Saturday, September 16, 2006

Pope Benedict & Muslim Denial

HOLY DENIAL: Muslim utes in India burn effigy of da pope.
I am no fan of Pope Benedict XVI or the Roman Catholic Church, but he spoke an undeniable truth the other day when he addressed the "evil and inhuman" elements of Islam in a speech in Germany. (I only hope that Oriana Fallaci was able to hear the prelate's words before she left this mortal coil.)

It is the leaders of Islam whoare in denial as is evident from the angry reactions from Britain to Iraq to Indonesia. The New York Times, among other media outlets, is bent out of shape, too, saying that Benedict was "sewing pain." Yes, the truth hurts.

What is it that Muslim leaders don't get?
I know of no other religion today where its most fanatical adherents are on a holy crusade to kill you and I and our children.

I know of no other religion today whose holy book sanctions violence in the advancement of its own faith.

I know of no other religion today where adherents who choose to renounce their faith are subject to officially sanctioned death.

These issues needs to be addressed, but it is so much easier -- and utterly mindless -- to turn the historically accurate remarks of a man who had no intention of insulting his Muslim brothers and sisters into another Danish cartoon incident.

Ahem.
For the record, the offending words came at the outset of a scholarly address on reason and faith in which Benedict recounted a conversation on the truths of Christianity and Islam that took place between Manuel II Paleologus, a 14th-century Byzantine Christian emperor, and a Persian scholar.

This is what the pope said:
“The emperor comes to speak about the issue of jihad, holy war. He said, I quote, ‘Show me just what Muhammad brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached.’ ”

Benedict also briefly discussed the Islamic concept of jihad, which he defined as “holy war,” and said that violence in the name of religion is contrary to God’s nature and to reason.

How can a truly peace-loving person disagree with that?

9 comments:

Vikadan said...

I have great concern over the violence that happening in the recent years in India.

I am more concerned with my country, India, when I read the ideology of some muslim organisations (SIMI). They publishing the Ideology to reinstate the Muslim Rule on India.

What will be the reaction of common secular people to this Stupid Theory.

The Majority of this country is too secular. But If they came to know the ideology of these people, they will react slowly but steadily with the common muslim population.

SIMI Activists don't think about society, people. They even don’t mind muslim society.

SITUATION OF TODAY.

Even the secular people cleverly try to avoid certain situation. Big companies secretly conveying a message to scan the address of their staff, their client.

A brillient muslim youth won’t get a Good Job in a Big Company before a wide range of scanning. Even if it is happened he will be in a tough situation, How to find a place to Stay?

Even, the secular people, cleverly trying to avoid business activities with their Muslim brothers because they are not sure who is who.


FUTURE SITUATION

If the terrorism continues the situation will go worse.

The muslim population will cut off from the mainstream in a fast manor. This will add salt to the wound. The terrorism again will increase, the minority will fully cut off from the society. One day, the barrier will loss it control and I don’t know what will happen.

This all happen only because of the Terrorist ideology of a minority group of the Minority.

TO CHANGE THE SITUATION.

The Muslim majority have to come out against this terrorisum, even against a slight negative ideology. They have to come and join the Mainstream after off loading all its mental barrier.

They have to clear and cut off all negative, extremist people from the society. Don’t allow them to enter in the society.

I am Sure after some years INDIA will come to a normal secular state with all its colours.

Shaun Mullen said...

Thank you for your thoughts, Vikadan.

I adore India in all its vast, clamoring dysfunctional greatness. The Dear Friend & Conscience lived there. (I got thrown out trying to get into Bangladesh right after independence. There's a big container of saag paneer between the tuna salad and tortillas in the fridge in the other room. Lunch today is saag and garlic nan.

Anyhow, I too share you fear. The so-called modernization of India has been far too convulsive and far too secular. I pray that Muslims will speak out against the fascist beast in their midst.

Be safe.

Abdul Rahman Hilmi said...

bismillah
assalamu ala al Muslimeen

To sum up all what you wrote, you're basically saying that you think Islam was spread by the sword.

First of all, forcing anyone to convert to any religion doesn't work and never worked throughout history. The enquisition tried it in Spain and slaughtered millions of people and forced alot to "convert to Catholicism", but all of the history scholars agree that the Jews and Muslims who publically renounced their respective religions continued to practice their original faiths in private. You can force a people to practice whatever you want them to practice with the sufficient force, but you can never force anyone to believe and think how you want them to.

It only requires of you to have a little common sense and some knowledge on history to refute that "Islam was spread the sword" nonsense. I would also like to add Indonesia for spice on my dish of refutation. The Muslims never did rule nor even fought a single war in Indonesia and yet it is a country with the most population of Muslims in the whole world. People accepted Islam through their trade and business dealings with Muslims. This is how they knew it and this is how they loved it and accepted it. The rest of the Muslim world could not be any different.

Muslims today, wherever they are, (who according to you their ancestors were forced into Islam (even though that doesn't make any sense as I said earlier)) protect Islam and the Muslims and call for the return of Islamic rule everyday more than the previous day.

What is even more pathetic is that this nonesense is coming from the Roman Catholic Church, an organisation that is known for the slaughter of Muslims and Jews (not to mention pedophelia). A Christian priest in Lebanon once said that if the Muslims indeed forced people to convert you would have had a replica of Spain throughout the Muslim world. Spain has an absolutly neglegible number of Muslims even though the Muslims ruled the land for thousands of years. Compare that to Muslim countries you find Christian minorities with ancestoral heritage almost everywhere. When the Khaleef Omar conqured Jerusalem he refused to even pray in the Church and instead prayed in the street outside for fear that people after him will tear down Churchs and build mosques over them.

The Pope's quote was made by Christians who not only started religious "holy" wars - namely the Crusades where they only won the first and then defeated in the next 8 of their attempts, but also prosecuted Jews throughout their history.

Terrorism? I agree that most fighters today fighting the Western world are Muslims, but is that because we don't like peace? No, we love peace just like any human being does. The difference is that we refuse peace if it is at the cost of justice. When it comes to a choice between living in peace with injustice or justice and war, we'd take justice and war any day.

Instead of attacking such people, the Pope should be more concerned with the cause of those problems. Maybe stop spending on all the gold bracelets, canes and diamond jewleries, the palaces, art collections, and silk clothes and furniture, he should spend more money to feed more people. If he was indeed a man of honesty and really cares about people that is. If not, then he better not talk about Muslims nor Christians. Enjoy his lasagna and remain silent is probably the better thing for him.

As for whether we as Muslims are over-reacting; it is an issue of priorities. The West holds a priority of freedom and it is the one thing they respect. Muslims don't. Muslims have a priority of honour and the honour of the prophet and of Islam comes above everything. Absolutly everything. If you want us to respect your freedom you have to respect our prophet. If you can't respect our prophet then don't expect us to respect your freedom.

wassalam

Shaun Mullen said...

I think we are talking past each other a bit. I apologize if I seemed to infer that Islam is a violent faith and Muslims are a violent people. There are elements of violence in both faith and followers, but I believe that the vast majority of the hundreds of millions of Muslims worldwide are peace loving.

That said, I find the crux of your comments to be horrifying. If I do not respect your Prophet (which I happen to do) that gives you license to kill me.

Shame on you.

Abdul Rahman Hilmi said...

bismillah
where exactly did you gather that I want to kill you?

I said that you shouldn't be expecting Muslims to leave those things go quite when you insult the one thing we hold dear. Personally I was against all the demonstrations that occured on the Danish cartoons issue, but on the other hand you people seem not to realise that we don't hold the same values as you do. You expect what is normal to you to be normal for everyone else, which is a big mistake. I am not saying that I want to hurt anyone, no. I am saying that everything you do would have a reaction from the people around you. The more important you are in society, the more responsibility you hold in the things you say. If you can't take that responsibility when someone somewhere reacts in an unacceptable way then you shouldn't be in that position in the first place.

Shaun Mullen said...

Thank you for the clarification.

While we are on the subject, might you suggest why more Muslim leaders are not more outspoken about the people who make no bones about the fact that they want to kill me and my children? Or is this a case of the Western media focusing on the negative and not the positive?

Abdul Rahman Hilmi said...

bismillah
Two things you should know.
First of all, only the Shia Muslims are the ones who have a leader (and thus they are generally more united in their decisions these days than the sunnies). The Sunnie Muslims' leader is the Caliph, which has been deposed by Britain after the First World War. The good men amongst us are working to bring back that leadership again to bring unity to the Muslims of the Sunnah by re-establishing the Caliphate.

Secondly, if you're children were already dead and those who killed them are still slaughtering and butchering your people in their hundreds, robbing your land and its resources and supporting tyrants and dictators who rule you with corruption and an iron first, would you cry when their children and people die? However much ethically and morally wrong it is to kill innocent civilians and however much I am against the killing of Western civilians (as Saladin once said; "We don't learn how to fight from the Crusaders") I still cannot bring myself personally to attack Muslims who all what they're doing is protecting their lands and homes from aggressors. Granted their method of doing so is contraversial, yet still, how can I watch my own son's dead body and then attack the fathers and sons who lost their own relatives when they take their revenge in the means that they (pushed into blind hate and anger?) see fit? What do you want me to tell a son who saw his own father being beaten up by Israeli soldiers in the street? Should I tell the mother whose home has been bulldozed down about the human rights convention and the UN? Should I give them lessons in ethics and that we are all one brotherhood, us and the Zionists and the Americans and then leave her sleeping in the street next to the ruins of a century old olives and dates farm that was her only source of income? What do you want me to say to the mother whose new born son died of the cold weather because she had to give birth to him in the street at an Israeli checkpoint because they wouldn't let her pass to go to the hospital?

Next time you see a hungry man in the subway or in the park, why don't you start lecturing him about the hungry people in Africa and tell him to give something to them. I'll tell you from now, either he'll ignore you or he'll start chasing you with a stick. It is your countries men and women who came to our land holding guns, not ours. The militants amongst the Muslims are only people who reacted to the environment the West created in our lands. If we had any form of security or prosperity or even a hope for a better future, things would have been alot different.

Again, I do not advocate militancy, however you asked me why the Muslims don't condemn militants and I'm telling you why.

Cassidy said...

I pray that Muslims will speak out against the fascist beast in their midst.

Muslims and facists... not you too?

Shaun Mullen said...

You're right, Cassidy, but saying that also is a long way from saying "Pretty please, don't fly jetliners into skyscapers," which would be inoffensive but meaningless. Perhaps I need to be somewhere in between and only have half as many Muslims pissed off at me.

Language is the lubricant of this particular slippery slope, and you are absolutely correct that I must tread carefully.