludicrous you'd put all muslims in the same "family."

its a figure of speech. all kinds of groups use it. are they really your brother or sister? not necessarily. but its used as a way to refer to someone in the same group as you are. why would muslims NOT be put in the same family/category. thats what they are: Muslims! people put their religion above their country. above all else.

seriously, i'm done with arguing. this is the last time i reply.

Let's see....because there are 1.6 billion and growing Muslims on the planet from every ethnicity, country, background. You think shi'a and sunni fighting in Baghdad right now are calling each other brothers?