Posted: Sat 12 Aug 2006 21:19 Post subject: Bush's language angers US Muslims
In the days after the horror of the 11 September attacks, President George W Bush made a point of saying Muslims per se were not America's enemy.
But in the five years since then, he has taken less care to emphasise that message, US Muslim leaders are saying.
They are upset about his use of terms like "Islamic fascists", which he used this week both for Hezbollah and the suspected bomb plotters held in the UK.
"It offends the vast majority of moderate Muslims," Ahmed Younis said.
"The use of the term casts a shadow upon Islam and bolsters the argument that there is a clash of civilisations between Islam and the West," Mr Younis, the national director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (Mpac), told the BBC.
He said it was wrong to link the actions of violent Muslims to their religion.
"There is nothing Islamic about their fascism. The Prophet [Muhammad] and the Koran clearly articulate that this type of activity is outside of bounds for Muslims."
Regular refrain
Mr Bush used the term on at least two separate occasions this week.
On Monday, during a press conference from his ranch in Texas, he said terrorists "try to spread their jihadist message - a message I call ... Islamic radicalism, Islamic fascism".
A moment later, he said "Islamo-fascism" was an "ideology that is real and profound".
Then, on Thursday after the arrest in Britain of two dozen people suspected of plotting of bomb planes travelling to the US, he said "Islamic fascists... will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom".
That day, the Council on American-Islamic Relations wrote to him to complain.
Its chairman Parvez Ahmed condemned his "use of ill-defined hot-button terms", which, he said, "feeds the perception that the war on terror is actually a war on Islam".
The council had not had a reply from the White House as of Friday afternoon, its legal director Arsalan Iftikhar told the BBC.
Neither the White House nor the State Department responded to BBC requests for clarification of the term.
Mr Younis of Mpac said he believed the president's use of the term was "a mistake" and that Mr Bush's speechwriters would drop it in the future.
He added that the idea that "there is a school of thought called Islamic fascism is a misnomer".
'Different breed'
Security expert Daniel Benjamin of the Center for Strategic and International Studies agreed that the term was meaningless.
"There is no sense in which jihadists embrace fascist ideology as it was developed by Mussolini or anyone else who was associated with the term," he said.
"This is an epithet, a way of arousing strong emotion and tarnishing one's opponent, but it doesn't tell us anything about the content of their beliefs.
"The people who are trying to kill us, Sunni jihadist terrorists, are a very, very different breed."
Zanab Chami, a Muslim community activist in Dearborn, Michigan - home to one of the largest Arab communities in the US - said the administration had seized upon a new term to frighten people.
"I think the word terrorism has lost its edge. They are looking for something with a little more oomph."
And she is afraid that such language does have an effect on how Americans view Muslims.
"In the post-9/11 era, people are apt to fear Islam. These terms get thrown around so easily and it builds upon a foundation of fear that has already been instilled."
In fact, a Gallup poll released the day of the arrests in Britain showed that two out of five Americans admit to feeling prejudice against Muslims.
In Washington, Mr Younis said the president's linking of Islam with fascism would alienate "moderate Muslims who are needed at the front line of any effort to counter terrorism or extremism by Muslims".
But in Michigan, Ms Chami said it was already too late to worry about indelicate phrases.
"Members of the Muslim community here do not believe in the administration. They rightfully discount much of what President Bush says. People have closed their ears to him."
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Sun 13 Aug 2006 00:20 Post subject: Re: Bush's language angers US Muslims
pinpanpun wrote:
In the days after the horror of the 11 September attacks, President George W Bush made a point of saying Muslims per se were not America's enemy.
But in the five years since then, he has taken less care to emphasise that message, US Muslim leaders are saying.
They are upset about his use of terms like "Islamic fascists", which he used this week both for Hezbollah and the suspected bomb plotters held in the UK.
That's amazing!
They are offended because someone treats them of murderers. They can kill people by the thousands in terrorist attacks and get offended because someone point them like the biggest suspects.
For me, personally, Muslims mean Madrid train attacks, and the rememberances of the ancient moorish invasions, stonning of women, amputation of the hands of criminals, violent invassion, sect killings, slavery and religios fanatism. In short, Muslims means intollerance and violence, particularly against the West.
Quote:
"It offends the vast majority of moderate Muslims," Ahmed Younis said.
What are the "moderate" muslims doing to stop the radicals, besides getting offended so easily?
Quote:
"The use of the term casts a shadow upon Islam and bolsters the argument that there is a clash of civilisations between Islam and the West," Mr Younis, the national director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (Mpac), told the BBC.
What else is going on in here, then? Muslims people is the one that are plotting the terrorist attacks, and they still believe that by killing the enemy they'll go to Paradyse.
Quote:
He said it was wrong to link the actions of violent Muslims to their religion.
"There is nothing Islamic about their fascism. The Prophet [Muhammad] and the Koran clearly articulate that this type of activity is outside of bounds for Muslims."
Have he really read the Koran?
Quote:
Mr Bush used the term on at least two separate occasions this week.
On Monday, during a press conference from his ranch in Texas, he said terrorists "try to spread their jihadist message - a message I call ... Islamic radicalism, Islamic fascism".
A moment later, he said "Islamo-fascism" was an "ideology that is real and profound".
Nothing knew. Everybody know that's the truth, no matter some Muslims "get offended". What a hiprocresy.
Quote:
Its chairman Parvez Ahmed condemned his "use of ill-defined hot-button terms", which, he said, "feeds the perception that the war on terror is actually a war on Islam".
That's actually the truth. Islam is the cause of too much violence from Indonesia and China to the west. Bombings and killings going all all the way.
Quote:
Mr Younis of Mpac said he believed the president's use of the term was "a mistake" and that Mr Bush's speechwriters would drop it in the future.
He added that the idea that "there is a school of thought called Islamic fascism is a misnomer".
Perhaps Islamism is enough. No need to add fascism. Everybody knows Islam is a religion that preaches violence and that forms "martyrs".
Quote:
In Washington, Mr Younis said the president's linking of Islam with fascism would alienate "moderate Muslims who are needed at the front line of any effort to counter terrorism or extremism by Muslims".
Moderate muslims, if exists, have been sleeping for too long by now. Theirs voices have not beeing heared at all.
Posted: Sun 13 Aug 2006 01:54 Post subject: Re: Bush's language angers US Muslims
oevega wrote:
pinpanpun wrote:
In the days after the horror of the 11 September attacks, President George W Bush made a point of saying Muslims per se were not America's enemy.
But in the five years since then, he has taken less care to emphasise that message, US Muslim leaders are saying.
They are upset about his use of terms like "Islamic fascists", which he used this week both for Hezbollah and the suspected bomb plotters held in the UK.
That's amazing!
They are offended because someone treats them of murderers. They can kill people by the thousands in terrorist attacks and get offended because someone point them like the biggest suspects.
For me, personally, Muslims mean Madrid train attacks, and the rememberances of the ancient moorish invasions, stonning of women, amputation of the hands of criminals, violent invassion, sect killings, slavery and religios fanatism. In short, Muslims means intollerance and violence, particularly against the West.
Quote:
"It offends the vast majority of moderate Muslims," Ahmed Younis said.
What are the "moderate" muslims doing to stop the radicals, besides getting offended so easily?
Quote:
"The use of the term casts a shadow upon Islam and bolsters the argument that there is a clash of civilisations between Islam and the West," Mr Younis, the national director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council (Mpac), told the BBC.
What else is going on in here, then? Muslims people is the one that are plotting the terrorist attacks, and they still believe that by killing the enemy they'll go to Paradyse.
Quote:
He said it was wrong to link the actions of violent Muslims to their religion.
"There is nothing Islamic about their fascism. The Prophet [Muhammad] and the Koran clearly articulate that this type of activity is outside of bounds for Muslims."
Have he really read the Koran?
Quote:
Mr Bush used the term on at least two separate occasions this week.
On Monday, during a press conference from his ranch in Texas, he said terrorists "try to spread their jihadist message - a message I call ... Islamic radicalism, Islamic fascism".
A moment later, he said "Islamo-fascism" was an "ideology that is real and profound".
Nothing knew. Everybody know that's the truth, no matter some Muslims "get offended". What a hiprocresy.
Quote:
Its chairman Parvez Ahmed condemned his "use of ill-defined hot-button terms", which, he said, "feeds the perception that the war on terror is actually a war on Islam".
That's actually the truth. Islam is the cause of too much violence from Indonesia and China to the west. Bombings and killings going all all the way.
Quote:
Mr Younis of Mpac said he believed the president's use of the term was "a mistake" and that Mr Bush's speechwriters would drop it in the future.
He added that the idea that "there is a school of thought called Islamic fascism is a misnomer".
Perhaps Islamism is enough. No need to add fascism. Everybody knows Islam is a religion that preaches violence and that forms "martyrs".
Quote:
In Washington, Mr Younis said the president's linking of Islam with fascism would alienate "moderate Muslims who are needed at the front line of any effort to counter terrorism or extremism by Muslims".
Moderate muslims, if exists, have been sleeping for too long by now. Theirs voices have not beeing heared at all.
Omar
Omar,
Blaming all followers of Islam for the crimes of others sounds like bigotry. Not all Muslims believe in Islamofascism.
Moreover, Christians have committed their fair share of crimes against humanity. I think many Indigenous Americans, Australians, Africans, and Asians can attest to Christians raping, pillaging, etc. Heck, your hero, Christopher Columbus started a policy on Hispanola to hack off the hands or other limbs as punishment for failure to produce enough gold.
It's very sad that you would hold onto anger from wars that took place hundreds of years ago that affects no one today. Indigenous Americans have more right to anger given their current continued mistreatment by the descendants of their Christian conquerors.
Look at the Bosnia-Croatia-Serbia conflict. People fighting over grudges from conflicts that took place centuries past. That's pathetic. All of those people lived together relatively peacefully under the banner of Yugoslavia. Once the Cold War ended and they gained independence from the Communists, it was time to kill each other thanks to demagouges. It didn't matter that ethnic groups had intermarried and lived as family and friends for decades.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Sun 13 Aug 2006 04:47 Post subject: Re: Bush's language angers US Muslims
triguy wrote:
...Omar,
Blaming all followers of Islam for the crimes of others sounds like bigotry. Not all Muslims believe in Islamofascism.
I blame some Moroccian immigrants, which were formed in the Islamic religion, and that were converted into extremists by who knows who, for the bombings of Madrid. That's a fact.
Quote:
Moreover, Christians have committed their fair share of crimes against humanity. I think many Indigenous Americans, Australians, Africans, and Asians can attest to Christians raping, pillaging, etc.
I agree on all the above. The Crusaders, the Inquisition and the Protestant bigotry commited lots of crimes. However, you should not forget a very simple fact:
Christians are already CONTROLLED.
Just see how many priests have been sent to jail because they were degenerated people!
Christianism is a religion that these days is domesticated and has to follow the rule of the secular LAW. To achieve that, to control the Church, westerners had to fight for centuries against the Christian churches. And only during the 20th century the west managed to take religion out of the political control.
Even today there are Christian nuts that want to teach creationism, but those are just the last actions of a religion that used to control the minds of the west like if people were robots. Not anymore.
Quote:
Heck, your hero, Christopher Columbus started a policy on Hispanola to hack off the hands or other limbs as punishment for failure to produce enough gold.
Colombus is just another brute of their time. I admire him like a visionary, but not like an administrator. Remember he went back in chains to Spain, and that happened because some reasons. Brutality was quite common during the first days of the conquest, when the "private enterprise" was in action and the colonial governments where not formed as yet.
Quote:
It's very sad that you would hold onto anger from wars that took place hundreds of years ago that affects no one today.
You really don't realize the real impact of the Islam in Spain and onto us, finally. Islam changed the destiny of Spain for worst.
Spain was a Roman province once, and have a way of living very standar for the West, but it was invaded and converted in a country of hate because of the brutish invasion it suffered in the hands of Islam. Militarism, extreme religiosity, violence, all of that was the heritage of the invansion, and that has affected us even today.
However, what I am afraid is what's happening today in the world. I saw 200 Indians killed in Bombay bombings of a train, killings of tourisn in South East Asia and Egypt, bombing of the london subway, the killing of Madrid, hundred of russian children killed at a school, the destruction of the 11 of september. And I see that in all those attacks the terrorists has been Muslims. What do you want I believe about Muslims in general, then? Do you really want me to believe they are peaceful?
Is like with Colombians. One hear "colombian" and immediately believe the person is a drug dealer. In the same way one hear Muslim, and the immediate association is terrorist. I am afraid things are following that path. And I see in the Muslim extremism (Not all muslims, of course) one of the most dangerous threat the world have.
Quote:
Indigenous Americans have more right to anger given their current continued mistreatment by the descendants of their Christian conquerors.
At least in Latin America most people is mixed. So the left hand have to fight with the right hand, because the Spaniard and the Native exist in the same person.
Quote:
Look at the Bosnia-Croatia-Serbia conflict. People fighting over grudges from conflicts that took place centuries past. That's pathetic. All of those people lived together relatively peacefully under the banner of Yugoslavia. Once the Cold War ended and they gained independence from the Communists, it was time to kill each other thanks to demagouges. It didn't matter that ethnic groups had intermarried and lived as family and friends for decades.
Yes. That happens when countries does not have a common, global and embracing identity for all its people. It is not the case of most of Latin American countries at all.
Omar what you are saying about Spain sounds like anti-Islamic propaganda. Let's make fair statements and point the finger back at Christianity and paganism in that case. Christianity and Christian people have been as or more brutal that Islamic people and Islam depending on what part of history and intercultural contact one considers. The genocides and subjugation of native people of the world during the colonial/imperialist period of history need only be mentioned to check that kind of revisionist thinking.
I doubt sincerely that a Sephardic Jew would look towards Christian Spain as an enlightened improvement over Moorish Spain. Moreover, the Romans persecuted Jews at a rate that could outweigh the Nazi holocaust if one looks at the percentage of the population that was murdered. The Romans also killed Christians with glee until Constatine converted. The Vikings did the same. Neither are the only examples.
The Moors brought many advances to Spain in terms of medicine, law and philosophy. Their hygiene and medical practices alone were vastly superior to those in other parts of Europe, where many people believed regular bathing was unhealthy, making the population more prone to disease, vermin infestation and plagues.
Andalucian Spain was a light in Europe, and though it was no utopia, one can make the argument that for many people it was a more just society than the Spanish would re-create.
oevega wrote:
Christianism is a religion that these days is domesticated and has to follow the rule of the secular LAW. To achieve that, to control the Church, westerners had to fight for centuries against the Christian churches. And only during the 20th century the west managed to take religion out of the political control.
This is not due to the moral superiority of the Christian religion or European societies. When Europe was dominated by monarchies/empires that were sanctioned by the Church (Holy Roman Empire, anyone?) brutal theocracies were the norm. Islamic societies could and have become more secular as well - Turkey and Dubai are two examples.
I do agree that Islam is not a peaceful religion. Muslims have and can be peaceful and just, but Islamic societies have been as militarist and aggressive as ancient Greek/Macedonian societies were.
Last edited by sagascend on Sun 13 Aug 2006 13:31; edited 1 time in total
Posted: Sun 13 Aug 2006 13:31 Post subject: FREE MUSLIMS COALITION
This is a wonderful organization and I encourage everyone here to brouse this site. Clear thinking, modern, intelligent and peace loving people who call themselves Muslim do exist. However, they most certainly do face an uphill and frightening battle against their primitive and backward minded, totilitarian loving and violence supporting brothers and sisters.
For the sake of this world and all of it's inhabitants, I hope and pray these decent & brave people - along with former Muslims (now atheist) Ayan Hirsi Ali, Salmond Rushdie, Ali Sina and many many others - plus the leaders of free nations and law enforcement - continue to make a positive impact against Islamic terroism which threatens us all. Each in their own way.
Truly, IMO people need to stop bringing up Christianity when the topic at hand (I believe) is Islamic fundamentalism/extremism and how to stop it from spreading and destroying peoples lives.
Slavery, child marriage, torture and murder, the stoning to death of women and genital mutliation of girls, decapitations of kidnapee's, hanging of gays, bombings of innocent civilians, and other unspeakable horrors are being carried out right now in THIS century by Islamic extremists and their sympathesiers. Mentioning the atrocities that took place during the Crusades and other historical periods - which we're all aware of and denounce - does nothing but take attention away from the problem at hand today. People need to stay on track and realize who/what the CURRENT enemy is (and always has been for a large segment of the earths population).
The Free Muslims Coalition is a nonprofit organization made up of American Muslims and American Arabs of all backgrounds who feel that religious violence and terrorism have not been fully rejected by the Muslim community in the post 9-11 era.
Free Muslims was created to eliminate broad base support for Islamic extremism and terrorism and to strengthen secular democratic institutions in the Middle East and the Muslim World by supporting Islamic reformation efforts.
Free Muslims promotes a modern secular interpretation of Islam which is peace-loving, democracy-loving and compatible with other faiths and beliefs. Free Muslims' efforts are unique; it is the only mainstream American-Muslim organization willing to attack extremism and terrorism unambiguously. Unfortunately most other Muslim leaders and organizations believe that when it comes to terrorism, the end justifies the means.
Other Americans have spoken up against terrorism, but never before has this message come with such clarity from Muslims or Arabs. Muslims are the only ones who can solve the problem of terror in Islam, and sadly until the founding of this Coalition, they were the only group who had not definitively spoken up against the use of terror.
Taking our religion back one Muslim at a time
Quote:
We believe in the re-interpretation of Islam for the 21st century where terrorism is not justified under any circumstances.
We believe in the separation of religion and state.
We believe that democracy is the best form of government.
We believe in the promotion of secularism in all forms of political activity.
We believe that equality for women is an inalienable right.
We believe that religion is a personal relationship between the individual and his or her God and is not to be forced on anyone.
Our Positions
Quote:
The Free Muslims Coalition believes that there can NEVER be a justification for terrorism.
The Coalition believes that fundamentalist Islamic terror represents one of the most lethal threats to the stability of the civilized world. The existence of Islamic terrorists is the existence of threats to democracy. There is no room for terrorism in the modern world and the United States should take a no-tolerance stance on terrorism in order to avoid another tragedy, along the lines of 9-11. With the added threat of biochemical weapons, the call to defeat terrorism has never been so urgent.
Among Islamic scholars, the concept of jihad ranges in definition from the personal struggle against temptation to holy war. All calls for jihad to create an Islamic state should be rejected as heretic and a threat to modern society. The Coalition feels that the concept of jihad should be reinterpreted for a modern day context in which holy war is obsolete. No holy war needs to be waged; there is no clear and present threat to Islam; the only war that needs to be waged in the modern world is one against terrorists and extremists. As militant Islamic fundamentalism increases, the Coalition will wage a battle of minds as we bring Islam into the 21st century and introduce a doctrine which is compatible with democracy and modern living.
So far, the few Muslims who choose to speak up against militant extremist Islam have faced threats of violence and accusations of being anti-Islam. Even members of this Coalition face threats as they carry out their work. In effect, the message disseminated by radical Muslims is that merely discussing Islamic terrorism is to be construed as an attack on Islam.
More effectively, Muslim extremists have quelled criticism against them from peaceful Muslims by adopting popular Muslim and Arab causes. A case in point is the adoption of the Palestinian cause. The issue of Palestine and the perceived suffering of the Palestinians is the single most important issue that unites the entire Muslim and Arab world. No issue evokes the passion of Muslims and Arabs as much as the Palestinian-Israeli conflict.
The Palestinian-Israeli conflict is so important to Arabs and Muslims that every terrorist group from Morocco to Indonesia that seeks legitimacy and a following, places the ?liberation? of Palestine at the forefront of their agenda. For example, recall that Saddam Hussein responded to the world?s request that he leave Kuwait by insisting that Israel first evacuate the West Bank and Gaza. Osama Bin Laden also invoked the Palestinian issue to justify 9-11. Iran has made the Palestinian issue its most important foreign policy priority since the Islamic Revolution of 1979. HAMAS, Hezbollah and Islamic Jihad justify the murder of innocent Jews by adopting the Palestinian cause.
The clever adoption of the Palestinian cause has made it difficult for peaceful Muslims to attack terrorist organizations such as Islamic Jihad and HAMAS. The real aim of organizations such as Al-Qaeda, HAMAS, Hezbollah and countries such as Iran is not just the ?liberation of Palestine? but the creation of a fundamentalist Muslim empire made up of every Muslim nation. This desire to create a Muslim empire is based on the delusion that modernity is a threat to Islam and the idea that the Muslim community has strayed from God and if they were to return to a strict interpretation of Islam that the problems in the Muslim world would be solved. It is this exact mentality spurned of paranoia, ignorance and fear that inspired and supported the Taliban and the creation of a medieval society in Afghanistan.
The Coalition rejects the urgent desire by extremist groups to create a strict Islamic empire as a justification for terrorism. The coalition rejects the desire to help the Palestinians as a justification for terrorism. The coalition rejects the use of terrorism under any circumstances and will challenge the terrorists? propaganda machines head on.
The Coalition will seek to raise the peaceful voices of Muslims world wide. The terrorist and extremist Muslims will no longer go unchallenged. Their days of sympathetic leaching off the Muslim community are numbered.
Don't Blame the "Jews"
Quote:
Another disturbing trend that is heavily propagated by extremists and accepted by many naive Arabs and Muslims is the blaming of all Muslim problems on the ?Jews.? There are numerous examples for this but most recently news broadcasts out of Iraq quoted Iraqi victims of violence who blamed the bombings on Jews or a Jewish conspiracy.
Many Arabs and Muslims still blame the 9-11 attacks on a Jewish conspiracy that was allegedly perpetrated to demonize Arabs and Muslims in the eyes of the world.
One of the most recent and tragic examples of unjustified hate towards Jews was the brutal murder of Daniel Pearl. Daniel Pearl was a journalist murdered by Islamic extremists in Pakistan who had never met a Jew, and the only knowledge they had about Jews was the tireless propaganda from Muslim extremists throughout the world blaming Jews for all of the world?s problems. The extremists targeted and murdered Daniel Pearl because he was a Jew.
Our research indicates that one of the modern origins of this trend is the mutual demonization by Israelis and Arabs of each other to gain global support for each other?s causes. This pattern includes the Arab media?s ceaseless reference to the falsified document, the Protocols of Zion. The Coalition strongly urges Muslims and Arabs to refrain from demonizing Jews and stop blaming Jews for all of the world?s problems. The Coalition also urges Israelis to stop demonizing Arabs and Muslims who peacefully advocate for the rights of Palestinians.
Modern Islam
Quote:
The term "modern Islam" is a controversial term often stirring deep passions among Muslims.
Some Muslims use the term referring to a necessary evolution in Muslim thinking that is long overdue. While others are enraged by those who use the term as trying to change the basic tenets of Islam which are ?clear? with no change or evolution necessary.
The Free Muslims Coalition does not seek to change the tenets of the religion. However, the Coalition believes that the Koran only provides general principals of governance which leaves the faithful with substantial flexibility to modernize popular Muslim practices and beliefs.
The Coalition seeks to encourage discussion among Muslims about every aspect of their religion as it applies to modern times. The unwillingness of the Muslim religious establishment to consider modernizing the faith has relegated most Muslims to third world status and in many instances to a medieval existence.
Those who seek change are often afraid to speak out because of the aggressive and violent nature of those Muslims who reject change. The silence of peaceful Muslims has resulted in the hijacking of Islam by extremists and terrorists. This must change.
The Coalition seeks to give a voice to these reformers and fearlessly challenges the extremists and those who justify terrorism.
Last edited by zsana on Mon 14 Aug 2006 13:30; edited 3 times in total
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Sun 13 Aug 2006 14:11 Post subject: Churches.
sagascend wrote:
Omar what you are saying about Spain sounds like anti-Islamic propaganda. Let's make fair statements and point the finger back at Christianity and paganism in that case. Christianity and Christian people have been as or more brutal that Islamic people and Islam depending on what part of history and intercultural contact one considers. The genocides and subjugation of native people of the world during the colonial/imperialist period of history need only be mentioned to check that kind of revisionist thinking.
That is well known. But the Christian Churches were already targeted like a source of many violence in the west. And Christianism, in practical terms, has already been neutralized.
In short, the west IS NOT Christian, but a set of civilian societies where democracy is at work, and where religion has not business in the management of the states or in the definition of the laws. Even in education, the churches are controlled for what they teach people.
People in the west knows religions have a possitive side, but also a very negative side because they are sources of conflicts, hate and war. What better example of that that the Spanish Civil war where old fashioned Christianity allied with fascism in the worst massacre of the 20th century Hispanic world.
Quote:
I doubt sincerely that a Sephardic Jew would look towards Christian Spain as an enlightened improvement over Moorish Spain.
A very tragic event, indeed, it was the expulsion of the Jews and Moors from Spain. But it should not be forgotten that it was a painful decision that took Queen Isabel (Isabella) in a fragmented and Balcanized country, in order to regain the control of theirs lands for her people.
Quote:
Moreover, the Romans persecuted Jews at a rate that could outweigh the Nazi holocaust if one looks at the percentage of the population that was murdered. The Romans also killed Christians with glee until Constatine converted. The Vikings did the same. Neither are the only examples.
Nobody dissagree on that. The west has not being precisely a peaceful place.
Quote:
The Moors brought many advances to Spain in terms of medicine, law and philosophy. Their hygiene and medical practices alone were vastly superior to those in other parts of Europe, where many people believed regular bathing was unhealthy, making the population more prone to disease, vermin infestation and plagues.
No one dissagre on that. That happened not only in Spain and Portugal but in Sicily as well. And we do know that the presence of Islamic secular science and phylosophy was the origin of the renacense of Europe. In my case, I admire Al-Kwarismi, Alhazen, Avicena and Kayyam and many other scholars of the time. Some of them were born in Iberia or Italy.
Quote:
Andalucian Spain was a light in Europe, and though it was no utopia, one can make the argument that for many people it was a more just society than the Spanish would re-create.
To certain degree, only. It is true from the 7th century to the 11th century only, but after the 12th Century the Muslim society start to become more and more fanatic, and that was the beginning of the end of the presence of Muslims in Spain. Without mention that by that time Turks where starting to replace Arabs from the control of Islam.
Quote:
oevega wrote:
Christianism is a religion that these days is domesticated and has to follow the rule of the secular LAW. To achieve that, to control the Church, westerners had to fight for centuries against the Christian churches. And only during the 20th century the west managed to take religion out of the political control.
This is not due to the moral superiority of the Christian religion or European societies. When Europe was dominated by monarchies/empires that were sanctioned by the Church (Holy Roman Empire, anyone?) brutal theocracies were the norm. Islamic societies could and have become more secular as well - Turkey and Dubai are two examples.
Yes. Today's Turkey is the exception. My problem is not with the religion itself, but with societies dominated by a religion. Turkey is a secular country when its people is majoritary Muslim, and that show a new mentality. The rest should follow.
Quote:
I do agree that Islam is not a peaceful religion. Muslims have and can be peaceful and just, but Islamic societies have been as militarist and aggressive as ancient Greek/Macedonian societies were.
Yes, but societies have to change. Today we are not in the times of the ancient Greeks or in the Middle Ages. The world expect countries are able to control their religions and fanatics. That's the path that has to be follow.
And I agree with you. Modern Turkey is a good example of a way of this chaos for Muslim societies.
A very tragic event, indeed, it was the expulsion of the Jews and Moors from Spain. But it should not be forgotten that it was a painful decision that took Queen Isabel (Isabella) in a fragmented and Balcanized country, in order to regain the control of theirs lands for her people.
They also were murdered by the Church-State, and Queen Isabella might have wrung her hands in private but she was the ultimate Christian crusader in her bloody and ethnocentric policies. Your statement makes it sounds as though they were rounded up and herded out of Spain instead of deprived by their lives in abominable ways at the hands of the Inquisition. Even those who had converted to Catholicism were killed or expelled if they were lucky. This was not a fringe movement by the Franciscans or Dominicans but a State policy designed by Ferdinand and Isabella, the "great saviours" of Spain.
That is well known. But the Christian Churches were already targeted like a source of many violence in the west. And Christianism, in practical terms, has already been neutralized.
In short, the west IS NOT Christian, but a set of civilian societies where democracy is at work, and where religion has not business in the management of the states or in the definition of the laws. Even in education, the churches are controlled for what they teach people.
Of course the West is Christian! Influences by Judaism and progressive/secular in many ways, but still fundamentally Christian. It is one thing to say a state is secular and another to say that it is not religious or its laws are not defined by a religion. Churches are not controlled, they are simply not the business of the state. The fact that there is even a debate about teaching creationism in schools, and abstinence-only sex education is common in U.S. schools demonstrates that Christian values/morals are influential in laws and public policy.
oevega wrote:
Yes, but societies have to change. Today we are not in the times of the ancient Greeks or in the Middle Ages. The world expect countries are able to control their religions and fanatics. That's the path that has to be follow.
We may not be in ancient Greece or the Middle Ages but it's no fluke that our current problems are deeply rooted in the past. Modern people aren't much different than ancient people when it comes to being blinded by faith and convinced of their cultural superiority.
The world can't have it both ways, and the West is especially hypocritical vis a vis the Middle East. You can't prop up fundamentalist theocratic governments on one hand (i.e., Saudi Arabia and Pakistan) and decry terrorism on the other. What the West expects is for the wolf to mind the hen house and then is outraged when chickens are killed. One has to ask why Western governments so concerned about terrorism have sown the seeds for fundamentalism with their foreign policies.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Sun 13 Aug 2006 19:18 Post subject: Diversity
Quote:
[quote="sagascend"]
oevega wrote:
A very tragic event, indeed, it was the expulsion of the Jews and Moors from Spain. But it should not be forgotten that it was a painful decision that took Queen Isabel (Isabella) in a fragmented and Balcanized country, in order to regain the control of theirs lands for her people.
They also were murdered by the Church-State, and Queen Isabella might have wrung her hands in private but she was the ultimate Christian crusader in her bloody and ethnocentric policies.
How many Jews were murdered in and after the expulsion? Do you really know? As far as I know the Jewish population of Spain was around 600.000 people by the time. Half become Christian and the other half took refuge in Portugal, Norther Europe, Italy, Northern Africa in Turkey and even the Middle East. Of the ones that remained in Spain, did so because they were alredy converted to Christianity. And the cases of killings were not massive but selective, by a terror politics of repression directed by the state. Queen Isabel is still considered -by same- a great woman, that took the nasty decisions at the right time, and that gave Spain back to Spaniards.
The expulsion of the Jews is shameful and sad, but people should not forget that even today, both Spaniards and Hispanics have a lot of Hebrew ancentry on them, and a jewish intellectual heritage that permeates the culture. Now, the Sephardites of today has more in common with the people of Spain that to any other people in world.
Quote:
Your statement makes it sounds as though they were rounded up and herded out of Spain instead of deprived by their lives in abominable ways at the hands of the Inquisition. Even those who had converted to Catholicism were killed or expelled if they were lucky.
That's false. Only those Jews that converted and that, afterwards, went back to the Jewish religion were the target of the Inquisition. Those were a small minority. Most of Jews either chose to leave the contry and keep their religion, or chose to mantain the country and lost the religion. Actually, that happened with Muslims as well, and many become christians to avoid expulsion.
Quote:
This was not a fringe movement by the Franciscans or Dominicans but a State policy designed by Ferdinand and Isabella, the "great saviours" of Spain.
Yes, Dominicans particularly were the represive police of the new state. Nobody denies that. What perhaps you don't know is that it was the state which asked to imposse Inquisition to control disidents and not the church. Inquisition is the church at the service of the state and not the other way around.
Quote:
Of course the West is Christian! Influences by Judaism and progressive/secular in many ways, but still fundamentally Christian.
I dissagre on that. Of course most people is Christian in the West, but a large percentage don't take religion like the central part of their lives. Besides, atheists and agnostics make a good fraction of the population as well. The French Revolution was the beginning of the freedom from the church of the western people.
Quote:
It is one thing to say a state is secular and another to say that it is not religious or its laws are not defined by a religion. Churches are not controlled, they are simply not the business of the state. The fact that there is even a debate about teaching creationism in schools, and abstinence-only sex education is common in U.S. schools demonstrates that Christian values/morals are influential in laws and public policy.
That only shows that religion is a hard dying animal. But the efforts exist to get rid of theirs influence in politics and laws. Is that continuos battle between faith and the rights of the common people what you can appreciate in the west.
Quote:
We may not be in ancient Greece or the Middle Ages but it's no fluke that our current problems are deeply rooted in the past. Modern people aren't much different than ancient people when it comes to being blinded by faith and convinced of their cultural superiority.
I must agree on that.
Quote:
The world can't have it both ways, and the West is especially hypocritical vis a vis the Middle East. You can't prop up fundamentalist theocratic governments on one hand (i.e., Saudi Arabia and Pakistan) and decry terrorism on the other.
I agree on that, too. I believe the western superpowers (I don't mean all the West at all, which have a lot of more countries and mentalities that the "US+UK+Israel axis" ) have done a pretty bad job in keeping peace, good relations and good influences in the Middle East.
Quote:
What the West expects is for the wolf to mind the hen house and then is outraged when chickens are killed. One has to ask why Western governments so concerned about terrorism have sown the seeds for fundamentalism with their foreign policies.
I completely agree on that point too. I believe the dominant Western powers, and particularly the U.S. should take another approach to look at the Middle East, which is a region that has suffered too much already, while nobody say nothing about it. And that is a source of revenges and terrorism.
How many Jews were murdered in and after the expulsion? Do you really know?
This is from the wikpedia article cited above:
Quote:
The number of the Jews that left Spain is not known, not even with an approximation. Historians of the period give extremely high figures (Juan de Mariana speaks of 800,000 people, and Isaac Abravanel of 300,000). Nevertheless, current estimates significantly reduce this number. (Henry Kamen estimates that, of a population of approximately 80,000 Jews, about one half or 40,000 chose emigration [7]). The Spanish Jews emigrated mainly to Portugal (where they were later expelled in 1497) and to Morocco. Much later, the Sefardim, descendants of Spanish Jews, established flourishing communities in many cities of Europe, North Africa, and, mainly, in the Ottoman Empire.
Those who remained enlarged the group of conversos who were the preferred objective of the Inquisition. Given that all the Jews who remained in the Kingdoms of Spain had been baptized, continuing to practice Judaism put them at risk of being denounced. Given that during the three months prior to the expulsion there were numerous baptisms--some 40,000 if one accepts the totals given by Kamen--one can logically assume that a large number of them were not sincere, but were simply a result of necessity to avoid the expulsion decree.
The most intense period of persecution of conversos lasted through 1530. From 1531 through 1560, however, the percentage of conversos among the Inquisition trials lowered significantly, down to 3% of the total. There was a rebirth of persecutions when a group of crypto-Jews was discovered in Quintanar de la Orden in 1588; and the last decade of the sixteenth century saw a rise in denunciations of conversos. At the beginning of the seventeenth century some conversos who had fled to Portugal began to return to Spain, fleeing the persecution of the Portuguese Inquisition that was founded in 1532. This translated into a rapid increase in the trials of crypto-Jews, among them a number of important financiers. In 1691, during a number of Autos de Fe in Mallorca, 36 chuetas, or conversos of Mallorca, were burned.
During the eighteenth century, the number of conversos accused by the Inquisition dropped significantly. The last trial of a crypto-Jew was of Manuel Santiago Vivar, which took place in Cordoba in 1818.
The article also estimates that 2,000 Jews were killed by the Inquisition between 1480 and 1530, but also says the exact number is not known.
oevega wrote:
That's false. Only those Jews that converted and that, afterwards, went back to the Jewish religion were the target of the Inquisition.
I disagree with that. The Inquisition was not infallible or even insistant on credible evidence that targeted conversos were still practicing Jews. It seems anyone could accuse a converso of not being Catholic enough and that was enough reason to start proceedings. Also, although religion is provided as the overarching reason for the Inquisition I imagine that less high-minded motivations drove inquisitors and their "witnesses." They're only human after all.
oevega wrote:
What perhaps you don't know is that it was the state which asked to imposse Inquisition to control disidents and not the church.
Again, citing the Wikpedia article, it seemed to be a meeting of the minds politically and initiated by the Church:
Quote:
Alonso de Hojeda, a Dominican from Seville, convinced Queen Isabel of the existence of crypto-Judaism among Andalusian conversos during her stay in Seville between 1477 and 1478.[4] A report, produced at the request of the monarchs by Pedro González de Mendoza, archbishop of Seville and by the Segovian Dominican Tomás de Torquemada, corroborated this assertion. The monarchs decided to introduce the Inquisition to Castile to uncover and do away with false converts, and requested the Pope's assent. On November 1, 1478, Pope Sixtus IV promulgated the bull Exigit sinceras devotionis affectus, through which the Inquisition was established in the Kingdom of Castile. The bull also gave the monarchs exclusive authority to name the inquisitors. The first two inquisitors, Miguel de Morillo and Juan de San Martín were not named, however, until two years later, on September 27, 1480 in Medina del Campo.
At first, the activity of the Inquisition was limited the dioceses of Seville and Cordoba, where Alonso de Hojeda had detected the center of converso activity. The first Auto de Fé was celebrated in Seville on February 6, 1481: six people were burned alive. The sermon was given by the same Alonso de Hojeda whose suspicions had given birth to the Inquisition. From there, the Inquisition grew rapidly in the Kingdom of Castile. By 1492, tribunals existed in eight Castilian cities: Ávila, Cordoba, Jaén, Medina del Campo, Segovia, Sigüenza, Toledo and Valladolid.
oevega wrote:
The expulsion of the Jews is shameful and sad, but people should not forget that even today, both Spaniards and Hispanics have a lot of Hebrew ancentry on them, and a jewish intellectual heritage that permeates the culture. Now, the Sephardites of today has more in common with the people of Spain that to any other people in world.
Jewish intellectualism permeates all of Western culture. I can't imagine where we would be without it. Spain, Portugal and Eastern Europe probably have as much Semitic ancestry from Arabs and Muslims if not more. Wherever Jews went (or were forced to go) thankfully they brought their traditions with them. Sephardic Jews are still Jews - they have more in common with other Jews, which includes European and Asian Jews. Assimilated Jews in any country are hard to distinguish.
oevega wrote:
That only shows that religion is a hard dying animal. But the efforts exist to get rid of theirs influence in politics and laws. Is that continuos battle between faith and the rights of the common people what you can appreciate in the west.
You're looking at things from the perspective of someone who lives in a secular country that has already "won" the battle. The same struggle exists in Islamic countries. Many progressive Muslims have died fighting for secularism and democracy.
I agree with you that the foreign policy of the U.S. and UK has played the biggest role, along with France and Germany. We should also not forget the Soviets though it's debatable how "Western" they were.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Sun 13 Aug 2006 23:50 Post subject: Inquisition
sagascend wrote:
...
The article also estimates that 2,000 Jews were killed by the Inquisition between 1480 and 1530, but also says the exact number is not known.
Actually, it is surprising that the "method" of the Inquisition was planned to control people by terror rather than by massacres. The totals murders are around 4.000 in about 8 centuries. But the terror those killings produced affected tens of millions of people during centuries.
At the middle of the 20th century was still possible to feel the echoes of the Inquisition in the mind of common people, and a fanatic hate many have against the Catholic church for that.
Quote:
oevega wrote:
That's false. Only those Jews that converted and that, afterwards, went back to the Jewish religion were the target of the Inquisition.
I disagree with that. The Inquisition was not infallible or even insistant on credible evidence that targeted conversos were still practicing Jews. It seems anyone could accuse a converso of not being Catholic enough and that was enough reason to start proceedings. Also, although religion is provided as the overarching reason for the Inquisition I imagine that less high-minded motivations drove inquisitors and their "witnesses." They're only human after all.
Actually, most of the accusations were politically motivated. One should not forget, though, that in the following centuries, a large percentage of the Spanish intellectuals were conversos. There are people that suspect Cervantes and Columbus were conversos, but there are many cases of powerful people that appear in the history of Spain who addapted quite well to the transition. I believe that was the origin of the hate against the Church that many Hispanics have and the distance that others mark with the Church, including myself.
Quote:
Alonso de Hojeda, a Dominican from Seville, convinced Queen Isabel of the existence of crypto-Judaism among Andalusian conversos during her stay in Seville between 1477 and 1478.[4] A report, produced at the request of the monarchs by Pedro González de Mendoza, archbishop of Seville and by the Segovian Dominican Tomás de Torquemada, corroborated this assertion.
Queen Isabel (Isabella) was not a dumb girl easy to convince. Actually she dominated not only her husband but all the Christian kingdoms of Spain. They were looking into a strategic rather than religious problem. Jews were know to be very influential and the allies of Muslims of those times. Spain was invaded several times from Northern Africa and that has to be stopped. And the Turks were the next menace. Something has to be done to assure Spain remained Christian (which means Roman and European). Isabel fought for a Christian Spain and world and she is still considered a heroe for Spain and the Hispanic world.
Quote:
Jewish intellectualism permeates all of Western culture. I can't imagine where we would be without it. Spain, Portugal and Eastern Europe probably have as much Semitic ancestry from Arabs and Muslims if not more. Wherever Jews went (or were forced to go) thankfully they brought their traditions with them. Sephardic Jews are still Jews - they have more in common with other Jews, which includes European and Asian Jews. Assimilated Jews in any country are hard to distinguish.
Well, Sephardic Jews are hard to distinguish from average Spaniards and they speak Ladino, which is a dialect of Castillean Spanish that any Spanish speaker can understand without trainning. Today there are movements that call for the reconciliation between Sephadies and they ancient land: Spain.
Quote:
oevega wrote:
That only shows that religion is a hard dying animal. But the efforts exist to get rid of theirs influence in politics and laws. Is that continuos battle between faith and the rights of the common people what you can appreciate in the west.
You're looking at things from the perspective of someone who lives in a secular country that has already "won" the battle. The same struggle exists in Islamic countries. Many progressive Muslims have died fighting
for secularism and democracy.
The point is countries have to be secular. People can believe in God or several gods, if they wish, but nobody have the rigth to imposse religion on others. Form the human sacrifices of Cartago and Tenochtitlan, to the murders of Crusaders and Muslims extremists, religion has produced a lot of pain in the world, and is time to keep that genious in its cage.
Quote:
I agree with you that the foreign policy of the U.S. and UK has played the biggest role, along with France and Germany. We should also not forget the Soviets though it's debatable how "Western" they were.
Yes. The U.S. and the U.K. are not in tune with what the rest of the West and the whole world wants.
Well, Sephardic Jews are hard to distinguish from average Spaniards and they speak Ladino, which is a dialect of Castillean Spanish that any Spanish speaker can understand without trainning. Today there are movements that call for the reconciliation between Sephadies and they ancient land: Spain.
Sephardic Jews are not just from Spain but also Africa and other parts of the Mediterranean. They look like the people from these regions as well. One of my good friends is a Sephardic Jew from Morocco and Arabic was her first language, along with French. She also speaks some Hebrew. She doesn't speak Spanish any better than I do.
Sephardic Jews are not just from Spain but also Africa and other parts of the Mediterranean. ... Arabic was her first language, along with French. She also speaks some Hebrew. She doesn't speak Spanish any better than I do.
(1) They all originally came from Iberia. (2) Ask her whether she speaks/understands Ladino. I would be surprised if she considers herself Sephardic but speaks no Ladino.
Last edited by fwsweet on Mon 14 Aug 2006 12:48; edited 1 time in total
Thanks for posting that Zsana and see no one has answered it.
The proud and educated elitists would rather debate about history instead of facing the TRUTH about Islam TODAY. You are 100% correct. We are talking about TODAY, NOW, CURRENT EVENTS and not the past. When was the last time a Christian, Catholic, Protestant, Buddist, Jew, Hindu, Bahai, et al bombed someone in their quest for Heaven/Paradise/Nirvana/Abraham's Bosom, etc? Most, of not all, other religions preach peace and helping your fellow man and that to murder innocent civilians, including children, is a sin.
Just like Europeans who are ignoring the 500lb bull in their china shop with their immigration policies. If they don't limit mass immigration and start assimilation immeduately, expect Civil War in about 50 years. But they would rather bash Americans, LOL!
The Moors brought many advances to Spain in terms of medicine, law and philosophy. Their hygiene and medical practices alone were vastly superior to those in other parts of Europe, where many people believed regular bathing was unhealthy, making the population more prone to disease, vermin infestation and plagues.
The Moors were a colonial force advanced in culture and science that enslaved people - and little as it is known were quite racists against the White peoples they conquered. What the Europeans brought to the Americas was every bit if not more what the Moors brought to Spain.
The Spanish just eventually united under their religion and elan for love of patrimony, and took back in collective effort what was conqured from them. The Reconquista was absolutely 100% part of the "War For The Cross" sparking its own military orders. As you find it baised and intellectually flawed for popular media, academia, or anyone else to suggest Black American culture is one and the same with Hip Hop... is pretty much the same way I feel it is baised and intellectually dishonest for one to condemn the Conquistadors or British but to glory in the Moors, and furthermore to reshape dishonestly what the "War For The Cross" was into some term that was used to denote European tax "Crusada" (Crusade) into the limited sphere of the Palestinian region.
Quote:
This is not due to the moral superiority of the Christian religion or European societies. When Europe was dominated by monarchies/empires that were sanctioned by the Church (Holy Roman Empire, anyone?) brutal theocracies were the norm. Islamic societies could and have become more secular as well - Turkey and Dubai are two examples.
Compared to the nomads like the Maygars, Bulgars, Turks, and Khanates... indeed it was quite Holy. The Holy Roman Empire never made colonial efforts into the Americas, Africa, or South East Asia either. In fact I can recall no Iran-Contra Affair in the Holy Roman empire nor similar CIA type conducts in Europe like the CIA did Chile and Gautamala. When Adolphus Gustavus launched his amphibious assualt into the Germanic Empire (Holy Roman Empire) he attacked soverigen territory. Many of the Protestant kingdoms stayed loyal to the Holy Roman Empire and her legal constitution.
The Bulgars used the skull of the Byzantine emperor (Nephaorus I believe his name was) as a gilded goblet to drink from. This was their norm. It has been said that "Mohammed is Charlagmane" meaning the expansion of Islam created medieval European Christianinty. While I don't contend that is entirely true, it does I believe contain an element of truth. Outside forces be they the nomads (usually thought of as the Mongols) or Islamic Turks and Moors had an impact and effect of European Christendom.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Mon 14 Aug 2006 13:42 Post subject: Sephardics
sagascend wrote:
oevega wrote:
Well, Sephardic Jews are hard to distinguish from average Spaniards and they speak Ladino, which is a dialect of Castillean Spanish that any Spanish speaker can understand without trainning. Today there are movements that call for the reconciliation between Sephadies and they ancient land: Spain.
Sephardic Jews are not just from Spain but also Africa and other parts of the Mediterranean. They look like the people from these regions as well. One of my good friends is a Sephardic Jew from Morocco and Arabic was her first language, along with French. She also speaks some Hebrew. She doesn't speak Spanish any better than I do.
Perhaps your friend is not Sephardic in the first place. The term Sephardic has become a little bit fuzzy in recent times, and some confuse it with Turkish or North African Jew. However "Sepharad" means Spain in Hebrew, and, by definition, Sephardites are the Jews of Spain living in the diaspora. Actually, most Sephardic Jews have Spanish last names like Calderon, Garcia and even Vega. And they do speak Ladino, a variation of standard Spanish.
The article below is found on the website Melani23 recently posted.
This is one of the sickest things I've ever read... I'm just shaking my head here. So THIS is why we mothers have to taste our breast milk and baby formula at the airports these days.
HATE-filled mums willing to sacrifice themselves and their BABIES are being hunted in the war on terror.
Security sources confirmed last night that alleged “baby bombers” were among those arrested over the plot to massacre thousands by downing transatlantic flights.
Those being quizzed included a husband and wife with a six-month-old infant.
The discovery prompted fears that there were fanatical mothers in secret al-Qaeda cells in Britain ready to become suicide bombers — and to die with their tots in their arms.
And it emerged as the reason why women at airports were ordered to drink from their babies’ bottles before being allowed to board flights during last week’s massive alert.
One senior Government security adviser warned of a race against time to identify individuals who might pose a threat.
The adviser said: “It may be beyond belief, but we are convinced that there are now women in Britain who are prepared to die with their babies for their twisted cause. They are ruthless, single-minded and totally committed.”
The nightmare is that mums carrying tiny tots would provide “very good cover” and not raise suspicions among even the most alert security guards.
The threat was identified along with an additional warning that as many as two dozen terror cells may still be active in Britain.
The source added: “We believe all the known players involved in last week’s plot have been detained. Our biggest concern now is all the unknown players who may be out there.
“And that includes mothers who are ready and willing to see their little ones die. It is a race against time.” Women around the world have carried out suicide attacks in the past.
Two female Chechen terrorists blew themselves up on separate flights in Russia two years ago.
An intelligence source said: “Al-Qaeda specialises in attempting the unexpected. What could be more unexpected in Western eyes than women willing to die with their babies?”
MI5 chiefs are jubilant over cracking the plan to disguise bombs as soft drinks or baby bottles — but warned that other forms of transport are massively at risk from suicide attacks.
The Government source said: “There are dozens of other outrages being plotted on all forms of transport because they offer the highest potential body count.”
Yesterday it emerged that among those detained in last week’s raids is believed to be a key al-Qaeda figure.
A senior Government official said: “He is not al-Qaeda’s Mr Big in Britain but he is certainly a very important player.”
It is now almost certain that a dummy run for an attack had been planned by terrorists for a flight over the weekend.
“We now think that was on,” said the source.
Last night 23 people arrested in raids in London, Birmingham and High Wycombe, Bucks, remained in police custody.
Twenty-two can be detained until Wednesday and a decision on another individual has been adjourned until today.
Joined: 04 May 2005 {Posts: 2021 } Location: santiago, chile
Posted: Mon 14 Aug 2006 13:50 Post subject: History
Melani23 wrote:
...
Just like Europeans who are ignoring the 500lb bull in their china shop with their immigration policies. If they don't limit mass immigration and start assimilation immeduately, expect Civil War in about 50 years. But they would rather bash Americans, LOL!
Europeans, North Americans and Japaneses have forgoten that in order to preserve a society people has to have kids. And to have kids the family values has to be central to society.
The idea of "buying" people abroad and introduce them to allien societies like immigrants, and even like adoptees, is going to create a lot of ethnic tension for the future generations. Those may end peacefully or, I am afraid, could lead to ethnic wars that will make Yugoslavia a small kids play.
That's why I always mention the failed experiment of diversity in Muslim Spain, because that part of history has the potential of repeating once again at a larger scale this time.
By the way, nobody can stop China by now. Is only a matter of time that Chineses, Japaneses, and perhaps East Indians too, ally and imposse their conditions to the world in every field, from economics to the military.
Perhaps a new Middle Ages are comming to the West without people noticing.
They also were murdered by the Church-State, and Queen Isabella might have wrung her hands in private but she was the ultimate Christian crusader in her bloody and ethnocentric policies. Your statement makes it sounds as though they were rounded up and herded out of Spain instead of deprived by their lives in abominable ways at the hands of the Inquisition. Even those who had converted to Catholicism were killed or expelled if they were lucky. This was not a fringe movement by the Franciscans or Dominicans but a State policy designed by Ferdinand and Isabella, the "great saviours" of Spain.
Those were not uncommon tactics back then. Supposedly war does not end when war is won. If this is true? Then from a policy and social stand point in long terms, the expulsion worked well. Centuries later the policy of the Turks that once ruled the Balkans doesn't seem to have worked well. (because supposedly the war does not just simply end after the war is won. - Look at the situation of Israel in the Middle East this seems to be true)
Spain put to death about 5,000 Jews over the course of several hundred years. That amounts to a b-tch slap under modern carnage. It took U.S. mobs along with the KKK to conduct their own "Inquisition" on Black conduct related to White society, only something like 1 or 2 years if memory serves me correct to lynch approximately 5,000 Black Americans. Modern day Iran has executed over 5,000 homosexual. Stalin killed had more people executed in one day in one town than all the Inquisitions through out all of Latin America over the course of several hundred years. Yet the Inquistion is suppose to be "astonishing" . The Inquistion her self has been described as a "popular movement" because most Catholics wanted and were happy with the Inquisition. One reason is because the Inquisition helped to tide down mob actions and brought trial, order, and institution to capital punishment. She is the inventor in the West of the free public defender or "right to a lawyer."
Quote:
Of course the West is Christian! Influences by Judaism and progressive/secular in many ways, but still fundamentally Christian. It is one thing to say a state is secular and another to say that it is not religious or its laws are not defined by a religion. Churches are not controlled, they are simply not the business of the state. The fact that there is even a debate about teaching creationism in schools, and abstinence-only sex education is common in U.S. schools demonstrates that Christian values/morals are influential in laws and public policy.
I think you and Omar are both correct. But I think Omar is more correct. Much of the Western world today qualifies as "post-christian." Secularism rules and is the dominate faith and philosophy. And as such secular people are going to have to be adult enough to accept the flaws within their own societies. The Black Baptist Church did not create the notorious Crips and Bloods and their ethos. When 50 Cents says "get rich or die trying" that did not come about of religion or Biblical studies class... but it is an inherent ethos to be found in the Sears Tower banking system and secular idea of money and bling bling.
War, combat, hand-to-hand fighting is just a part of life. Just like the need to gather food to alocate clean drinking water to find a way to live. War or personal combat is just a part of life like those things. The martial arts - as well as internationa law - has the right idea or direction concerning war as a collective number of people or down to individual combat, and that is to order it and seek to avoid it, but bring moral or ethical principals into it, because you will never be able to rid life of it totally.
'
FAQ
Search
Register
Log in
) have done a pretty 
no one has answered it.
When was the last time a Christian, Catholic, Protestant, Buddist, Jew, Hindu, Bahai, et al bombed someone in their quest for Heaven/Paradise/Nirvana/Abraham's Bosom, etc? 
Most, of not all, other religions preach peace and helping your fellow man and that to murder innocent civilians, including children, is a sin.
If they don't limit mass immigration and start assimilation immeduately, expect Civil War in about 50 years. But they would rather bash Americans, LOL! 