Melanie Phillips today linked this tragi-comic piece of Front Page drivel, The First Step to Britishness Is Your Poppy. In it, Carol Gould describes how she was accosted by some idiot of Arab origin who noticed her poppy and demanded to know whether she was "from the Jewish". She then got in a cab and took a short ride down the Edgware Road to Marble Arch:
The driver was enormously sympathetic but told me that I had been “asking for it” by walking in what he called “Little Beirut.” He then told me that we were in World War III. His white, working class anger at what he perceived as “the Islamic takeover” of Britain was palpable. He was not the first London cabbie who has told me he would gladly join the far-right British National Party if pushed.
(It is worth noting in this context that London Mayor Ken Livingstone is trying to institute an initiative to bring ethnic minorities into the taxi fleet, to tackle its almost exclusively white domain. Keeping in mind that Washington D.C. has one of the worst taxi systems in the world, in part because most drivers can barely speak English and do not know the meaning of the words “cordial” or “polite”, especially where female passengers are concerned, one prays the Livingstone initiative will be approached with caution.)
Now, being a London van and truck driver, one must point out that a fair amount of the congestion I experience when driving in London is of their making. When working for the then Securicor Omega on the city run in 2001, the Cheapside area (west of the Bank of England) was awash with them. They have a privileged status on the roads and stop pretty much where they like, causing further obstruction. And there is a stereotype of cabbies, and it is only a stereotype I suppose, that they talk absolute crap. This one seems to fit the stereotype to a tee, though.
Perhaps it was Mick the Racist, an individual who used to take me from school to various appointments many years ago? (Perhaps not, as he's probably too old.) I remember being in Mick's Mercedes limousine when he found his way blocked by a black motorist in Camberwell, and he said "I keep forgetting this is Wogsville". I was pretty shocked, because I had been brought up not to be racist and even then did not think someone would say this in front of me. I asked him what he meant, and he said it was where you get cut up by the black men (well, he didn't exactly say black men). I had many experiences with minicab drivers while at school, and a fair number of them were abusive - sometimes physically so, and they made no secret of their anger when they found out that we had told our parents, who had then told the authorities, and in the end they had been reprimanded but still employed ferrying us around town.
Anyway, with the Edgware Road being "Little Beirut", it might surprise nobody that not many poppies can be found on people's lapels there. To be honest, I've not been looking out for poppies, and while I sort of considered buying one, the idea that I should never crossed my mind until my nan asked me, and my dad and sister when we visited her last Sunday, where our poppies were. But if one is talking about the various "ethnic" food outlets along the Edgware Road, I've been in quite a few of them, and most of the people working in them have foreign accents. I would very much doubt that there were many British-born Muslims working in or running many of the places Carol Gould visited. And where are these "hijab boutiques"? I know of a hijabi salon in Edgware Road, and many perfumeries and a dress shop, but not a single hijab boutique. The only such place I've ever seen was in Walthamstow, and that shut down a few years ago.
Gould's reference to "the nationwide atmosphere of devotion every November to the memory of the hundreds of thousands of men and women who died" is a gross exaggeration, and the statement that "most everyone wears a poppy across a grateful nation" is just plain false. Both of my grandfathers fought in World War II (my maternal grandfather in the Navy, my paternal grandfather in the Army), we visit the latter regularly (the former passed away in 2000), but none of us think of poppies as any sort of national identity badge. I find it insulting that this woman could link poppies with national identity and reproach anyone for not wearing them. What about all those who look after the war generation in their old age - both as family members and friends, and as nurses? Some of these are immigrants, but even among the locals, I'm sure many have not bought poppies.
I suspect that the "mobbed" meeting she attended at the Cenotaph was peopled by people who had been sent from various organisations around the country. I personally know of nobody who told me they attended; my grandma who asked us about our poppies didn't encourage me, when I told her I was going to London after visiting her, to go to the Cenotaph. The Cenotaph is ordinarily a traffic island in Whitehall, passed by thousands daily on buses who do not notice it's there. (It was built in the inter-war period when there was much anti-war feeling, and its lack of grandeur is deliberate.)
As a white British citizen who has lived in London for most of my nearly 29 years, I don't recognise the country Gould paints for a minute. People here are not at all patriotic and are not particularly reverent of this or any other national tradition. Gould may or may not be aware of the problems elderly people face in some run-down places where they are terrorised by delinquent youths of all races. The disrespect this shows far outweighs the indifference shown by non-citizens or by people whose ancestors reached these shores well after the war ended (and some of their ancestors, being residents of the Empire, were veterans, by the way). Carol Gould is exaggerating the public's reverence for this event in order to give an ugly picture of the Muslims in London for her right-wing, Islamophobic, American audience.
Yusuf, why are you even assuming that the story is true?
According to Melanie Phillips jews in Britain are on the verge of a final solution and that the public are unaware of this only because of an anti-semitic BBC conspiracy to cover it up. I'm still trying to understand why she keeps going on Moral Maze if she believes the BBC is conspiring against jews.
My point is that this isn't journalism. This is propaganda and obvious propaganda at that.
Snippets from Carol Gould's article, and a few of my comments:
"When I arrived in the United Kingdom thirty years ago from the United States I was so touched by this tradition that I made sure to buy one from a British Legion volunteer as soon as November rolled around."
Don't you just love it? A foreign-born national decides what constitutes "Britishness." It would be as if I, an American living here in Singapore, were to tell the citizens what constitutes being a Singaporean. (Heh, I'm sure my wife *wouldn't* like that! :) )
"The British government has brought in a new questionnaire for new citizens. It is full of obscure and at times outlandish questions about British culture. Frankly, I would fail on most of them."
Read: "I've lived in Britain for 30 years and haven't bothered to understand the local culture, but I've decided that you aren't really British unless you wear a poppy, dammit!"
"If one lived in Damascus and there was an annual tradition of some sort similar to Poppy Day, one would show respect for the day and join in."
Uh, no. Having lived as an expat for the past few years, I'd say that one *may* show respect for the day and join in, but joining in should never be compulsory (as Gould makes it clear that she believes to be the case). What's important is *not* to disrespect the tradition. If the tradition isn't yours, then politely, quietly, ignore it. Which is what the Muslims in Gould's article seem to have done.
"Why is wearing a poppy such a big deal to me? It is a tradition started in Canada and the United States that spread to Britain and to the Commonwealth nations, who had also suffered great losses in the Wars."
Sure, bring us Americans into this. The tradition may have started in North America, but this custom hasn't been observed in the US in my lifetime.
Well, it did appear in FrontPageMagazine, so of course it's propaganda rather than journalism!
Seriously, the article's nonsense. Honestly, her 'observation' that 'The fact is that most everyone wears a poppy across a grateful nation' has to be in the same league as her idea elsewhere in the article that the national drink in Russia is schnapps!
I'm from Indigo Jo's parents' generation, so my parents had been through WW2 and their fathers had both fought in WW1. My late father had distinct memories of literally every other house in the village having their curtains closed on the same day (then the tradition if there had been a death in the family) on receiving telegrams from the War Office after a large offensive on the Somme. Armistice Day was very important to my parents and is to me, but it's not about patriotism. It's about remembrance. I recently mentioned to my mother about an old family friend, long dead, who'd been several times decorated during WW2 but would never wear anything other than his campaign medals on what were then Remembrance Day parades because, while he wanted to commemorate his friends who fought and died alongside him, he certainly didn't want to recall what he'd had to do to earn those medals. My mother said many of her and my father's friends felt exactly the same.
There's a short story by Rudyard Kipling, a much misunderstood writer to my mind, and one who's far more subtle and complex than he's often given credit for, 'The Flag of Their Country'. It concerns a visit to an Army school by a Conservative MP and neatly skewers the sort of flag-waving 'patriotism', and attempts to enlist to its service the memory of British soldiers dead in past wars, on which Carol Gould seems so keen; it's at http://www.gutenberg.org/dirs/etext02/stlky10.txt and is well worth a quick read.
Attitudes to Remembrance Day are partly generational, I suppose, and I suspect the British Army's involvement in Ulster -- where, incidentally, Remembrance Day poppies are political symbols because of the close coincidence of the 1916 Easter Rising and the Battle of the Somme, in which the Protestant British 36th (Ulster) Division took very heavy casualties -- did a lot to put many people off the event for a while.
And, while obviously I don't know, I'd suspect that a lot of descendants of people, Muslim, Sikh or Hindu, who fought in the British Indian Army -- the largest volunteer force the world has ever known -- have similarly complex feelings about the British Armed Forces and the Union Flag that someone like me -- whose ancestors volunteered (or were forced to by necessity) for the Irish regiments over several generations -- sometimes has.
But, let's be charitable. Most readers of FrontPageMagazine can't be expected to understand the complexities of history.
Stephen G
"But, let's be charitable. Most readers of FrontPageMagazine can't be expected to understand the complexities of history."
As opposed to the Mohammedans who post on this blog.
Are we talking about the same FrontPageMagazine who host conservative writers such as Robert Spencer, David Horowitz or Stephan Schwartz? If we are could you please desist from the mud racking and come up with some cogent rebuttals. Any of you guys can post of Mr. Spencer's Jihad/Dhimmi Watch if you wish, It would certainly add a little excitement to that site, and perhaps some of us Islamaphobes might change our views on Muhammad and Islam.
"Are we talking about the same FrontPageMagazine who host conservative writers such as Robert Spencer, David Horowitz"
David Horowitz is conservative? I thought I read he was once a member of the Black Panthers. Oh well.
"Stephan Schwartz"
Steven Schwartz is a muslim (according to him) who has praised the guerillas in Chechnya.
David Horowitz is a conservative. In his youth he foolishly flirted with the new left, but like Arthur Koestler he became disillusioned with fellow travelers. Do you find this odd?
As for Steven Schwartz, yes he is a Muslim, (according to him) who erroneously believes that all that is wrong with Islam can be attributed to Wabbabism. He, like most converts, is reticent when it comes to the unscrupulousness of Muhammad. But it is difficult to defend the indefensible, so I’m not surprised that he never discusses the founder of Islam. He is a bright fellow, perhaps a bit starry-eyed about Balkan Islam but I believe as more outrages are committed by Muslims in the name of Islam, he will become increasingly disillusioned with the Ummah.
Let me get this straight. Carol Gould is an American and mentions she's Jewish.
So,
1.] She's not British
2.] She wasn't born in Britain
3.] She is follows a small minority religion which has nothing to do with British culture.
4.] Her race is not British but Jewish, because Jews in this country, following their own lobbying, are classified as a race.
So everything about her is non-British, and she dares to tell us what British culture is and should be. And gentiles swallow this propaganda of hatred
Spence,
"As opposed to the Mohammedans who post on this blog."
Please dont refer to Muslims as Muhammedans. Some of us still adhere to the concept of tawheed, the basis of Islamic theology, and Muhammedan implies that a bit of shirk. Ask the Jihadwatchers to explain the above voab words for you.
Oh BTW, Spence I had a question, what constitute Jihad according to the Quran and the Sunnah. As a Muslim I always wanted to know that.
Spence,
"He is a bright fellow, perhaps a bit starry-eyed about Balkan Islam but I believe as more outrages are committed by Muslims in the name of Islam, he will become increasingly disillusioned with the Ummah."
More disillusioned than Prophet Muhammed's (sallalahu alaihi wa salams) prophetic hadith about that very ummah? It is a good thing our faith is in Allah (azwajal) and the not precarious nature of man, any man. Us converts to convert to Islam because of Muslims. So in the event that most they do disappoint, which was already establish 1400 years ago, its great that are stake is with thier Creator and not creation.
Surah Al Fatiha
In the Name of Allah, the Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful.
All the praises and thanks be to Allah, the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists). The Most Beneficent, the Most Merciful. The Only Owner (and the Only Ruling Judge) of the Day of Recompense (i.e. the Day of Resurrection) You (Alone) we worship, and You (Alone) we ask for help (for each and everything).Guide us to the Straight Way. The Way of those on whom You have bestowed Your Grace, not (the way) of those who earned Your Anger (such as the Jews), nor of those who went astray (such as the Christians).
Now Spence, do you see where our fortunes lie?
*As for Steven Schwartz, yes he is a Muslim, (according to him) who erroneously believes that all that is wrong with Islam can be attributed to Wabbabism. He, like most converts, is reticent when it comes to the unscrupulousness of Muhammad.*
No doubt Schwartz does not consider the Prophet (*sall' Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam*) unscrupulous any more than any other Muslim ever has. The life of the Prophet (*sall' Allahu 'alaihi wa sallam*) is a matter of public record and if it put him off, he would have said so years ago.
"David Horowitz is a conservative. In his youth he foolishly flirted with the new left, but like Arthur Koestler he became disillusioned with fellow travelers. Do you find this odd?"
Find what odd? That you only seem to like conservatives if they're jewish.
"He is a bright fellow, perhaps a bit starry-eyed about Balkan Islam but I believe as more outrages are committed by Muslims in the name of Islam, he will become increasingly disillusioned with the Ummah."
One wonders why you respect the opinion of someone so obviously confused?
"So everything about her is non-British, and she dares to tell us what British culture is and should be. And gentiles swallow this propaganda of hatred"
It's just like Melanie Philips claiming she's a British patriot but then judging the merits of the Church of England not by how much it helps the community but by how much it supports Israel.
Excuse my ignorance but what the heck is a poppy?
Ben,
Dont be sad, I dont know what the heck a poppy is anyway.
"Excuse my ignorance but what the heck is a poppy?"
A flower.
It symbolizes the soldiers who died in the poppy fields in Europe during WWI
"Dont be sad, I dont know what the heck a poppy is anyway."
LOL and think of it, its usually the Islamic legal terms on here I don't know, not a British one!
Why not define British the same way most people define "American" now? I.e. A person born or naturalized who holds a British passport, speaks English adaquately, and follows the law.
"It symbolizes the soldiers who died in the poppy fields in Europe during WWI"
Oh, I thought it might have something to do w/the flower. Do people wear them on their lapels or something like the little American flags here?
"Oh, I thought it might have something to do w/the flower. Do people wear them on their lapels or something like the little American flags here?"
Yes
I hate those things. Having to wear some kind of badge to 'prove' that you love your country is something you think would be required of you in North Korea. Just a bit too stalinist for me.
Of course, what else would you expect from David Horrorwitz?
From Communist idiot to Fascist idiot 5.5 seconds....
*Excuse my ignorance but what the heck is a poppy?*
It's a flower which is bright red. It's used because a whole load of poppies erupted in a field in Flanders in which a number of soldiers were killed in World War I.
David Horowitz is nothing but a jewish neocon fascist and hypocrite. As for Shwartz, he's another jewish extremist who went from left wing "Comrade Sandalio" to what he is today, a pseudo-Muslim neocon tramp. Horowitz cant even get published so he has to start his own smear portal.
These lunatics are so predictable. spit.
What really turned the poppy into a symbol was this poem, “In Flanders Fields”, by Jon McCrae:
In Flanders Fields the poppies blow
Between the crosses, row on row
That mark our place; and in the sky
The larks, still bravely singing, fly
Scarce heard amid the guns below
“We are the Dead. Short days ago
We lived, felt dawn, saw sunset glow,
Loved, and were loved, and now we lie
In Flanders fields.”
“Take up our quarrel with the foe:
To you from failing hands we throw
The torch; be yours to hold it high
If ye break faith with us who die
We shall not sleep, though poppies grow
In Flanders fields.”
My maternal grandfather fought for the British Army during WW2, he was an Indian national at the time. He subsequently fought against the British during the struggle for independence. History can be a bit complicated like that. It's a bit much to expect everyone to fall in line with a symbol representing one view of history. I have heard that in israel the Ashkenazi Jews go to great lengths to commemorate the holocaust, whereas the reaction of most of the Hasidic Jewish community is indifferent or even mocking.
"I have heard that in israel the Ashkenazi Jews go to great lengths to commemorate the holocaust, whereas the reaction of most of the Hasidic Jewish community is indifferent or even mocking."
Hasidic jews are a religious movement though. They already have a culture whereas secular jews have to invent their culture based around secular events like the holocaust.
""I have heard that in israel the Ashkenazi Jews go to great lengths to commemorate the holocaust, whereas the reaction of most of the Hasidic Jewish community is indifferent or even mocking.""
Well you know almost all of the victims were Ashkenzi Jews.
"Hasidic jews are a religious movement though. They already have a culture whereas secular jews have to invent their culture based around secular events like the holocaust."
It has nothing to do with religion or being secular. Ashkenzi Jews hail from Western Europe--and be extension the USA--and Sephardic Jews are of Spanish and Arab extraction.
There are many differences in culture but not really religion, aside from the fact Sephardics tend to be more religious. Ashkenzis tend to dominate political life in Israel, however, and usually are better off.
BTW I knew what a poppy flower was, and am familiar with the poem--I was just making sure "poppy" wasn't some weired British expression that had nothing to do with the flower!
"David Horowitz is nothing but a jewish neocon fascist and hypocrite. "
Don't remind me of the Jewish part, its incredibly embarrasing.
BTW if Muslims *did* start wearing poppies, I bet all the neo-nativists would start carping about how they are just doing it to "fit in" and aren't really "sincere".
After all in America, you can tell when a car is being driven by a muslim or arab--it usually has three American flags on it instead of one.
"Don't remind me of the Jewish part, its incredibly embarrasing."
Why would it be?
"It has nothing to do with religion or being secular. Ashkenzi Jews hail from Western Europe--and be extension the USA--and Sephardic Jews are of Spanish and Arab extraction.
There are many differences in culture but not really religion, aside from the fact Sephardics tend to be more religious. Ashkenzis tend to dominate political life in Israel, however, and usually are better off."
I thought Hasidic jews were a movement from eastern europe. My point was that Orthodox jews seem to be removed from secular jewish culture in general.
Ben,
"After all in America, you can tell when a car is being driven by a muslim or arab--it usually has three American flags on it instead of one."
Are you American? So am I. Which coast, I am west.
Yusuf, I really can't understand why you deleated my response to your paragraph below, but I'll post my message again and hope you will be a good sport and keep it up. [snip]
Yusuf responds: No, you hope wrong. You know the rules, and if you want to read and write this sort of stuff you can go do it somewhere else. I hear Blogspot is being filled up with garbage by spammers, so your material should be at home there.
In the words of Billy Joel, "you can speak your mind, but not on my time".
Spencer,
You wrote:
Any of you guys can post of Mr. Spencer's Jihad/Dhimmi Watch if you wish, It would certainly add a little excitement to that site, and perhaps some of us Islamaphobes might change our views on Muhammad and Islam.
Nothing wrong with your islamophobic beliefs. If it makes you happy, stick to it. However, you should learn to speak with respect to those who of us who have been seduced by Muhammad (sallallahu 'aleihi waslam). Or there's nothing in your religion that calls for respect towards other religions?
I am still waiting to hear the things you keep going on about from Sahih Al-Bukhari, what did you find there that disturbs your modern mind?
Sahih Al-Bukhari is one of the Most beautiful collection of Prophetic Traditions that can ever exist, so I am curious to hear what problem you might have with that book?
"I thought Hasidic jews were a movement from eastern europe. My point was that Orthodox jews seem to be removed from secular jewish culture in general."
They are, but when you were referring to the holocaust memorials I thought you mean *sephardic*. They usually aren't as invovled with holocaust memorial stuff, as their ancestors didn't suffer from it for the most part. Sometimes people confuse the two.
Yes, Hasidics are a religious movement.
"Are you American? So am I. Which coast, I am west."
East coast, Northern Virginia to be exact.
Anonymous,
I believe Spence, went from quoting Sahih Bukhari about one expedition r another, and some "sirah" from Ibn Ishaq about the torture and death of a wealthy Jew of Khaibar. I dont know what constitutes sirah for most Muslims but if it cant be authenticated by ahadith or Quran, what can we refer to. Oh and the hudnreds of Jews who were beheaded by our Noble Messenger (sallalahu alaihi wa salam.) Can you believe these people still hatching up that story.
Assalaamu alaikum,
Actually, when I was young, a neighbor used to round up some of us neighborhood kids once a year and take us to the local shopping center - in Maryland - to sell poppies for the VFW (Veterans of Foreign Wars). We would ask for donations and give a poppy (fake, for the lapel) to anyone who donated.
It was something that made a strong impression on me, because at a time when the Vietnam War was still going on, the only people who were nice and donated to us were the young antiwar, "hippie" types who were hanging around there. Most of the middle-aged people brushed by us and were pretty rude. I was surprised to find this...
Yusuf,
If I am making all this stuff up about your beloved Muhammad then please point it out and expose me for a fraud. However, I have a sneaking suspicion that you delete my messages because you know what I am saying is true about Muhammad and that you too are quite disturbed about some of the outrages he committed against innocents, particularly little girls
Anonymous,
So your line of reasoning is if one points out that Muhammad had fascist-like behavior then I must be an Islamaphobe-fascist. Interesting insight into the Muslim mind.
Bikhair,
How can you call such a low-life brigand "our noble messenger"? This man penetrated a 9-year old girl, cowardly murdered hundred of unarmed men and boys and stole hard-earned wealth from Jewish farmers These were horrific acts and every bloody one of you know it.
Ann
Before you jump ship and join Islam you should really read the hadiths. If you are comfortable with Muhammad’s conduct then Islam is for you. However, you owe it to yourself to do a little homework.
Spence,
I guess you still haven't figure this out, so let me spell it out for you.
I am a Muslim. I have been for about 12 years. I did a lot of reading and studying about Islam before I became Muslim, and I have continued to learn for those 12 years.
I had the usual stereotypes and would never have dreamed of being Muslim, but then I came to work in a Muslim country and realized that everything I had been told - especially about Muslim women - was wrong.
Yes, I am (more than) comfortable with the Prophet's (peace be upon him) conduct.
Yes, Islam is for me.
If you don't feel it's for you, then that's your choice and I hope you feel comfortable with that choice.
Since I'm happy and confident about my religion, I feel no need to go and harass people on blogs associated with other religions. I still don't understand why you hang around Muslim blogs trying to annoy people. Maybe you're not so clear about your choice?
Spence,
So what are these hadiths so we can help you with the interpretation :)
Ofcourse, I am aware of the hadiths you are referring to, but it would be more appropriate for us to hear it from your mouth and provide the references if you know the hadith literature that well. One of the rules of knowledge is that you only speak about that which you know.
Ann,
Be prepared for spence to tell you that you are deluded, that you don't know the tRUTH about Islam and Muhammad (sallallahu'aleihi wasalam).
How funny!
Spence,
"This man penetrated a 9-year old girl..."
This same nine year old girl that was married to the Prophet by her father, who would be by his side until his death, who will teach the Muslims the Sharia and Prophet Muhammed Sunnah, and would be the example of all Muslim women?
"...cowardly murdered hundred of unarmed men and boys and stole hard-earned wealth from Jewish farmers."
No one is unarmed in 7th century Arabia. I have a question for you Spence, had the table been turned, and you cant murder those you go to war with, what does the Torah say about the fate of those taken captive?
Ihave to wonder about this issue about Aisha (radiyallahu anhu). Now Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) recieved criticism on a personal level often especially from the Arabs and when he married his orphan son's ex wife, but never about his marriage to Umm-Muminoon. So if there objection is that because it is wrong because it is wrong in modern times, why do they not have archiac opinions of homosexuality or promiscuity? If there is any objection to remain on account of her age, it certainly wasnt objectionable, and probably not rare during that time and for sometime to come. Who established the age of puberty and immaturity anyway and why should everyone be subject to it. Is there a case of moral relativism?
"...that is their furthest reach in knowledge....they follow conjecture, and conjecture is not enriched by truth whatsoever.... "
Their problem is really not about whether Aisha (radiyyallahu a'nhu) was 9 or younger, their problem is that they are obsessed with seeking a way against Allah and His Messenger. They have been veiled from his light (salallahu 'aleihi wasalam). We all are to a certain extent. Or rather, they have proven incapable of seeing with his light, just as the one with cataract detest bright crisp daylight. "So, they want to put out the light" that they may then be self-convinced in their delusion that they had always been right - that there were no divine guidance to follow, that Muhammad was as they hoped-a soothsayer.
The presence of his light worries them, it keeps them on their toes, they can't make up their minds...spining round and round in worry...
Little do they know that his light is actually their light, firmly lodged in their deepest heart, ..in the heart of everything created thing (however obscured it may have become).
Allah will complete his light! ...for those who permit.
If their problem was with the marriage of Aisha to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), they would also be concerned about the marriage of 12 years old Mary (peace be upon her) to 90 year old Joseph as narrated in their "aprocryphal" writings.
You would have thought this would also be a subject of discussion on their lips.
But not, their obsession is solely with the Life and Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him), with Islam, and its women - whom they would certainly love to unveil!
Modernity is meant to be a neutral thing, but somehow it can work its way into human psyche and pose as a religion in itself.
So, they judge everything by modern doctrines (whatever those doctrines are - it doesn't matter as long as it is from modern times).
Consider a sample statement of this low logic:
'The developments of the 21st century surely must be better than what happened in the year 6 AD, and so on'.
Says who? Isn't the word "better" amongst other words inherently subjective?
For muslims, the best Example is the Example of Prophet Muhammad (saw) - literally - the rest is simply God taking us as we are.
Bikhair,
Your defense of pedophilia is just barmy.
"No one is unarmed in 7th century Arabia. I have a question for you Spence, had the table been turned, and you cant murder those you go to war with, what does the Torah say about the fate of those taken captive?"
I would surmise that prisoners are unarmed. And is it progress if Muhammad sanctions murder. The job of a prophet is to better the world and harness humankind’s baser instincts, which we could all agree would include sparing prisoners from a gruesome death and not robbing them of their wealth. I would have no problem with Muhammad if he hadn’t invented a religion, history if it had remembered him, would have just written him off as another Arab brigand, although one with a bit more political acumen than his contemporaries. However, beheading prisoners including young boys and old men is not the sign of a holy man. If the yanks behaved in similar fashion and treated the hirsute prisoners at Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo like Muhammad treated the Banu Quarazai the Muslim world would be in an uproar.
"I would surmise that prisoners are unarmed. And is it progress if Muhammad sanctions murder. The job of a prophet is to better the world and harness humankind’s baser instincts, which we could all agree would include sparing prisoners from a gruesome death and not robbing them of their wealth. I would have no problem with Muhammad if he hadn’t invented a religion, history if it had remembered him, would have just written him off as another Arab brigand, although one with a bit more political acumen than his contemporaries. However, beheading prisoners including young boys and old men is not the sign of a holy man."
So nothing to say on the Torah then?
Shamil
Actually no, Jews are not flying airliners into Muslim high-rises or beheading their prisoners, filming these acts then distributing it among their community. If the IDF followed the book of Leviticus then there wouldn't be much of a Palestinian problem would there.
Moreover, I don't think there are any contemporary Jewish Bin Laden's or Abu Musad az-Zarkawi's. Although I imagine you are going to use the spurious argument that anyone donning the uniform of the IDF is a terrorist. A week doesn't go by without a new batch of the usual suspects being arrested in Europe or elsewhere who were in the planning stages of a new terrorist outrage. And I’m sorry to say these guys aren’t Hebrews.
So nothing to say on Muhammad then?
Spence,
"Your defense of pedophilia is just barmy."
Modern social constructs used to revile Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) should also be used it across the board.
"...which we could all agree would include sparing prisoners from a gruesome death and not robbing them of their wealth."
First you should understand that under the Sharia it is at the discretion of the Muslim ruler as to what should be done to prisoners of war and it was the discretion of Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salm) according to your dubious sources(those unconfirmed by authentic ahadith and Quran)of ibn Ishaq, that shows him relying on the judgement of Sa'd ibn Mu'ad, of the tribe of Aws who was a "patron" of the Banu Qurayza. Sa'd ibn Mu'ad according to ibn Ishaq gave the judgement that, "the men should be killed, the property divided, and the women and children taken as captives..."
Compare that to Deuteronomy 20 v. 13-14
And when the Lord thy God hath delivered in into thin hands thou shalt smite every male thereof with the edge of the sword: But the women, and the littler ones and the cattle and all that is in the city even all the spoil thereof shalt thou take unto thyself..."
Now the issue isnt whether the Isrealites do this anymore because most Muslims dont behead thier enemies and there isnt a leader of a Muslim today who has declared jihad, which is his sole responsibility according to the Sharia.
What happened to that tribe was the exception not the rule and as it so happens it wasnt even the exception of Prophet Muhammed but that of the above pagan Arab. What was common was to ensalve them, and for the pagan Arabs convert them totally, or make them tributaries.
Spence,
You also made mention about Prophet Muhammed (sallalahu alaihi wa salam) taking the female captives and wedding them to the Muslims. Why are you so critical of such a humane practice. Do you remember what kind of patriarchal, violent--even before Jihad because those Arabs before Islam engage in warfare and blood fueds constantly-- and precarious soceity 7th century Arab was? What is a woman in that kind of society without a man, husband, brother, tribe, etc. Do you know why the Quraish tribe killed thier daughters, and why other Arabs killed thier daughters, bacause back then a women was nothing more than another mouth to feed. She couldnt occupy the same capacity as a man in that society. So if her kin were killed, or banished, who was supposed to protect her, and provide for her? Oh thats right United Nations refugee camp.
Spence, your female like over emotional tirade is getting on my nerves. Go get some Midol and come back when youve rid yourself of the estrogen.
"Shamil
Actually no, Jews are not flying airliners into Muslim high-rises or beheading their prisoners, filming these acts then distributing it among their community. If the IDF followed the book of Leviticus then there wouldn't be much of a Palestinian problem would there."
Pretty predictable response. Unfortunately you're contradicting yourself. All this time you've been saying "Your prophet did this in sira..."
Thats scripture based arguement. Although we don't actually regard sirah as scripture literally or otherwise.
You haven't been saying "Muslims are bad because they fly planes into buildings"
Are saying that you'd have a good opinion of the Prophet(SAW) if muslims weren't commiting terrorist acts.
Thats what the logic you're using seems to suggest.
Yusuf, you ought to delete the tripe this guy is spitting out about The Prophet (saw).
Spence, if the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon) his was a stupid holy man in accordance to you fancy, none of us would have followed him.
As for prisoners of war. We don't put people in prisons in Islam. They are put in the homes of muslims where they can be rehabilitated. The society is spared from the evils of those that are too dangerous to rehabilitate - if the "punishement" of their crime is capital.
You have a lot to learn.
Stay tuned here, and inshallah, you will learn some wisdom. Certainly, you won't get worse by being here. You can only get better.
"The job of a prophet is to better the world and harness humankind’s baser instincts, which we could all agree would include sparing prisoners from a gruesome death and not robbing them of their wealth."
You've also contradicted this statement in revealing that you know about the contents of philosophy.
Word of advice.
If you're secular and want to be taken seriously you should have a comprehensive philosophy through which to view the world.
"You've also contradicted this statement in revealing that you know about the contents of philosophy."
That was supposed to say the contents of Leviticus.
Spence,
Our noble Prophet (peace be upon him), like Moses (peace be upon him), was a perfect Judge. He was a Lord of Men, a Father, a Husband, a Stateman, a Companion, The Perfect Man (sallallahu 'alehi wa salam).
By now, you should have detected that you are in the ranks of those who love Muhammad dearly, more than their own selves. All your bad mouthing of the Prophet is to your own loss.
On your famous subject - on that he ordered the execution of unarmed men. Stupid you, if they were armed, would that be called execution. What is the point of saying they were unarmed (after being armed and engaged in a fierce battle that lasted over 14 days).
If indeed the Prophet (saw) ordered the execution of anyone, that would still be just in our eyes ;-) - because his actions are based on divine justice and mercy. I am sure that is all over your head, because concepts such as justice mean little to people of your type.
Part of justice is "punishing" those who compromise the safety and livelihood of other peoples. The safety of any state requires the proscription of traitors who secretly give information to the enemy. I won't write much for you here on the logic of Islamic justice, cos your intelligence and style has taught me not to waste my time.
However it must be said that the execution of the Jews of Banu Qurayzah to which you are referring was ordered by Sa'd Ibn Muadh - at the request of those Jews themselves or some say the Prophet appointed him over them (since he was a prince from their sister tribe).
They said they wanted Sa'd to pronounce their verdict. Of course, stupid as they are, they thought because he is a prince from one of their tribes he will be merciful than the Prophet Muhammad (who indeed could have spared them, as he spared all the Meccans who killed the Muslims for years). But since they asked for Sa'd's verdict, they got it! He ordered that his own ex-co-religionist be leveled to the ground sparing the women and children. One account had him say that he was invoking the law of the Torah. The Prophet didn't overturn it, why should he -isn't that what they asked for?
They shouldn't have been spared in any case. If they had been spared, they would have reinvaded Medina, as that was their sunnah- invading, pillaging, and jeopardising the lives of other people.
How ironic, that this incidence resonates the verdict of Moses (peace be upon him) in Numbers 31 (go check your Bible) in this case against the "Gentiles", many centuries earlier - in favour of the Jews...
31:17 Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him.
It is striking how the preceeding events that led to this resembles the seige in Medina.
We could go on and on here...to help you out of your confusion..., but what benefit is clarity going to serve for an ignorant soul as yours whose inner eye has been deemed. Little benefit, I guess - which is still better than nothing, Alhamdulilah.
You will hear words of respect when you learn how not to insult the Prophets (peace be upon them). You are clearly one of those who are unable to discriminate between the sacred and the mundane - even if it is of religion other than yours.
Now, run away and get more hadiths.
That is what your life is all about anyway.
What a life!
Sister Bikhair
"Now the issue isn’t whether the Israelites do this anymore because most Muslims don’t behead their enemies and there isn’t a leader of a Muslim today who has declared jihad, which is his sole responsibility according to the Sharia."
Of course, this is the issue; there would be outrage in the Jewish community if the IDF or some Jewish terrorist outfit behaved this way. You have to admit that almost everywhere Muslims rub up against non-believers you invariably end up with some headless kuffar. I mean we have all seen those vile clips from Iraq, but this also happens in southern Thailand, the Philippines, Indonesia and in the 90s the Algerian GIA were famous for their head chopping, their main targets being unveiled women, intellectuals, teachers etc…. I also recall that Theo Van Goe nearly had his head severed, I guess the knife was dull.
[chop]
I can tell you are quite orthodox; you must be constantly unhinged by being surrounded by all that infidel filth in the US. Here's some advice, why don't you take some exercise, get fit, learn how to operate firearms and then purchase a ticket to Iraq or the Hindu Kush and participate in Jihad. You must have contacts, if you don't I can provide you with some. Instead of whinging all the time, you armchair jihadi's should act on your seemingly bottomless list of grievances and do something.
Spence,
Thanks Spence for coming.
Guys where are your conjones, if female converts are doing this you should all be ashamed. I hope some of you will be buying your tickets soon.
Female Belgian suicide bomber hit Baghdad
BRUSSELS, Nov. 29 (UPI) -- A woman who carried out a suicide attack in Iraq two weeks ago was identified Tuesday as the first European female suicide bomber.
The Belgian anti-terrorism unit has confirmed that the woman was a Belgian citizen who converted to Islam after her marriage to a Muslim fundamentalist, news service RTL reported Tuesday.
American military forces identified the woman at a combat scene in Baghdad. She was carrying recently issued Belgian identity papers which revealed she had traveled via Turkey. There are no traces of her radical husband who is believed to have organized her trip.
Around 10 percent of all suicide bombings the last 25 years have been carried out by women from the Middle East or Asia. It is, however, a first for a Western woman who has converted to Islam.
© Copyright 2005 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved
Want to email or reprint this story? Click here for options.
I found this quote at Jihad Watch. God are these guys un-PC or what.
"First female European bomber, what an achievment! Looks like Islam is the progressive, feminist multi-cultural religion we've been told it is after all."
Just visited Harry's Place and read Yvonne Ridley's reaction to the bombings in Jordan. Its worth a read.
I don't know anything about the Belgian woman, but if this is true, I don't think that she was the first European woman to do this. Aren't Chechnyan women European, too?
Spencer,
You got it all wrong. Prisoners of war are usually spared in Islam. In fact there are assigned to the homes of muslims where they can learn proper morals. But this is not necessarily - if they will prove too dangerous, they may receive capital punishement.
This is a new departure from the barbarity of your Christian wars over the ages, and indeed we can see it in some of the ongoing wars - where there were no even concept of "prisoners of war" or safe guarding lives of the innocent. They just burnt everyone! And now adays, they bomb them to dust before they can even become prisoners.
Non-Muslims who read these gutter hadiths are utterly shocked at Muhammad’s behavior and I suspect some Muslims are quite embarrassed also as you really don't advertise these stories
Spencer are you joking here?
The muslims who are embarrased of Prophet Muhammad's (peace be upon him) behaviour are usually the ex-ones. Rather, it's just a reflection of their intelligence. I am rather embarrased of you intelligence and analysis.
Try another hadith. Bring them all on. I will try and give you a response here.
You are dealing with a Perfected way of life, there is nothing to be embarrased about. Rather it is indeed a great honour for us to be muslims, a dust on the feet of Muhammad (peace be upon him).
....Something you can only aspire to, but you continue to let yourself down.
Spencer, there are no secrets in Islam. Go and enrol in University and take a degree in Islamic studies, your non-muslim professor will take you through the sirah, and you will be on your own with your conclusions.