Second Letter from a Fearfully Concerned Muslim to an American-Jewish Friend
In my letter to you, I expressed my fear of how a culture of narcissism (as Christopher Lasch called it) and political correctness (as Allan Bloom laid bare in The Closing of the American Mind) have contributed to the present situation in American politics that you and I deplore. What I implied is that America’s retreat from its role as leader of the West will mean an absence of an effective check to the malady that has brought ruin to the Muslim world, and that this affliction will spread. An isolationist America and a weakened West, its Enlightenment values irreparably corroded, is ominous for everyone who loves freedom.
Though I come from within the body of the majority mainstream Sunni Islam of the Hanafi school of Islamic rites, to which most Muslims in South Asia, Central Asia and Southeast Asia belong, I am cognizant and respectful of the diversity of traditions within Islam and among Muslims. Though weakened in recent times, it must be recognized despite the media’s understandable preoccupation with the convulsions of the Muslim world. We must especially resist the malicious efforts of those, such as the Muslim Brotherhood, who crudely insist — to their own perverse advantage — that Islam is monolithic.
Let me pause here for now, and I will return shortly.
Salim
A very in lighting article, thank you for posting it for us all to read.
I guess the only thing I have to say is that I wish the Islam of Salim and others would step up to the table with a little louder voice. Only by challenging the mosque will things change. Staying away or running from the reality of what is taking place within will accomplish nothing but give a stronger voice to the brotherhood and radical Islam. You and your views have to be heard, and if by no one else, the White house and its pitifully impotent occupant.
Demanding martyrdom won’t cure the violence from the Islamists, but instead will feed the sick blood frenzy.
Salim Mansur’s voice is written and heard here where people listen and contemplate. And it isn’t as if his message is not observed by the Islamists leading communities in Mosques.
To cast his voice of reason to be trampled, distorted and cut short would be a sin, snuffing out the life force of a virtuous man possessing charitable thought and powerful expression to which we Americans and Westerners ourselves must pay attention.
We must heal ourselves and clean our own house before we can righteously demand others to become purified. Beam, meet Mote; Mote, meet Beam. “Peace on Earth, Good Will Towards Humanity”
My concern is with the world’s unrealistic expectations and twisted demands for the US to marshal righteousness globally. I say “twisted” because internationally, foreign countries have their own interests at heart, and whatever love/hate relationship they experienced over the last century with the USA has eroded into the hate category of divorce or at least contentious loathing. Yet they won’t defend themselves on their own dime, still expecting US taxpayers to bail-out every problem.
Whereas, the Americana traditions were understood as expansionist limited within our own conception “from sea to shining sea” Manifest Destiny. Beyond that concept, isolationism, being content within our own continent, served as sage advice from the Father of our Country, President George Washington. Protecting our legal interests through direct warfare as pursued by President Thomas Jefferson against Piracy and by James Madison in 1812 settled matters so as to go on in the law abiding peaceful pursuit of happiness. Finally, President Eisenhower’s departing speech warned America to not go where we’ve gone against his advice. Americans chose to be oblivious to being manipulated by vested industrial/government interests to promote warfare for blood money profit and corrupt power. And now, the foolish business of American nation building Islamist democracies is the height of globalist deceit. Iraq and Afghanistan do not choose to be Western friendly, despite the American blood shed on their behalf, despite the American fortune taken from US citizen taxpayers on the basis of being “compassionate” to prove America’s “good intentions” as if we can distribute Liberty selling PC.
As with the rejection to demand martyrs as if martyrdom with heal the world, I denounce trumping vain “compassion” through Politically Correct self destruction.
#1 Reply to Concerned American
Concerned American – I agree.
“My concern is with the world’s unrealistic expectations and twisted demands for the US to marshal righteousness globally. I say “twisted” because internationally, foreign countries have their own interests at heart, and whatever love/hate relationship they experienced over the last century with the USA has eroded into the hate category of divorce or at least contentious loathing. Yet they won’t defend themselves on their own dime, still expecting US taxpayers to bail-out every problem.”
I (read) hear people from other countries pleading for the world nations to step up to “help us” when there is conflict. Who steps up more than most? America. For that who gets disparaged and hated the most – America. The hate you speak of, the ‘hate’ is from ‘within’ America too. Claiming ‘we’ are the ‘occupiers’ “we” are the oppressors??
Truth is ‘America’ does not occupy, countries. | At least, not in the sense Protesters here in America would like people to believe. America ‘trys’ to “restore order” in Countries where there is ‘conflict’. America ALWAYS works with the Government of said country involved we do not ‘take over’ said Government. If that happened we “would” be considered ‘occupiers’ of said country. And this is simply not true. Yes all of this on our dime…
I said we really revamp our ‘foreign policies’. We need to stop ‘propping up’ Countries on our dime. We need to start thinking once again “America First”.
#1 Reply to Concerned American
Concerned American – I agree.
“My concern is with the world’s unrealistic expectations and twisted demands for the US to marshal righteousness globally. I say “twisted” because internationally, foreign countries have their own interests at heart, and whatever love/hate relationship they experienced over the last century with the USA has eroded into the hate category of divorce or at least contentious loathing. Yet they won’t defend themselves on their own dime, still expecting US taxpayers to bail-out every problem.”
I (read) hear people from other countries pleading for the world nations to step up to “help us” when there is conflict. Who steps up more than most? America. For that who gets disparaged and hated the most – America. The hate you speak of, the ‘hate’ is from ‘within’ America too. Claiming ‘we’ are the ‘occupiers’ “we” are the oppressors??
Truth is ‘America’ does not occupy, countries. | At least, not in the sense Protesters here in America would like people to believe. America ‘trys’ to “restore order” in Countries where there is ‘conflict’. America ALWAYS works with the Government of said country involved we do not ‘take over’ said Government. If that happened we “would” be considered ‘occupiers’ of said country. And this is simply not true. Yes all of this on our dime…
We really need to revamp our ‘foreign policies’. We need to stop ‘propping up’ Countries on our dime. We need to start thinking once again “America First”.
Very heartfelt and beautifully written. The problem I see however, is that while we in the west should not consider Islam monolithic anymore than we do any other religion, where are the Moslem voices worldwide condemning those that destroy Islam with their own brand of hate. While anything but a fan of our present President, it is not the job of the United States to rectify the issues within Islam. That is the job of Moslems alone.
They are beaten into silence by their violent peers. They are afraid to speak out, for fear of reprisal on their families. They are not rich, they struggle day to day for their daily bread, not knowing where the next pay will come from. like many of us in USA, they work long hours just trying to survive, eat/sleep/live/love, they keep their heads down and their noses out of others business so they don’t get caught in the light of the drama.
They too are the meek of which Jesus spoke who will inherit the earth; they who just try to survive, and who, when it all blows up, will come crawling out of the rubble, pick up the pieces of whomever is left to live, and go on living on the face of the earth, until death brings them to their reward.
I guess it is cultural. I’m 60 years old. I grew up in a culture that allowed me, encouraged me, to ask questions. To search out what is truth, if indeed truth exists. Probably because the ‘doors of perception’ in my brain were thrown open by hallucinogenic drugs during a brief period of intense spiritual curiosity around 20 years of age I became what was once commonly spoken of as a religious seeker.
Philosophically I came to believe I have an eternal spirit and or soul. It seemed very important to me to make the right decision as to which of the ‘world religions’ were worth looking into and which of them would be the greatest truth. I could be wrong but then if I am I won’t know it after death. Atheists and worshippers of false gods may be in another boat.
Mohammed is, to my informed mind, absolutely the worst, most disgusting, most dishonest religious figure of all the significant religions of this world. One cannot even compare him to Jesus of Nazareth. It would be absurd.
I repeat what I said before in comment to your first letter. In another manner. Are you blind? Are you putting forth a false front? Are you a liar? You are obviously too smart to accept this monster Mohammed as a prophet of God.
I suspect you are actually an atheist. This I can understand. Worshipping Allah I cannot. Not for you. The common muslim, yes. They are not allowed to question or study the alternatives and are heavily brainwashed. But you. You know better.
Science has given us the knowledge in just the past few decades to see and measure and quantify that we indeed live within a miracle. The universe, the ‘big bang’ is no greater nor less comprehensible an idea than an omnipotent creator is. God IS. Men are eternal beings. This is our proving ground. We are being forged upon the anvil of The Lord.
Scott, I can relate to your post because, like you, I have spent decades searching out the truth of different religions and spiritual paths. I was also into that New Age curiosity and experimentation. I would agree with you that nowhere in all of that scene did Mohammad stand out as a worthy example to study. The closest thing was Sufism, especially as portrayed (perhaps incorrectly) by Idries Shah.
Although Salim is not formally a Sufi, “his Islam” is closer to the sentiments expressed in that vein of Islam. Also, “his Islam” is of the subcontinental variety and is infused with the mysticism associated with India and surrounding areas. He loves poetry of all sorts and is well versed in the Islamic poets whether in Arabic, Persian, or Urdu. For him, the Koran is a source of inspiration and not a clear cut prescription. He has an ear for the heart and soul of Islam, what some poets refer to as its sweet nutritious kernel.
Though a political scientist, Salim is ambivalent about taking on political leadership. I believe he did stand for office once but failed. I’m sure he is always doing what, in his heart, he senses that God is calling him to.
If Salim ever did take on a more active political role, I’m sure he would be looking to a more recent Islamic model of political leadership in the person of Badshah Khan (Khan Abdul Ghaffar Khan). I confess that I find it mystifying but this peaceful giant and close collaborator with Gandhi was both devout Muslim and determined pacifist. And he interpreted Mohammad as his own model for that pacifist stance. Like Salim, he was no fool and no man of empty words or deceit. His example serves, at least, to give us pause before being too ready to judge either Islam or its founder.
I like to keep an open mind while recognising that the spiritual search is the task of a lifetime. It comes to its final end or resolution only at the final hour of death.
Oh, come on now. What was that that Congressman West said about blowing sunshine somewhere? The wars that were specifically in the name of the cross were much fewer and narrower in time than that, and most certainly didn’t include “global European wars of the last century”. Or is he trying to spin that tired old yarn about Hitler being a Christian Dominionist?
I could quote at length Der Fuhrer’s admiration for Islam and disdain for Christianity, but I need I?
I have to object, if only in light of real history from the creation of Christianity and that you attack a point he concedes. Christians at first were the “persecuted” and spread their faith peacefully, around 300 AD when they became the predominant faith, their cause was suddenly taken up in arms by Theodosius. What followed was nearly thirteen hundred years of a mix of military conquests of various peoples under the aegis of the cross as well as missionary proselytizing.
Of course, students of history do realize that various kings were moved by faith to expand their holdings and use the dogma of religion as both the spear to conquer and the whip to maintain their hold over populations. This knowledge of the mix of faith and state, particularly the power of the papal throne aligned with monarchies, is what prompted the founding fathers to insist on separation of church and state, even while supporting the various churches in the state, debating state funding to churches, etc, etc, etc.
So, the militant version of Islam hasn’t been much more or less active than Christianity for much longer or less. Nor should we ignore the fact that the spread of the Ottoman empire, while bearing the banner of Islam in front of it, was largely about controlling trade routes, obtaining resources, money and political power with each of the subsequent rulers. However, that form of mercenary (as it, after material gain) Islam isn’t what we are dealing with here.
Um…you should have read Christopher Hitchens on the subject of Hitler and religion. Hitler was not “anti-Christian”. He considered himself a Christian and referred to the almighty God and being on the side of right in Mein Kampf (read the book if you can stomach it). Further, it was Christian Europe’s long persecution of Jews (the Christ Killers) and the persistent bigotry that allowed Hitler’s ideas to be more easily accepted and subsumed so quickly amongst his followers.
It was Himmler who mixed neo-paganism with Christian rights. HOWEVER, Christianity was not necessarily the guiding principle of their political frame work. It was the idea that everything, including faith, was the servant of the state and that people were the servant of the state so any ideas of being a servant to say the Catholic Pope in Rome must be subservient to the role of servant to the state. You could not be a servant of both (Hence, Himmler creating his own bizarre political religion).
The objection to this had many Catholic priests and various other reverends thrown into concentration camps along with the Jews, Communists, Gypsies and the rest. there numbers were only lower because many kept their heads low or decided that administering to the faithful was more important than objecting to the political form under which they lived. Then, of course, there were the complicit.
Secondly, why attack him on such a manner when he is asking, quite fairly and in the same “fear” as we hold, why the United States politicos are not supporting the expansion of freedom and opposing more directly the establishment of political Islam or Islamism. (Ever notice that the worst sorts of political systems end in “ism”?)
I believe there are two issues, one only a symptom the other the major diagnosis. We are currently being led by people who are “lost in the 90′s”. Those who had imagined the fall of the USSR as “the end of history”. The major opponent of the United States had crashed in the face of our economic, political and military power. There is a large group of people who imagine that all other potential adversaries are “lesser evils” that present less security risk and can be defeated by some lackadaisical meandering of liberal economics.
The idea put forth by JFK so long ago that a “rising tide raises all boats”. From an historical view of “revolutions” for “self determination”, the rise of the middle class in a nation usually precedes demands for political voice. This is the “softly, softly” approach, but, post cold war, has lost its focus.
The idea that liberty will simply trickle out at the point of the dollar or diplomatic nerf bat and either create allies or keep other nominal allies “stable” without a guiding plan or principle is simply ridiculous and flies the face of common sense. Further, that the last great adversary to freedom has vanished and no one else can pose a threat flies in the face of history.
there are too many in government at this time that wishes it was 1992, that the US was on top of the economic and political mountain without a challenger in sight. Stupid.
That appearance of realpolitik and isolationism is only a symptom. Our major malfunction is a cognitive dissonance among our own population about what exactly our role is supposed to be. The wish that we could just float above it all, do our thing and let the rest of the world do its thing. A kind of rendition of the “if we hadn’t been messing around over there, maybe they wouldn’t have flown planes into our buildings” mentality. Then there is the second half of us that thinks if we hadn’t had the making of economic power as our only goal, but kept our primary goal the defense of liberty (which is always safer when liberty is on the march, not when it retreats).
then there is the fear of our own militancy coupled with the idea that men should be able to choose their own government, even if it antithetical to our beliefs. So long as they don’t decide that they need to attack us to survive or expand. Unfortunately, that is exactly what a wing of the Islamist movement has done. Equally unfortunate is that they don’t actually govern a state with the face of their beliefs out front so that we can knock it off.
due to our continued cognitive dissonance and lack of cornerstone or purpose (defense of liberty), we are unable to formulate a policy we can all get behind. Because we are still fighting amongst ourselves over what we should be right now.
You nailed it.
Higher purpose. Somebody’s “higher purpose” is population control. not general population but the lwoer classes.
They say we cannot sustain the peopel we have. Because there isn’t enough space for them.
We are surrounded by nothing but space, look up at the night sky and ask why can’t we focus our brains upon obtain the technology to go there and live there and be born there and sustain ourselves while there?
Instead we kill off he brains who might be the ones who would come up with the ideas to get us there.
God didn’t just give us a world, God gave a whole universe. God gave it in the same way He gave us a womb to grow in until we can emerge from it. We keep recycling ourselves into a kind of “crawl back into the womb” mentality, instead of taking the leap off earth into space.
I wonder if someday we will be able to watch a war on the face of the moon between our nations…. WILL WE EVER GROW UP AND STOP THIS STUPID FIGHTING !!!!?
“This situation in which Muslims of a persuasion and faith like mine find themselves is not unique. Consider the Japanese, confronted with their history of rape and violence during the first half of the last century.”
The problem is, these Japanese were not committing acts of violence in the name of Buddhism. The acts of violence he describes are being committed directly in the name of Islam. (Christians have always protested the violence committed in the name of their religion — c.f. Dorothy Day et al. — and of course being a Westerner is not equivalent to being a Christian by any means.)
As for the comments of Glass and Independent Patriot about why moderate Islam does not speak up, the answer is obvious. The U.S. has abandoned moderate Islam all over the world. We have sent them to make peace and negotiate with those who would murder them. Look at the religious minorities of the Middle East, or isolated dissidents who must have bodyguards 24/7.
The Japanese who fought the Pacific War were
carefully indoctrinated with ‘State Shintoism’
which compares to the original version the way
Wahhabi Islam compares to Islam.
Actually, it should have been in the name of “Shinto-ism”, a militant version of which had raised again the old Bushido code of the Shoguns and painted the Emperor as a god. It established a kind of Japanese knight code (what attracted Hitler to the japanese as an ally), somewhat different from the Renaissance version of Chivalry we like to pretend was the norm amongst our western knights.
It was this Bushido code that helped create the idea of “kamikaze”. However, you are correct that, while this idealism supported their primary goal of Imperial expansion as it created the new sacrificial warriors for the state, it was not their primary cause.
Shinto also had no ethical or moral code, which put it at a disadvantage with Buddhism.
As for Hitler being Christian, anyone reading authorities like William Shirer’s “Rise and Fall of the Third Reich” or Dusty Sklar’s “Gods and Beasts: The Nazis and the Occult” would find out pretty quick that Hitler only paid lip service to Christianity. He knew he had to in order to gain popular support, but he enacted many laws against Christianity (see Shirer), and he and his closest Nazi associates subscribed to some of the worst racist, pagan magazines around (Sklar).
Poor soul. He does not know Islam is about following Mohammad. What did Muhammad do? Yea, we know, and the Muslim brotherhood knows too.
Murdering in the name of Christ does not make one a Christian. What evil men did in the name of Christ hundreds of years ago, or 50 years ago, does not make it OK for Islam to murder in the name of Allah infidels, and Jews now.
Islam, which means submit, worships the god. One of 360 gods at the Kabba. Allah Akbar, means the god is greatest. Greatest of what? The god is greatest of all other gods at the kabba, or zero point.
Thanks for sharing Salim, though it is against my better nature, I am going to assume that you are genuine rather than an obfuscating dissimulator.
You mentioned the actions of the Japanese, does that mean you recognise (whether consciously or not) what it would take to bring about a pacifistic and non-expansionist islam, are you willing to accept what that would entail and take responsibility (by not being an unprincipled fence-sitter at best) for bringing that about rather than offloading that responsibility to the West?
The Japanese had to suffer a catastrophic defeat to being them out of their insanity and even than Hirohito’s surrender speech almost didn’t happen, Judaism had to go through the destruction of its Temple not once but twice in order to evolve.
It is natural for things to evolve / grow via adversity through while islam has suffered its share of setbacks, it has never truly been confronted with an evolve or die situation in its birthplace.
While I have my doubts of such a thing ever happening, I am of the view that the only way Salim’s islam can be mainstreamed is for islam in its current state to go through a thorough exorcism or a total defeat in order to allow it to evolve or live on in history books if it doesn’t.
Unfortunately for those of us who believe in the path with the least bloodshed, the same Western world that still has the power to easily deal with this sordid affair has not only lost its resolve, but is all too willing to ally itself to the muslim brotherhood and even seeks to somehow become “one” with the Islamic world.
Thank you, Salim! I suspect that Mohammedanism has been hijacked by Saudi Arabia with its Wahabi version and its oil wealth. Where have the imams of your mosque been trained and financed? Yes, Mohammed, to my mind, was terrible, quite unlike the founders of other religions – e.g., Moses, Jesus, Gautama Siddartha (the Buddha) – or seekers of wisdom like Socrates or Confucius. He was unlike the Mohammedan reformer in India, Ahmadi, founder of the Ahmadiya Muslims. But the practice of Mohammedanism by millions of people has not always been an imitation of Mohammed, and many, if not most, are decent people.
Evil occurs when good men do nothing.
That is the centerpoint and key to the debate. The Inquisition occurred based on ignorance and greed and the Church failed to restrict its growth because it made them more powerful. In previous centuries “witches” were burned more for political gain than real religious concerns. The failure of rational minds to pull the reins of hysteria allows evil to flourish. And unfortunately, the mainstream Muslims have failed in their efforts to rein in radical Islamists within their ranks. We can play the fool and say this only happens in (fill in the blank) but the stark reality is that we have Muslims who have been indoctrinated to the ideology of radical Islam in our midst. A shooting at Fort Hood, two thwarted terror attempts in Dallas, and on and on and on….at some point one will succeed. And at that point people will no longer care what margin of Islam one believes-there will be retribution. At that point all those good Muslims who allowed clerics with radical agendas to teach their young people will have just as much blood on their hands as the people who pull the triggers. It doesn’t have to be like this, but evil occurs when good men do nothing.
“at some point one will succeed”
I really don’t need to say a word. They can nuke NY City and we will not quit masturbating in the mirror.
As a Jew who can look back on thousands of years of history of interaction with Christianity and Islam I can say that both religions suffer from flaws that will ultimately cause their extinguishment.
Both Christianity and Islam claim to be the ” one true religion “. Any honest person must conclude that such a philosophy poisons the mind and spirit, Those Christians and Muslims whose intellect and spiritual humanism reject that principle, like the author of this letter, have moved beyond ideology. They have outgrown the flaws of their religions.
The second cause of great despair in the world is the rejection of Judaism and Jews.
I am not speaking of becoming Jews and changing prayers, worship or lifestyle. I am talking about the respect that is lacking in the Christian and Islamic world.
After all, if the Torah was not true how can the Christian Bible or the Koran contain truth? If Abraham Isaac, Jacob, Sara, Rachel, Leah and Moses did not live and walk and act what becomes of Christianity and Islam. They fade. Just stories.
Thousands of years before Jesus or Mohammed walked the earth we Jews had begun our remarkable journey. Yet in the last hundred years we are beset as never before. The industrial revolution automated not only cars but our murder. Now most deny us the tiny speck of world that The Almighty in His Wisdom demands we live on. We are beset again. Right now rockets rain down on our children. And the world is otherwise occupied.
With my young/old eyes I see what is happening and smile despite the pain.
We are at a time we always knew would come. There is really one hope. But Mankind refuses to do it.
To simply say, ” Thank you my Jewish brothers and sisters, live in peace in The Land G-d gave you.”
One sentence that would save the world.
Yet not one ” world leader ” will say it.
Pray hard and do good deeds.
Perhaps The Almighty will show Mercy and delay Judgement long enough for the human race to wake up.
Very nice, very true. In contrast to the view held by the earlier poster that we ‘needed’ destruction to evolve, its destruction was really a ‘victory’ of brute power over truth, even if there were flaws in that truth. Jews lost the Temples because of the crushing foot of Empire, not because of our moral inferiority. Christianity to me often looks pale and two-dimensional, the Evangelical support dependent on the return of a crusading Jesus, the leftist sort just fantasy and self-absorption.
Islam is something else altogether, misformed from birth. Salim Mansur never addresses the core essence of Islam. He can’t, like Dr. Jasser and others.
We as Jews are certainly flawed, but our tradition is rich and does evolve. In my short time back here, I can see clearly how those minorities who are not indoctrinated against Israel and Jews are quite content with an Israeli life. Once I would have said it was in spite of traditional Judaism; now I suspect it is more because of it.
Larry
I did not intend to come across as believing in the idea that might makes right (which fits islam to a T), I am merely saying that the value of an idea or anything else for that matter can only prove its worth when it is tested to such extremes and either evolve or die out if faults are found.
What I meant in the case of Judaism was the fact that it was able to survive without its spiritual centre despite it being less than ideal, if it were any other system facing similar circumstances I very much doubt it would be able to survive such a catastrophic event once, let alone twice.
Contrast that with a system such as islam that has never really been challenged / tested like Judaism has and believes that because it never had to tested in such a way, that it somehow proves that islam is true, along with its “destiny” to conquer the world, kill all the infidels and create a millennial Reich… I mean caliphate.
Interestingly, starting with Quttb down to Zawahiri, they believe the west has been “testing” them for a long time, from colonialism all the way up through post colonialism as we consistently pushed into the Islamic world with business, books, movies, MTV our very presence. They believe we are intent on destroying “Islam” and they are defending it (read Zawahiri Knight’s Under the Prophet’s Banner).
We didn’t set out to destroy it (change it as they believe with the institution of forms of liberal society), but they did force the question about where liberal ideas and Islam meets. There WILL be a reformation of Islam. It’s hard to say how or when (point of a gun, internal debate, both), but I believe the premise is correct. And, if we put our minds to it (they force us to), it will be faster than these erstwhile “defenders of Islam” had thought.
Again, I am impressed by the emotional self-assertion of ‘I’m right’ and at the same time, the illogical arguments made by Menachem.
First, he writes that both Christianity and Islam suffer from flaws that will lead to their extinguishment. I note he does not outline these flaws. But, this claim rests on an unstated assumption that Judaism does not suffer such fearsome life-ending flaws.
Second, he claims that Christianity and Islam both claim to be the ‘one true religion’ and that making such a claim ‘poisons the mind and spirit’. But, didn’t he just make that claim for Judaism? After all, he said nothing about its ultimate extinction due to its internal flaws.
Third, he then goes on to critique the respect that is lacking towards Jews and Judaism. But, aren’t his words against Christianity and Islam also a lack of respect – as he posits that their basic flaws will result in their extinction?
Kindly note – I am not saying that any religion merits respect. I am referring only to the contradictions and illogical assumptions within this post.
Fourth – he claims that the content of the Torah is true; and thus, the Bible and Qur’an are also true. Yet again, circular ‘reasoning’.
Fifth – yet another assertion – that Israel belongs to Jews because God ‘gave it to them’ – of course, an illogical claim. Land is not an essentialist right but a political claim. God has nothing to do with it.
I think it is a serious error to equate the political reality of Israel with the axioms of a religion. That is, to critique Israel does not mean that one is anti-semitic – and I often strongly critique Israel but reject any and all charges of anti-semitism.
As for the question of why people are anti-semitic, and there is no question that many, many are – I have a suggestion. I wonder if it is due to its isolation and exclusion. You see, Judaism, unlike the other two ‘religions’ (I admit I have a hard time acknowledging Islam as a religion)..does not seek converts. That is important.
Judaism – which I maintain began among a self-sufficient horticultural people (which is why they are matrilineal rather than patrilineal)..is not interested in converting others to their religion.
Christianity is based on conversions – by persuasion. Christianity is not a religion that one is ‘born into’ (unlike Judaism and Islam); you must make the individual choice to do so. Islam is a militant converting ideology; you must convert or be killed – and you can never leave.
Judaism has no interest in such agendas. It and its people are self-sufficient and show little interest in increasing members by post-birth conversions or militant domination.
I wonder if this self-sufficiency and isolation, this self-satisfaction, this certainty that it is ‘the one true religion’ – irritates others who feel that they, in turn, are being insulted by ‘These People’ who apparently want nothing to do with them and even, look down on their beliefs.
I can think of no reason for anti-semitism other than this sense that Judaism self-defines itself as ‘true’ and unique and unavailable to those who aren’t born into the ”tribe’. [Yes, I'm aware of conversions but the point is, that Judaism has no agenda of 'going out into the world' and converting/forcing new members.]
Just a thought.
Your last comment reminds me of a thesis paper written by some left-wing Israeli academic that Israelis are racist because their soldiers do not rape Arab woman after winning a war. I am just saying….
BTW I disagree with most of what Manchem says.
Your comment doesn’t make much sense to me. On the semantic terminology, I’m not defining Jews as ‘racist’; nor am I defining anti-semitism as ‘racism’. Judaism is a religion; not an ethnicity or a race. I define anti-semitism as bigotry. Minor point possibly.
Now what I’m trying to explore is the reason for the constant anti-semitism. I can understand its existence 2000 years ago, when all peoples were grouped into tribes and viewed other tribes as essentially non-people. That exists in Judaism – read the halahkhah rules which say a lot of nasty things about arabs…but it’s found in all tribal systems of the period. Christianity was the first ‘religion’ that promoted collaboration and interaction with other peoples – which is why I say that it emerged within a market economy.
The question to explore is why, why anti-semitism exists after the tribal period? I can understand its existence within Islam for Islam never moved beyond its tribal origins. But why does it exist elsewhere? It can’t be about the ideology, for the majority know nothing about Judaism and don’t care to know. And besides, what is there to really object to in the religious ideology? It can’t be about a reaction to force, for Judaism seeks no converts and is not a militant religion. So..why? We’ve all heard the most intelligent people make some strange comment..’oh, he’s a jew’..to explain some aberration. It doesn’t make sense.
The only reason I can come up with is that Judaism isn’t interested either in coverting – to Christianity for example, and Christianity does want converts…and it isn’t interested in having anyone convert to its beliefs! If you are orthodox, moreover, you do insist that it is a ‘blood ideology’; i.e., you inherit the ideology ‘in your genes’.
Is this the reason why? Because they define the religion as a genetic component? And thus, set themselves up as genetically distinct from others? Is it thise sense of genetic difference? Is it also this sense of elite superiority to others? The assumed ‘first monotheistic religion’, the assumed ‘chosen’, the assumed essential ‘right to a land base’? And above all, the disinterest in bringing others ‘into the fold’? That’s the only reason I can come up with – because the longevity of such bigotry does require some explanation.
Wow…getting far off the point of Salim’s letter, but I made this point earlier about anti-semitism…
If you want the start of anti-semitism in Christian Europe, you have to view it from the very long historical reference. Starting with the Pharisees rejecting Jesus teaching in the temples and that the Pharisees conspired with Rome to get rid of this “rebel” who was threatening their hold over the Jewish population. To the Pharisees, Jesus was a heretic and the Romans took the same view of Christians against their pagan religion of the state (ie, the gods and that Ceasar was a god), continuing the persecution.
Early Christians did not see these persecutions as separate issues. As Christianity rose in Europe and the power of the Papal state rose with it, converting kings at every turn and “anointing” them in the name of Christ, anti-semitism became the norm, a must in order to be professed (and empowered) by the church. You had to believe that the Jews were complicit in murdering “God” (in the form of the trinity) to be a believer in the resurrection. This made them the enemy of Christianity.
Later, issues of state became entangled with religious concepts. Kings used Jewish bankers to finance their kingdoms and wars. When they didn’t want to pay the loans back (because they were often unable to), they could drag out that old hate to push their political necessities while re-affirming with their subjects the idea that they and the king were one under their faith. It is this political persecution in the name of faith that rumbled on for centuries through Europe and provided Hitler with a ready made field to sow the oats of his “final solution”.
(Recall that one of his major complaints in Mein Kampf was that the Jewish Bankers had forced Germany into WWI on the premise of gaining wealth).
This fits well with the Muslim contention that, as they are all descendants of Abraham and were denied their patrimony in Israel, the Jews have stolen their birth right from them from that moment all the way up to the establishment of Israel in 1948.
So, why does anti-semitism persist? The Jews have something everybody wants and they just won’t die or go away. Whether it is to be the “mother” religion of two rival faiths, a piece of land, gold or to be one of the longest surviving religions. How did they survive so long?
Not that I believe they should “give it up”, but that does seem to be the problem.
I didn’t want to get into this argument, but I feel that I have to. If you look closely at the countries that hosted the Jews for the past two thousand years, you will find that it was against the law for a Jew to go out and seek converts. The act itself was a death sentence. The genetic component that you so well describe is a result of two thousand years of forced isolation in ghetto environments. Jews were unable to move about, convert others and living under other harsh terms. This resulted in inter-breeding that causes genetic diseases which abound in our gene pool. Now this brings me to the next point. Jews do not reject converts; however, it is so bloody tough to become a Jew, without being raised as one, that it forces people away. In other words, if you really want it, you got it; but, you have to really want it. As for you holding Israel to this high level of scrutiny, how dare you. You don’t hold any other nation or nations to anything close. You better exam your underlying motivations to have to act in such a manner. Underneath it is some serious self hating which you project on to others. By the way, I’m not afraid to call you an ass when I think you really are one.
In reply to Andy Gump – no, it’s a basic component of Judaism that they do not seek converts; it isn’t an external rule imposed on them by a non-Judaic Ruler. Seeking converts is, however, basic to both Christianity and Islam – the first by persuasion, the latter by brute force.
No, the ‘genetic component’ I am referring to is not due to intermarriage; it refers to the fact that in Judaic law, in order to be a Jew, your mother (not your father) must be Jewish. That’s called matrilineal descent – and one must wonder why a people set up that type of inherited characteristics. Matrilineal descent of any type is usually found in economies based around horticulture and gathering, primarily carried out by the women. And it is equally hard to convert to Christianity. Islam, is, of course, a different story but I have grave concerns about its even being defined as a religion.
Islam is patrilineal – and they were, going by their texts, a pastoral economy – always carried out by the men.
I think that it is important to analyze ancient historical origins of belief and behavior. They didn’t just spring out of the earth fully formed and the ‘Hero’ or ‘Big Man’ theory of history, focused around the preachings of various Big Men..ignores why their words were accepted and believed. After all – why didn’t people just put down Mohamed’s words as the ravings of a schizophrenic? Why did they join with him? What was going on – economically, politically – that they didn’t just ignore him?
What ‘high level of scrutiny of Israel’? I analyze Israeli political actions no differently than of any other nation. Surely you aren’t saying that there should be no analysis whatsoever?! I’d suggest a little more realism in your comments.
Menachin – yet another ad hominem. Now, you are calling me a fool. heh. That’s hardly the sign of a ‘wise man’.
You are wrong about Jews not wanting to convert others. Up to the time of Christianity, Jews were proselytizing. After Christianity took over the Roman empire, the Roman Bishops made it a crime for a Jew to convert anyone. With the crushing defeat of the Jews in Israel by the Romans, the Jews were set up to be a vassal group to the Christians, who later took power, and forcibly so. The only thing left for the Jews was to retreat into their own religion and hope to just survive. My earlier statements are absolutely right.
Christianity was the first ‘religion’ that promoted collaboration and interaction with other peoples – which is why I say that it emerged within a market economy.
Like the treatment of endemic populations by the conquering hordes of Christians in Africa, the Americas, Australia and hundreds of Island peoples. Collaboration and interaction such as genocide and forced conversions. Market economy….selling slaves in the new world?
Etab, Your contentions are absurd. Your ad hominem attacks prove nothing except your lack of scholarship. If you had read my post with an open mind you might learn something.
” First, he writes that both Christianity and Islam suffer from flaws that will lead to their extinguishment. I note he does not outline these flaws. But, this claim rests on an unstated assumption that Judaism does not suffer such fearsome life-ending flaws. Second, he claims that Christianity and Islam both claim to be the ‘one true religion’ and that making such a claim ‘poisons the mind and spirit’. But, didn’t he just make that claim for Judaism? After all, he said nothing about its ultimate extinction due to its internal flaws. ”
The flaw is as I stated that both Christianity and Islam believe they are the ” one true religion “. On that basis both theologies believe others to be lesser than, ie not going to ” Heaven”. Judaism lacks this flaw. Jews do not believe we are the ” one true religion’. Other religions are legitimate. In fact according to Jewish Law a person does not need to believe in The Almighty to enter ” heaven “. Doing good deeds in life is what matters. Jews believe Judaism is the best religion for Jews only. There is no ” lesser than “. And while we do not seek converts anyone who is sincere can become a Jew.
” Third, he then goes on to critique the respect that is lacking towards Jews and Judaism. But, aren’t his words against Christianity and Islam also a lack of respect – as he posits that their basic flaws will result in their extinction? ”
I have no problem with folks thinking Judaism is hogwash. They have every right to do so. They simply must acknowledge my right to BE a Jew and PRACTICE Judaism. Just as I must acknowledge another’s right to be a Muslim, Christian, Taoist, etc.
” Kindly note – I am not saying that any religion merits respect. I am referring only to the contradictions and illogical assumptions within this post. ”
Nonsense.
” Fourth – he claims that the content of the Torah is true; and thus, the Bible and Qur’an are also true. Yet again, circular ‘reasoning’. ”
More nonsense. If I build a strong building and another bloke comes along and build a less strong structure on top of mine does that mean mine is less strong? Or that his is as strong as mine? I see no circular reasoning in my comments. What I do see is a complete lack of reason in yours.
” Fifth – yet another assertion – that Israel belongs to Jews because God ‘gave it to them’ – of course, an illogical claim. Land is not an essentialist right but a political claim. God has nothing to do with it. ”
LOL.
” I think it is a serious error to equate the political reality of Israel with the axioms of a religion.”
LOL
” That is, to critique Israel does not mean that one is anti-semitic – and I often strongly critique Israel but reject any and all charges of anti-semitism. ”
Name another country that many nations seek to actively destroy.
” As for the question of why people are anti-semitic, and there is no question that many, many are – I have a suggestion. I wonder if it is due to its isolation and exclusion. You see, Judaism, unlike the other two ‘religions’ (I admit I have a hard time acknowledging Islam as a religion)..does not seek converts. That is important.
Judaism – which I maintain began among a self-sufficient horticultural people (which is why they are matrilineal rather than patrilineal)..is not interested in converting others to their religion.”
Another poster has addressed this nonsense better than I.
“Christianity is based on conversions – by persuasion. Christianity is not a religion that one is ‘born into’ (unlike Judaism and Islam); you must make the individual choice to do so. Islam is a militant converting ideology; you must convert or be killed – and you can never leave. ”
Conversion at the point of a sword. Historically speaking.
” Judaism has no interest in such agendas. It and its people are self-sufficient and show little interest in increasing members by post-birth conversions or militant domination.”
Our strength.
” I wonder if this self-sufficiency and isolation, this self-satisfaction, this certainty that it is ‘the one true religion’ – irritates others who feel that they, in turn, are being insulted by ‘These People’ who apparently want nothing to do with them and even, look down on their beliefs.”
Again your lack of scholarship is evident. Jews do not believe we are the ” one true religion.”
Read…. learn….
Rabbi Jonathan Eybeschutz (1690-1764)
” The Christian nations among whom we live, generally observe the principles of justice and righteousness, believe in the creation of the world and the existence and providence of G-d, and in the Law of Moses and the prophets, and oppose the Sadducean view that denies the resurrection of the dead and the immortality of the soul. Therefore it is fitting to be thankful to them, to praise and extol them, and to bring upon them blessings and not, G-d forbid, curses.”
Rabbi Yaakov Emden (1697-1776)
Rabbi Yaakov Emden wrote:
“We should consider Christians and Moslems as instruments for the fulfillment of the prophecy that the knowledge of G-d will one day spread throughout the earth. Whereas the nations before them worshipped idols, denied G-d’s existence, and thus did not recognize G-d’s power or retribution, the rise of Christianity and Islam served to spread among the nations, to the furthest ends of the earth, the knowledge that there is One G-d who rules the world, who rewards and punishes and reveals Himself to man. Indeed, Christian scholars have not only won acceptance among the nations for the revelation of the Written Torah but have also defended G-d’s Oral Law. For when, in their hostility to the Torah, ruthless persons in their own midst sought to abrogate and uproot the Talmud, others from among them arose to defend it and to repulse the attempts.”
” I can think of no reason for anti-semitism other than this sense that Judaism self-defines itself as ‘true’ and unique and unavailable to those who aren’t born into the ”tribe’. [Yes, I’m aware of conversions but the point is, that Judaism has no agenda of ‘going out into the world’ and converting/forcing new members.”
What a dunce.
Etab, Sorry I called you a ” dunce “. MBY
No, Menachem, you are the one who moves into ad hominem. I say nothing about you while you belittle me (dunce, LOL). Stick to the issues.
We’ve been over this before. You state: Jews believe that ‘Judaism is the best religion for Jews only’. Your argument is circular: A Jew is a Jew. One could equally say that, for a Christian, the best religion is Christianity. That’s not an argument!!! You have a habit of circular reasoning which is a totally invalid method of argumentation.
I could equally say that ‘the best belief for a socialist is socialism; the best belief for a communist is communism’. That’s not an argument!
And, remember, we’ve been over your claims of ‘the chosen people’ before – which are also a circular and therefore illogical argument.
Of course land is not an essential right; it’s a political entity. You may LOL – but that’s not a defense but a lack of one. After all, using your argument, that god gave the Jews the land, anyone can make similar claims about any land anywhere in the world..’god gave it to me’. I don’t think that’s a very strong legal claim!
And no, Israel as a political entity MUST be open to criticism. It cannot set itself up as ‘dogma’, ie, sacred and immune to criticism. That’s what Islam does; it sets its societal and political modes of behavior as immune to criticism because it defines them as ‘religious’. Israel shouldn’t hide its political reality from criticism.
Another nation that the world would like to destroy? Have you ever heard of the United States of America?
Your view that Christianity converts ‘at the point of a sword’ is incorrect. You fail to differentiate between the Church of the period from 300-1600 AD and its links to political power…and the religion of Christianity. That’s an error.
Why is it nonsense to focus on the economic mode of early Jews and examine why they are matrilineal rather than patrilineal? Aren’t you interested in such explorations of history?
Cherry picking quotes from those who align themselves with other religions doesn’t change my analysis of the view of self-sufficiency of Judaism. You consider that the rejection of conversion by Jews (they don’t seek to convert) is ‘a strength’. Ahh, so the religions which seek to convert are ‘weak’? Your building analogy confirms your belief in the weakness of other religions. But I thought that you didn’t view other religions as insufficient; indeed, you claim that it isn’t necessary to even have a religion! Again – your circular ‘arguments’.
I suggest this self-definition of self-sufficiency, is a reason for the hostility of other groups to them. Can you supply a reason? So far, you haven’t done so.
Etab. I will ” take the bait ” no longer. Nor will I respond to your long winded posts.
From now on I will take the advice of my favorite teacher-
” I seek no victory, for the honor of my soul and character consists in deviating form the paths of fools, not in conquering them. “
Jews, Muslims and Christians alike.
Pay attention.
Each and every person among you will die. You will leave your bodies behind.
Is not that a clue that we were not intended for this “life”?
If we are not intended for this life, since we will not, once born, continue to live on and on, isn’t it silly to fight over a piece of dirt, a bit of sand, some water, some minerals, a few plants and animals? Not to mention oil.
Power.
Show me your power to live forever?
Jewish man says “Mine si the true religion.”
Muslim man says “Mine is the true religion”
Christian man says “Mine is the true religion”
Buddhist man says “Mine is the true religion”
Hindu man says “Mine is the true religion”
and so on and so on….
Which one(s) teach(es) “be selfless, not selfish” in your use of the earth and all its things and even individuals treatment of each other.
Will all claim “Mine”? Is it truth?
Because if you study them all, all have such elements.
Which religion’s God submits the Godself to the God’s people, and does not Lord it over them?
One.
It is the one with the radical difference to all other world religions before it and since it.
ETAB, you wrote, “I often strongly critique Israel but reject any and all charges of anti-semitism….”
I am curious to know. On what basis to you often strongly critique Israel?
Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Canadian Conservative Party are very supportive of Israel in both word and in deed.
You stated:
“…it would not be inappropriate for me to ask why violence was so deeply embedded in Christians, if not Christianity itself.”
Ask you may, and go ahead and asnwer the question as well, the way you wish; this, however, won’t make it so.
While at it, please tell us what is “taqiyya” to you?
And who’s Aisha and what was she to your “prophet” at the age of six?
Salim: You took the time to write your article so I am hoping you will follow by reading the comments. If you do I think you need to get real. Islam is the problem not Christianity not American Politics not poverty not anything other than Islam. Not a single day goes by without innocents being slaughtered in the name of Islam. This happens in every country in the world. Since 9/11 there have been some 20,000 cases of Muslims slaughtering innocents and in that period not a single protest by so called moderate Muslims–no marches demanding a stop to Islamic barbarism, no academic conferences asking what is wrong with Islam, no reparations for the victims. When a single mentally deranged young man used a gun to kill innocent people in Tucson, Arizona there was great horror at what happened. Islam turns out mentally deranged individuals like this on a daily basis. There are millions in the pipeline right now so we can expect eh barbarity to continue for some time. Do something about your insane religion or stop blowing smoke up my ass!
anna (5.)
the U.S. hasn’t abandoned moderate muslims all over the world. It’s not the responsibility of the U.S. to do anything for moderate muslims. It’s the responsibility of the moderate muslims to stand up for themselves.
If moderate muslims would fight to overthrow fundamental islam, the western world would help. but they don’t.
That these are heartfelt words, I do not doubt. That an interpretive, secular, peaceful, even somewhat agnostic Islam should exist does not surprise me. That such people might even exist in significant numbers does not surprise me either.
The problem we face as a world community is that we have allowed the fundamentalists of a major world-wide religion to take charge and speak for the whole. If this problem were to be fixed from the outside, it would be horribly bloody. We as Westerners can not impose this solution upon this fundamentalist Islam any more than they think they can impose their warped views upon us.
No, the change must come from within and it has to come from someone credible. If there is anything that history teaches me it is this: Leaders of caliber such as Mahatma Ghandi, and Martin Luther King Jr. are unfortunately very unusual and rare. We should be thankful that we have benefited from their guidance and leadership.
In today’s world we can not even contain these barbarians. They know it and we know it. We have built the very vehicles and technologies that our enemies seek to use against us. The fundamentalists are angry, belligerent, and they have lots of cannon fodder. We have held our fire because we do understand what is going on. But how much longer this can remain so is something that bothers me greatly.
This situation feels like a societal case of suicide by cop. There are police officers who simply could not do their regular beat after having something like this happen to them. We remember what happened during World War II. We don’t have the will to do this again. Yet we detest what these fundamentalists want of us to our very core.
Whatever happens, it will take a miracle to keep us all from fighting a dirty battle that we can never scrub ourselves clean from.
Wow. You put that amazingly well.
Nicely argued. But I’d argue that you are missing a key point.
It’s that Islam, right from its origin, set itself up, not as a religious ideology (i.e., analysis of the metaphysical) but as a political ideology and as such, one that required economic power. It set itself up, right from the start, as a military and occupational violent force over others.
Then, it defined this political-economic ideology as a religious dogma; i..e, immune to evolution and change. After the defeat of Islamism in the 15th c – it did isolate itself from the mainstream. That also meant that intellectually and socially, Islam didn’t evolve from its tribal origins. It didn’t modernize to enable its people to live within the modern world.
Then it was confronted with the modern world by the two world wars and its serendipitous reserves of oil – which it was unable to extract or process on its own. But the oil enabled these Islamic nations to remain ideologically isolate. What is happening now in the ME is that the oil has reached its limits of supporting its increased population – and Islam, as an economic and political mode – has remained in ‘the stone age’ so to speak.
And we in the West, as you say, have allowed both the fundamentalists and the isolate Islamists to speak up, to insist that they retain their old ways, to refuse to adapt and evolve. That’s why multiculturalism in the West is so extremely harmful.
And I agree – that Islam has to reform itself. And that this has to be from within. But, there must be a reason for them to reform! The West has to strongly assert that it refuses to collaborate with a people who espouse such primitive rules as those found in Sharia Law, that it refuses to give up its own western religious and social beliefs and behavior; that it refuses to allow Sharia laws to operate in the West; that it refuses ‘special privileges’ to identity groups – including Islam. And that if anyone immigrates to the West, it has to be an act of integration with the long developed values of the West.
Like Islam, Judaism was/is an all-encompassing religion/political movement. The same can be said for most sects of Christianity. It wasn’t until the founding of these United States that the concept of separation of church and state became normative.
As you say, many leaders of Islam have to see for themselves why this normative requirement is essential for a peaceful coexistence. However, the problem is that they have seen it, they don’t want it, they don’t live here, and yet, they feel we have wronged them and that we should kowtow to them.
We will not agree on the reasons why they feel we have wronged them.
This is why I alluded to the incredible leadership of Ghandi and King. The problem is that even they operated only on a national scale. We need someone to operate on a scale on par with that of the Pope –in a religion that has no central authority and does not respect such authority.
All the diplomacy in the world can not cover up the chasm that lies between these points of view. There will be stress, strain, and discontent while both exist. Some refuse to acknowledge that this gulf exists. Some see nothing but the differences and don’t know how to build bridges.
We need to find ways to keep the hotheads apart, all the while building bridges and controlling access. They are too numerous for an ethical military solution. Thus, we are left with the untenable situation where they are too dangerous to be left alone, and we can not intermingle with them to convince them that we mean no harm.
At best, we need to find ways to isolate them and cut their participation from our world to a manageable limit. We have to get other countries to agree to this. We will have the Islamic and the un-Islamic world.
We are the Kuffar. May God have mercy on their souls.
Islam is what it is. It has always been the same. Their flavour and taste has remained constant over the centuries. Unlike Christianity which has been poured and constantly refined.
For the muslims who do not agree with the edicts or injustices regarding Islam, let them speak out. At least in the western lands. There are no other politics or cultures to blame for what Islam is. Only Islam is to blame for that. It is deaf and blind to not accept it’s own responsibility in it’s edicts and acts.
But no whitewashing of this practice will be accepted. It is, what it is.
I don’t doubt Mr. Mansur’s sincerity, but I wonder how he squares his understanding of Islam with that explicitly found in Islam’s sacred texts which is rife with loathing for the “non-believer” and justifies the most heinous acts against them. Does he, like so many Muslims, consider Mohammed worthy of emulation?
The Jews have as their models Moses the lawgiver, Aaron the peacemaker, Akiva and Hillel as teachers, and Maimonides as scholar. Christians have Jesus as the “Prince of Peace” who gave his life to redeem humanity. Buddhists have the Buddha who sought only enlightenment. And what of Mohammed? What kind of example was *he* setting?
Oh Boy! Now we get the good Muzzie-bad Muzzie crap. How about the regular Muzzie that makes his 12 year old daughter marry some old geezer? How about the sexual mutilation of your women? Or how about making your women wear a black bag when they go out? How about the poll just taken in Cairo where 65% of Egyptians said that a Christian convert from Islam should be killed? How about killing gays and lesbians? How about condoning or just standing by while thousands of people are murdered by your fellow Muzzies? STFU and GFY!
Dear Fellow Readers (and Mr. Simon & Mr. Mansur),
I am one of the critics of Mr. Mansur, a harsh critic and again renounce him as an intellectual fraud.
Mr. Mansur pleads “So let me be clear: I speak with you entirely as an individual Muslim, one who belongs to no party or organization run by Muslims for Muslims.”, and goes to great lengths to persuade us about the diversity of Islam.
Certainly, as I have witnessed from my travels to Islamic lands, there may be slight variations on the window dressing of Islam – the style of dress, the cuisine, even some of the rituals – yet there remain three constants that run through all Islamic sects and within all Muslims, even ‘individual Muslims’ like Mr. Mansur and Dr. Zuhdi Jasser:
1) They ALL profess the Islamic creed known as the Shahada:
“There is no god but God, and Muhammad is the messenger of God.”/
لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله (lā ʾilāha ʾillallāh, Muḥammad rasūlu-llāh)
2)They ALL believe the Koran is the direct, immutable, unalterable word of Allah, as revealed through the lips of Muhammed.
3) As such, ALL Muslims uphold Muhammed as ‘al-insan al-kamil’ (the perfect man) and ‘uswa hasana’ (an exalted standard of character Koran 68:4), a moral beacon and role model to be emulated by all Muslims.
But the hard truth about Muhammed, as recorded in the Islamic ‘holy’ texts, is that far from being a a ‘holy prophet’ Muhammed was a sadistic sociopath, a 7th century Arabian Hitler – only worse – a successful Charles Manson, only creepier and more evil.
Factually, Muhammed was a mass murderer, sadistic torturer, heartless amputator, sick decapitator, merciless mutilator, human slaver, looting stealing thief, serial rapist, human trafficker, sex trafficker, child rapist, sexual deviant, woman abusing misogynist, perfidious liar, repeat genocidist and self proclaimed terrorist.
By any objective standard, Muhammed was one of the most vile and disgusting men in the pantheon of human history, a brutal barbarian, a self important narcissistic consumed by unquenchable sexual lust, greed and power.
Muhammed should have been incarcerated not venerated, and he should be reviled not revered.
Every pathology that afflicts Islam comes directly from this sick man, Muhammed, and the world has suffered continuously for 1,400 years because of him.
Mr. Mansur has the courage to condemn “Those who instigated and reveled in the killings” during the Islamic apartheid partition of Greater India, and “the likes of the Muslim Brotherhood”, and he “very clearly remembers the evil that men do”, yet he very conveniently and intentionally erases the savage barbarity of his spiritual guide, Muhammed.
It is as if the decapitation of 700 men & boys, the chopping of hands and feet, the burining of eyeballs with hot iron pokers, the rapes, the thievery, the lashings, the tongue cutting never existed, never happened.
Having studied Islamic doctrine, I understand why Mr. Mansur takes such a schizophrenic position, condemning Islamic terrorists while not condemning the greatest Islamic terrorist to have ever lived, Muhammed.
He knows that it is forbidden to question or expose the truth about Muhammed, but in questioning and exposing other Islamic terrorists following the teachings, mandates and personal examples of Muhammed, he is essentially doing just that.
Mr. Mansur is walking the Islamic ‘death fatwa tightrope’ and he knows it, which is why he is hasn’t stepped foot in a mosque since 9/11 and has essentially been blackballed by his Islamic community.
Mr. Mansur waxes poetically about “the stream of time” and asks how Islam would look if we were able to ‘freeze a frame in a moving picture of the world.’ He fails to realize, or admit, that he has exposed another constant in Islam.
In every century, in every year, since 622ad when Muhammed began his rampaging campaign of terror, there have ALWAYS BEEN those “wild and angry men chanting threatening slogans, wreckages of violence and terrorism committed in the name of Islam” and there would ALWAYS BE freeze frames which “illustrate in graphic detail the effects of the toxin at work: frames of wild and angry men chanting threatening slogans, wreckages of violence and terrorism committed in the name of Islam.”
This is true BECAUSE THAT IS WHO THE ‘HOLY PROPHET OF ISLAM WAS, AND THAT IS WHAT IS DEMANDED BY ISLAMIC JIHAD DOCTRINE AND DOGMA, whether it be Hanafi, Hanbali, Maliki or Shafi’i.
The ‘freeze frame’ pictures are indeed true — and they DO depict Muslims engaged in unforgivable behavior – in the 7th century, 8th, 9th 10th, 11th 12th…in every century and every year, on every continent until this very day when an Islamist in Texas was just arrested for plotting a WMD attack against President Bush, proclaiming “It is war…until the infidels leave defeated” and “In the name of Allah The Beneficient, The Merciful. Nitro Yoria [Urea] explosive is more powerful than T.N.T.” and “Only gratification from Allah is what I want; therefore, it is what I seek. And God willing, I shall encounter it in eternity not in this world.”
Mr. Mansur states “I condemn what I see categorically, while maintaining that the Islam depicted in the pictures is not my Islam.”
Unless he also condemns categorically the sadistic sociopath ‘holy prophet’ Muhammed, he reveals to the ummah that he is a cowardly Islamic psuedo-apostate, and reveals to us that he is just a poser, an intellectual and moral fraud.
~ The Infidel Alliance
Another excellent post on Islam. I doubt if any Muslim will come argue with you; However, you might get a death threat.
Mr.Mansur, You speak of “Muslims of a persuasion and faith like mine”, but I have seen no evidence that such Muslims really exist. The Islam you profess to follow would have to reject everything Mohamed stood for, and would therefore not be Islam. I don’t believe that a “Mohamed-free” exists.
Again I ask why you choose to follow a man who was an example of everything that is evil. You do have the right to choose another religion or no religion if you wish.
You also use the diversionary tactic of making reference to violence committed by Christians many hundreds of years ago. Yes violence was committed by Christians, but, it was committed AGAINST the teachings of Christ, while violence committed by Muslims is commanded by Mohamed and is done following the example of Mohamed. The two cannot be compared, and you know that to be true.
What you say you don’t like about Islam is the Islam of Mohamed- the true Islam.
In the end there is no middle ground. Either Mohamed the pedophile,
homicidal maniac, torturer and practitioner of and advocate for virtually every evil known to mankind is the most perfect human being ever or he is not.
Remain a follower of Mohamed in any form and you are in fact condoning all the evil that is part and parcel of Islam.
I have long maintained that the only good Muslim is a “bad” Muslim.
In this eloquent and sophisticated letter, Mr. Mansur reveals himself to be such a good Muslim. And, what’s more, a good man.
Salim Mansur wrote: “….it would not be inappropriate for me to ask why violence was so deeply embedded in Christians, if not Christianity itself. Would not Muslims, among other non-Christians, justifiably be cautious, if not fearful, of those who wore the cross?”
I’ve got to admit, he has a point. Much of this violence was perpetrated by the Roman Catholic Church and its doctrine; the Jews portrayed as Christ-killers. Scholars maintain, were it not for historic Christian anti-Semitism, propagated from the pulpit, the Holocaust would have been inconceivable. Protestant reformer, Martin Luther – author, “On the Jews and Their Lies” – was no better. That having been said, there is no comparison between the founder of Islam and the founders of Judaism and Christianity respectively. Late last year the Vatican held a Synod on the Middle East in large measure to address persecution of Christians in the region. Unsurprisingly the Church and the Pope laid much of the blame on Israel based on “Christian” theology. See Arch Bishop Cyril Bustros statement on the Holy Land:
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2010/11/exclusive-archbishop-cyril-bustros-clarifies-his-remarks-at-the-vatican-synod.html
Consequently, like Islam, I can only conclude the Roman Catholic Church has not evolved for the better, but instead clings to its anti-Jewish past.
I’ve got to concur with writers above, the problem is largely rooted in Islam’s founder and his example, endorsed by Allah himself. It is rooted in Islam’s holy book. Because no matter how much people try to compare the Qur’an with the Bible, there is no comparison. The revelation in the Qur’an is very different from the one in the Bible; in particular the Hebrew Bible, the so-called “Old Testament.” The God of the Jews (the God of Israel) is a very different God from that of the Muslims. He is very different from the god of Muhammad, portrayed in the Qur’an.
and as someone of Jewish background, you are far more sensitive and aware of Christian violence than I could be
Just to make some obnoxious but salient points.
How could Hitler — an devout anti-Christian — kill 6 million Jews, unlike, say, Tamerlane, who was a devout Muslim?
Because he could get his hands on them.
And why was that?
Because they were living in Europe rather than Turkey or the Levant or Iraq or Persia. Granted some Jews were living in those places but the number was a couple magnitudes less than 6 million.
For some strange reason the Jews chose to migrate from the 4th to 20th centuries to places controlled by “violent” Christians rather than “enlightened” Muslims.
And this brings to mind the circumstances of black slavery. (There has been white slavery too, which, since the 7th century has more often than not involved a certain “enlightened” religion, but let’s stick to the black kind) From the 16th century, 30-40 million blacks were taken as slaves from Africa to the Americas. Despite the suffering, vibrant black communities developed on both continents.
A similar number of blacks were taken during that same period as slaves to the Islamic world. Where are the vibrant black communities?
Mr. Mansur states “I am a student of history, much more so than theology.”
Good. As issues of spirituality and mysticysm are matters of faith and not fact, let’s stick with the facts, things we can objectively prove.
Islam (all sects) claims a Judeo-Christian lineage, and also claims Moses and Jesus as Islamic prophets, with Muhammed being the final prophet.
But the ‘holy prophet’ Muhammed personally violated every one of Moses’ 10 commandments, and in word, deed and morality Muhammed was the polar opposite of Jesus, the very definition of the ‘Anti-Christ’.
Do you not see something wrong with this? Do you not recognize some sort of fatal flaw in Islamic moral logic?
Mr. Mansur, how can you defend the actions, teachings and mandates of your prophet Muhammed? How can you defend the indefensible?
—–
For those who equate ‘Christian’ atrocities with Islamic atrocities, there simply is no comparison. You are confusing ‘Churchianity’ with Christianity.
When ‘Christians’ kill, rape, loot, enslave or terrorize, they do so in direct contravention to the teachings and personal life examples of Jesus.
When ‘Muslims’ kill, rape, loot, enslave or terrorize, they do so in direct accordance with the teachings and personal life examples of Muhammed.
~ The Infidel Alliance
Much as I respect and admire Salim Mansur – and I do – I think that the conceptual infrastructure of Islam has to be publicly examined. Just to say that one has not been to a mosque since 9/11 is not an examination and call for reform (if possible) of Islam.
I have a hard time acknowledging Islam as a religion. It has little to say about the metaphysical, which I claim is the only venue for a religion and most of that is straight from the judaic plus the area’s tribal paganism. Islam is primarily a socioeconomic and political system of a pastoral tribalism. It is, furthermore, a militant ideology, with a focus on a violent takeover of lands and people. What’s religious about that?
Christianity, in my view, is non-violent. The focus of its beliefs is an insistence on collaboration and acknowledgement of Others (love thy neighbor). It IS an ideology of conversion, seeking to expand its members by persuasion. I suggest it emerged within the expanding market economies of the Roman era.
The Church that emerged within Christianity is quite a different story. The Church was all about power. Over money, the economy, land, politics, people. This church, which supported wars and economic-political expansion was, in my view, not an expression of Christian beliefs. But of a political imperialism of an elite set – the church leaders who hid behind the ‘sanctity’ of a religion to gain political and economic power. The famous ideological debate between the Athanasian versus Arian interpretation of the trinity – which the former won – is an example of a focus on authoritative power.
Judaism is non-violent. It simply wants to be left alone, for it considers its ideology sufficient, satisfying and wholesome. And, it has never allowed a church, as did the Christian ideology, to gain political power and subvert the religion.
But Islam’s basic axioms are violent. Never mind the corrupt and vicious lifestyle of its assumed founder, Mohamed, which ought to be examined by Muslims and critiqued. But the agenda of military domination of all other peoples! How can that be justified?? Why isn’t it examined by Muslims?
I’ll declare that I am an atheist or perhaps more accurately an agnostic since I cannot logically prove or disprove the existence of a god; I’m an atheist because such an entity seems to me to be illogical despite my inability of proof.
Dear ‘ETAB’,
You are exactly right when you say “Islam’s basic axioms are violent” and Islam is “a militant ideology, with a focus on a violent takeover of lands and people”.
Witness ISLAMS PRIME DIRECTIVE:
Koran (4:76) – “Those who believe fight in the cause of Allah”
Koran (5:33) – “The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His messenger and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned…”
Koran (8:12) – “I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve. Therefore strike off their heads and strike off every fingertip of them”
Koran (8:39) – “And fight with them until there is no more persecution and religion should be only for Allah” (ISLAMS PRIME DIRECTIVE)
Koran (9:5) – “So when the sacred months have passed away, then slay the idolaters wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush…” (THE INFAMOUS VERSE OF THE SWORD – ISLAMS PRIME DIRECTIVE)
Koran (9:123) – “O you who believe! Fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness.” (ISLAMS PRIME DIRECTIVE)
Koran (48:29) – “Muhammad is the messenger of Allah. And those with him are hard (ruthless) against the disbelievers and merciful among themselves”
Koran (61:4) – “Surely Allah loves those who fight in His way”
Koran (61:9) – “He it is who has sent His Messenger (Mohammed) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islam) to make it victorious over all religions even though the infidels may resist.” (ISLAMS PRIME DIRECTIVE)
Bukhari (52:177) – Allah’s Apostle said “The Hour will not be established until you fight with the Jews, and the stone behind which a Jew will be hiding will say. “O Muslim! There is a Jew hiding behind me, so kill him.”
Bukhari (52:220) – Allah’s Apostle said “I have been made victorious with terror”
Muslim (1:33) – the Messenger of Allah said “I have been commanded to fight against people till they testify that there is no god but Allah, that Muhammad is the messenger of Allah.” (ISLAMS PRIME DIRECTIVE)
Bukhari (8:387) – Allah’s Apostle said “I have been ordered to fight the people till they say ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.’” (ISLAMS PRIME DIRECTIVE)
Muslim (1:149) – “Abu Dharr asked ”Messenger of Allah, which of the deeds is the best?” He (the Holy Prophet) replied “Belief in Allah and Jihad in His cause.”
Muslim (20:4645) – The Messenger of Allah said “There is another act which elevates the position of a man in Paradise to a grade one hundred (higher), and the elevation between one grade and the other is equal to the height of the heaven from the earth.” Abu Sa’id asked “What is that act?“ He replied ”Jihad in the way of Allah! Jihad in the way of Allah!””
Tabari 9:69 “Killing Unbelievers is a small matter to us”
Ibn Ishaq: 327 – Allah said “A prophet must slaughter before collecting captives. A slaughtered enemy is driven from the land. Muhammad, you craved the desires of this world, its goods and the ransom captives would bring. But Allah desires killing them to manifest the religion.” (ISLAMS PRIME DIRECTIVE)
Ibn Ishaq: 992 – “Fight everyone in the way of Allah and kill those who disbelieve in Allah.” (ISLAMS PRIME DIRECTIVE)
This is what informs and indoctrinates the Islamic civilizational consciousness.
Any comments Mr. Mansur? Do you reject these mandates as a modern intellectual, or do you embrace them as an ‘independent Muslim’?
~ The Infidel Alliance
Salim: Did your computer go down. We are anxiously awaiting your response to the comments. Today another priest was slaughtered by Islamic barbarians. I just wondered how this could even happen in the misunderstood religion of peace.
I remember that God himself preserved Ishmael. Forbade Abraham to kill him and then personally took care of him and his mother in the desert. Prophesying that he, Ishmael, would become a numerous people. hmmmmmmmmmmm
There are moderate Muslims. There is no such thing as moderate Islam.
From its inception, Islam was very violent, barbaric and cruel. Murderous hate for non-Muslims is taught in the Koran. Founder of Islam, Mohammad, was a huge slave trader. He is considered the perfect man by Muslims who follow the Koranic teaching. Mohammad murdered/beheaded 700 Jews because of the Jews love for, and allegiance to Almighty God, Creator of the Universe. The Jews refused to follow the new religion of Islam and another god. The Jews’ wives and children were seized for slaves to lives of living hell. The Jews’ courage and love for God will never be forgotten.
There is no such thing as cancelling out the word of G-D. The All-Powerful G-D KNOWS the future. The Jewish scriptures (Old Testament) are unchanging and eternal.
In comparing VIOLENT Mohammad to Jesus, a Hindu wrote with great respect for Jesus; that GENTLE Jesus died on a cross. Those who disparage Christianity ignore that ‘Christians’ who committed violence and murder massively violated the Biblical teaching of Christianity (and Judaism) to show love, mercy and kindness.
Teaching from Jewish Scriptures, Jesus declared in Matthew 7:12 “Treat people the same way you want them to treat you, for this is the Law and the Prophets.”
Matthew 5: Blessed are the gentle, for they shall inherit the earth.
Blessed are the merciful, for they shall receive mercy.
Jesus kept Saturday Sabbath, the Passover and all of the Jewish holy days. Jesus taught from the Jewish Scriptures in the synagogues and in the Temple on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem, Israel.
Once the Jew-haters got control of the church, they got rid of all of the Jewish things Jesus did. The Catholic church even changed the Sabbath day to Sunday, severely persecuting Christians who worshipped on Saturday. When the church was still in its infancy, the savage wolves entered the church. With an all-consuming hate for G-D and G-D’s Laws:
YOU SHALL NOT MURDER
Whilst angels wept, G-D haters of the apostate church perpetrated unspeakable acts, atrocities and mass murders against Jews to whom G-D gave His holy Laws to. Crusades. Inquisitions. Genocides.
By their evil, violent acts, the wicked, inhuman monsters revealed it was the devil that they worshipped.
Utterly opposed to G-D and G-D’s Laws, they blasphemed G-D, killing in the name of G-D. Their punishment from G-D will be terrifying.
The savage wolves never left the church. Some conceal who they are. Others reveal who they are – they sympathize with Muslim terrorists and demand little Israel give half of her G-D given land to the Islamo Nazis bent on Jewish genocide.
The MUSLIM JESUS is CALLED ISA.
http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/durie/islamic_jesus.html
‘Isa (Jesus) in the Hadith
‘Isa the destroyer of Christianity
The prophet ‘Isa will have an important role in the end times, establishing Islam and making war until he destroys all religions save Islam.
He will fight for the cause of Islam. He will break the cross, kill pigs, and abolish the poll-tax. Allah will destroy all religions except Islam. He (‘Isa) will destroy the Evil One and will live on the earth for forty years and then he will die’. (Sunan Abu Dawud, 37:4310)
What do these sayings mean? The cross is a symbol of Christianity. Breaking crosses means abolishing Christianity. Pigs are associated with Christians. Killing them is another way of speaking of the destruction of Christianity.
Under Islamic law the poll-tax buys the protection of the lives and property of conquered ‘people of the Book’. (At-Taubah 9:29) The abolition of the poll-tax means jihad is restarted against Christians (and Jews) living under Islam, who should convert to Islam, or else be killed or enslaved.
http://www.answering-islam.org/authors/durie/islamic_jesus.html
Oh how I wish you had not written this follow up- SALIM- it just proves to me the twain shall NEVER meet- you just don’t get it
First we get the moral equivalence crapola- “Oh once Christians did Crusades” Nazis Inquisition- etc- “You have been as bad as we are”
with slight feint to distance yourself from this
Then we get the history re-written- “oh the glorious Islam was once so great”- well not for non Muslims under conquest it was NOT-
all the so called great acheivements of ISLAm were stolen from the cultures they conquered and dominated by FORCE or threat–Obama shares your rosy pictures of the past.
Then we get – it’s all the fault of USA for being weak-
or our reactions to Islam- just so damn typical of Muslims everywhere- it’s like you all read from the same damn script- it’s never Muslim’s fault- always someone did something to them- boo-hoo, we are victims
If you did witness what you say, India partition- Banglasdesh deaths- then you should perfectly get the perversity that is ISLAM- this was not an exception. This is the behavior demonstrated throughout time by ISLAM- move in, make trouble, outnumber and take the lands. Genocide, ethnic cleansing, land theft- coincidentally all thing things Islamics say Israel does to them.
I appreciate that you think you are being understanding but your post proves to me you agree with the larger body of Muslims- I appreciate that you are “culturally” Muslim and of course love Muslims, those are your family, your friends your background. YOU SEE A SIDE OF PEOPLE WHO ARE good DESPITE BEING mUSLIM, who may represent the nicer side of Muslims but thatis not because of what ISLAm taught them or by copying the example of Islam.
I agree with those here that you should dump Mohammed and ISlam as you do do not follow it like a religion, so what is left of it that makes you a Muslim? Islamis a political domination cult, keeping mostly MUSLIMS in bondage- One day if you are truly honest with yourself you will see it is ISLAm that is the problem, not one sect of it- the basics, Quran and hadith define it so well and clearly as a totlitarian system, no less than NAzism which it has much in common-
And as a Muslimsmyou do know about abrogation, bidah and gates of itijhad being CLOSED- shut tight- to REFORM ISLAM means one must throw it all out- There is no such thing as a moderate FASCISM and now I am sure there is no such thing as moderate ISLAM.
I think Salim feels sorry for himself. I’m so sorry he’s not regarded as a good muslim there in Canada. He could, however, follow the Sufi teachings of his faith and no longer worry about attending a mosque. The Sufis were Islam’s equivalent to Christianity’s mystics and Vedanta’s and Hindu’s holy men.
Jacob (Israel)struggled with his stronger twin Esau (Christendom),but neither could reconcile with the Amalekites.(Muslims)
http://www.aish.com/jl/h/cc/48930992.html? wisdom and history from the OT
and now a joke:
The Quran is at a job interview. The boss asks- Do you have references?- Quran replies, Torah and Bible, call them. – So the boss calls Torah, and Torah replies, -I have never heard of him. – Confused, the boss calls Bible and Bible says, – I know him; he is a liar and a thief and is actually from Satan, the devil, don’t believe him. -Pressed by the boss, Quran defends by saying – They are liars. -And the boss reasons – if they are liars, why do you use them for references unless you are insane?
Isahiah62,
How can Christiandom be Essua, as he married into Ishmael family? Is that part of the joke?
I believe that there those who are secular Muslims just as there are secular non-practicing Christians and Jews, but that doesn’t make them “moderate Muslims” it makes them non-practicing “Muslims in name only”.
That is a far cry from being Moderate Muslims. There is no movement of practicing Muslims who are demonstrating and otherwise working for an alternative, non-violent form of Islam,that is different from the one we see destroying everything with which it comes in contact.
So called “moderate Muslims” are merely those who practice their “religion” less enthusiastically. There is no perceptible movement from within advocating significant changes to the “religion of peace”.
Moderate Muslims exist primarily in the wishful thinking fantasies of non-Muslims who hope that they wont one day be forced to defend their own beliefs.
@Salim
These critics have made a direct correlation between the freeze frame and Islam
No doubt there are many modern critics of Islam who denounce it primarily because of the conduct of modern extremist Muslims; however, Salim, you’re ignoring profound and incisive criticism of Islam as it was practiced by Muhammad, the Companions of the Prophet, the Rashidun Caliphs, and all the Muslim rulers during the golden ages of Islam you whitewash. Sure pre-modern Muslims generally treated Jews better than pre-modern Christians treated them; however, Muslim treatment of non Peoples of the Book was generally just as bad as Christian treatment of the same people, and even medieval Muslim treatment of Peoples of the Book wasn’t that great – It had a lot in common with how African Americans were treated under early 20th century Segregation in America. It just happened to be slightly better than most of Christianity at the time.
The main difference is, Jews & Christians can look to the founding figures of their religions and hold them up as perfectly ideal exemplars of perfect behavior. If modern Jews & Christians behaved like Abraham, Moses, Jesus & the Apostles, everything would be great! But if modern Muslims behaved like Muhammad or the Companions of the Prophet, we’d have wars of offensive Muslim conquest, second-class citizenship for Peoples of the Book, and forced conversions for all the rest!
Self-aggrandizing b.s..
I first heard the word “Jihad” in the late sixties. The Muslim being interviewed on a PBS documentory explained it.
Salim doesn’t address my question…What religion bombs its own places of worship ? This is the ultimate question and answer that separates Islam from all other religions.
When Christians start bombing each others places of worship and protest with signs saying “Behead those who insult Christianity”, I will address the “Insanity” of my chosen faith.
American Christian Infidel
Michael Canzano