Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote: I truly believe that what is happening across the Levant is political... I think any solution to this can not ignore the context of this violence: there are political and social causes that allow radical voices to be heard and acted upon, and this has nothing to do with the core values or practices of Muslims as a whole. We need to present a different ideology to the marginalized who fall for the radical rhetoric, and that starts with a conversation, but any attempt to modify the core values of the religion itself will fail.

Thank you Muslima. I only disagree with one thing -- we cannot extricate religion and politics in Iraq. Here in the US, that separation is much more distinct, but not in Iraq. That is my point -- Islam and politics are so intertwined, to say an event is only caused by politics and not religion is not accurate at all.

I agree with you -- "we need to present a different ideology to the marginalized who fall for the radical rhetoric, and that starts with a conversation." Well said. A conversation about what? An ideology about what? The disenfrachised Maslawis didn't commit to nonviolence to seek political gains. They welcomed a violent group of Sunnis who promised power and control. To them it was a win- (political) -win (religious) situation. Religion is absolutely and unquestionably a driver in what occurred on June 10th.

You know, the Iraqi scholar Fanar Haddad stated that more often than not, the intricacies of faith and theology are about as relevant in Iraqi sectarian dynamics as Christianity is in the rhetoric of European far-right groups.It is religion as identity rather than religion as faith that is being mobilized . Islam is not just a religion, it is a way of life, and so it differs from other religions in many ways. However, the relationship between 'Islam' and politics is not as simple as many make it seem.. So, 'Islam cannot mix with politics' is not an accurate statement. Nor is 'political matters cannot be dissociated from Islam' an accurate statement either. A lot of Muslims have created a "do-it yourself Islam" that is used to justify every action against the people that they perceive as oppressors. I quoted Yasir Qadhi yesterday, a Muslim scholar that I profoundly respect, and will repeat what he said again since he is way more eloquent than I am. Talking about these issues and he said every single terrorist, from Bin Laden himself, to the shoe-bomber and under-bomber and Boston bomber and every other bomber in between, ALWAYS mentions the deaths of civilians in Muslims lands as a direct cause of his own terrorist operations. While I continue to oppose these groups who claim to defend Islam (because killing innocent people is not allowed in Islam, and because attacking the superpowers of the West will result in the deaths of even more Muslims around the world), we do need to move the conversation beyond just 'condemning' every violent act from a Muslim radical, and realize that what is at stake is the continuing appeal amongst a segment of Muslims to Islamic violence as a response to Western aggression. Unless and until people of Western countries start asking themselves, 'Is it really worth it to invade other lands on false pretexts, to detain innocents for decades on end, to torture prisoners, to support brutal Apartheid states, to bully minorities by passing draconian laws and demonize their faith, etc.', there's only so much we as Muslims can do to prevent the hot-headed radicals in our midst as well.'
As a Muslim, I denounce such wanton violence and blood being shed in the name of my faith. The question is, as an American (or British, or French...): do you as well denounce the violence that your country have wrought across the globe?What we need in today's world, other than cases of self-defense of course, is to spread a culture of mutual co-existence and multi-faith dialogue and cooperation.

Muslima -- a very thoughtful reply. There's a lot to unpack here but it is getting late. I will look into the writings of Yasir Qadhi for further insights. Thank you -- have a good night.

Christians in Mosul, Armenians in Aleppo and Yazidis in Iraq have absolutely nothing to do with the Western aggression, and still ended up dead.

You talked about the political motivation behind ISIS in Iraq as a response to the allegedly sectarian Iraqi government that embraced Shias too tightly and marginalized Sunnis. You are being disingenuous if you do not admit that the hatred toward Shia "rafidah" is very much a part of the mainstream Sunni discourse, and has been for a long while before Al-Maliki was even born, and that discourse toward Shia is "we dominate you or we kill you." The Sunni discourse sees any, ANY Shia rule as illegitimate, and it doesn't even recognize Shias as complete Muslims. None of that would have changed if Al-Maliki was more open toward Sunnis.

The textbooks of Saudi Arabia describe Shiaism as "shirk akbar", which makes their blood and wealth halal to take, and that was published and disseminated way before the whole Iraq affair. The Shia of Khazara were slaughtered by the violent Sunni Taliban way before the whole Iraq affair. Don't pretend it's about Maliki and his government. That's BS.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Muslima habibtee- I would love your opinion on just one matter. I promise not to go back and forth with you on this thread as that can get overly tedious.

I recently read an article talking about the number of beheadings that take place in Saudi Arabia. I think there are about 79 or 80 that take place every year. The beheader prays for the imprisoned prior to the execution. Tell me, is Saudi Arabia's use of beheadings as a form of execution Islamic?

Sexist and condescending.

https://lebanonglc.wordpress.com/2012/11/06/stranger-or-not-youre-still-my-habibi/

Lebanon isn't representative of the entire Arabic speaking world. Many Arabs only use this word with intimate friends and family. I'd err on the side of NOT calling an Arab woman habibti unless you know her well.

I wasn't the one who used the word, but what I found, when I looked it up, is that the word is used in many languages, including Arabic and Hebrew, and is not particularly intimate. Or at least, it can be used intimately, among friends, acquaintances, strangers, etc. And don't we all know Muslima now?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Muslima habibtee- I would love your opinion on just one matter. I promise not to go back and forth with you on this thread as that can get overly tedious.

I recently read an article talking about the number of beheadings that take place in Saudi Arabia. I think there are about 79 or 80 that take place every year. The beheader prays for the imprisoned prior to the execution. Tell me, is Saudi Arabia's use of beheadings as a form of execution Islamic?

Sexist and condescending.

https://lebanonglc.wordpress.com/2012/11/06/stranger-or-not-youre-still-my-habibi/

Lebanon isn't representative of the entire Arabic speaking world. Many Arabs only use this word with intimate friends and family. I'd err on the side of NOT calling an Arab woman habibti unless you know her well.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Muslima habibtee- I would love your opinion on just one matter. I promise not to go back and forth with you on this thread as that can get overly tedious.

I recently read an article talking about the number of beheadings that take place in Saudi Arabia. I think there are about 79 or 80 that take place every year. The beheader prays for the imprisoned prior to the execution. Tell me, is Saudi Arabia's use of beheadings as a form of execution Islamic?

Sexist and condescending.

https://lebanonglc.wordpress.com/2012/11/06/stranger-or-not-youre-still-my-habibi/

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote: I truly believe that what is happening across the Levant is political... I think any solution to this can not ignore the context of this violence: there are political and social causes that allow radical voices to be heard and acted upon, and this has nothing to do with the core values or practices of Muslims as a whole. We need to present a different ideology to the marginalized who fall for the radical rhetoric, and that starts with a conversation, but any attempt to modify the core values of the religion itself will fail.

Thank you Muslima. I only disagree with one thing -- we cannot extricate religion and politics in Iraq. Here in the US, that separation is much more distinct, but not in Iraq. That is my point -- Islam and politics are so intertwined, to say an event is only caused by politics and not religion is not accurate at all.

I agree with you -- "we need to present a different ideology to the marginalized who fall for the radical rhetoric, and that starts with a conversation." Well said. A conversation about what? An ideology about what? The disenfrachised Maslawis didn't commit to nonviolence to seek political gains. They welcomed a violent group of Sunnis who promised power and control. To them it was a win- (political) -win (religious) situation. Religion is absolutely and unquestionably a driver in what occurred on June 10th.

You know, the Iraqi scholar Fanar Haddad stated that more often than not, the intricacies of faith and theology are about as relevant in Iraqi sectarian dynamics as Christianity is in the rhetoric of European far-right groups.It is religion as identity rather than religion as faith that is being mobilized . Islam is not just a religion, it is a way of life, and so it differs from other religions in many ways. However, the relationship between 'Islam' and politics is not as simple as many make it seem.. So, 'Islam cannot mix with politics' is not an accurate statement. Nor is 'political matters cannot be dissociated from Islam' an accurate statement either. A lot of Muslims have created a "do-it yourself Islam" that is used to justify every action against the people that they perceive as oppressors. I quoted Yasir Qadhi yesterday, a Muslim scholar that I profoundly respect, and will repeat what he said again since he is way more eloquent than I am. Talking about these issues and he said every single terrorist, from Bin Laden himself, to the shoe-bomber and under-bomber and Boston bomber and every other bomber in between, ALWAYS mentions the deaths of civilians in Muslims lands as a direct cause of his own terrorist operations. While I continue to oppose these groups who claim to defend Islam (because killing innocent people is not allowed in Islam, and because attacking the superpowers of the West will result in the deaths of even more Muslims around the world), we do need to move the conversation beyond just 'condemning' every violent act from a Muslim radical, and realize that what is at stake is the continuing appeal amongst a segment of Muslims to Islamic violence as a response to Western aggression. Unless and until people of Western countries start asking themselves, 'Is it really worth it to invade other lands on false pretexts, to detain innocents for decades on end, to torture prisoners, to support brutal Apartheid states, to bully minorities by passing draconian laws and demonize their faith, etc.', there's only so much we as Muslims can do to prevent the hot-headed radicals in our midst as well.'
As a Muslim, I denounce such wanton violence and blood being shed in the name of my faith. The question is, as an American (or British, or French...): do you as well denounce the violence that your country have wrought across the globe?What we need in today's world, other than cases of self-defense of course, is to spread a culture of mutual co-existence and multi-faith dialogue and cooperation.

Muslima wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote: I truly believe that what is happening across the Levant is political... I think any solution to this can not ignore the context of this violence: there are political and social causes that allow radical voices to be heard and acted upon, and this has nothing to do with the core values or practices of Muslims as a whole. We need to present a different ideology to the marginalized who fall for the radical rhetoric, and that starts with a conversation, but any attempt to modify the core values of the religion itself will fail.

Thank you Muslima. I only disagree with one thing -- we cannot extricate religion and politics in Iraq. Here in the US, that separation is much more distinct, but not in Iraq. That is my point -- Islam and politics are so intertwined, to say an event is only caused by politics and not religion is not accurate at all.

I agree with you -- "we need to present a different ideology to the marginalized who fall for the radical rhetoric, and that starts with a conversation." Well said. A conversation about what? An ideology about what? The disenfrachised Maslawis didn't commit to nonviolence to seek political gains. They welcomed a violent group of Sunnis who promised power and control. To them it was a win- (political) -win (religious) situation. Religion is absolutely and unquestionably a driver in what occurred on June 10th.

You know, the Iraqi scholar Fanar Haddad stated that more often than not, the intricacies of faith and theology are about as relevant in Iraqi sectarian dynamics as Christianity is in the rhetoric of European far-right groups.It is religion as identity rather than religion as faith that is being mobilized . Islam is not just a religion, it is a way of life, and so it differs from other religions in many ways. However, the relationship between 'Islam' and politics is not as simple as many make it seem.. So, 'Islam cannot mix with politics' is not an accurate statement. Nor is 'political matters cannot be dissociated from Islam' an accurate statement either. A lot of Muslims have created a "do-it yourself Islam" that is used to justify every action against the people that they perceive as oppressors. I quoted Yasir Qadhi yesterday, a Muslim scholar that I profoundly respect, and will repeat what he said again since he is way more eloquent than I am. Talking about these issues and he said every single terrorist, from Bin Laden himself, to the shoe-bomber and under-bomber and Boston bomber and every other bomber in between, ALWAYS mentions the deaths of civilians in Muslims lands as a direct cause of his own terrorist operations. While I continue to oppose these groups who claim to defend Islam (because killing innocent people is not allowed in Islam, and because attacking the superpowers of the West will result in the deaths of even more Muslims around the world), we do need to move the conversation beyond just 'condemning' every violent act from a Muslim radical, and realize that what is at stake is the continuing appeal amongst a segment of Muslims to Islamic violence as a response to Western aggression. Unless and until people of Western countries start asking themselves, 'Is it really worth it to invade other lands on false pretexts, to detain innocents for decades on end, to torture prisoners, to support brutal Apartheid states, to bully minorities by passing draconian laws and demonize their faith, etc.', there's only so much we as Muslims can do to prevent the hot-headed radicals in our midst as well.'
As a Muslim, I denounce such wanton violence and blood being shed in the name of my faith. The question is, as an American (or British, or French...): do you as well denounce the violence that your country have wrought across the globe?What we need in today's world, other than cases of self-defense of course, is to spread a culture of mutual co-existence and multi-faith dialogue and cooperation.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Religion is clearly not the issue. It's used as a motivator by those who exploit. It is used in an attempt to gain political power.

Every monotheistic religion has been used this way. Stop being part of the "us vs them" problem. It's a political tool of the weak, not a religion problem.

I agree, it is a motivator -- and it is used to gain political power because in many Islamic communities, politics and religion are ONE.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The District of Columbia alone recorded 108 homicides in 2014 - how many were committed by Christians? Do we need to change the daily practices of Catholics and Protestants respectively?

Really? These homicides were committed in the name of God, for the killers' hopes for Heaven? I guess we do need to emphasize more clearly that you can't get to heaven by murdering people.

Or maybe these homicides in DC were not committed in the name of religion. That seems likely to me.

jsteele wrote:Here are two examples of why the US has little credibility in trying to influence Muslims:

http://www.mcclatchydc.com/2015/01/11/252671_us-airstrike-in-syria-may-have.html?rh=1

"A U.S.-led coalition airstrike killed at least 50 Syrian civilians late last month when it targeted a headquarters of Islamic State extremists in northern Syria, according to an eyewitness and a Syrian opposition human rights organization."

Note that the civilians killed were opponents of IS who had been arrested.

and

http://news.yahoo.com/egypt-student-gets-3-jail-term-atheism-152045172.html

"An Egyptian court has sentenced a student to three years in jail for announcing on Facebook that he is an atheist and for insulting Islam, his lawyer said Sunday."

But, don't worry, Egypt was represented at the march in Paris today. The US supports the Egyptian government and provides millions in military assistance to the regime. This is what we get for our money.

Anonymous wrote:

Muslima wrote: I truly believe that what is happening across the Levant is political... I think any solution to this can not ignore the context of this violence: there are political and social causes that allow radical voices to be heard and acted upon, and this has nothing to do with the core values or practices of Muslims as a whole. We need to present a different ideology to the marginalized who fall for the radical rhetoric, and that starts with a conversation, but any attempt to modify the core values of the religion itself will fail.

Thank you Muslima. I only disagree with one thing -- we cannot extricate religion and politics in Iraq. Here in the US, that separation is much more distinct, but not in Iraq. That is my point -- Islam and politics are so intertwined, to say an event is only caused by politics and not religion is not accurate at all.

I agree with you -- "we need to present a different ideology to the marginalized who fall for the radical rhetoric, and that starts with a conversation." Well said. A conversation about what? An ideology about what? The disenfrachised Maslawis didn't commit to nonviolence to seek political gains. They welcomed a violent group of Sunnis who promised power and control. To them it was a win- (political) -win (religious) situation. Religion is absolutely and unquestionably a driver in what occurred on June 10th.

Anonymous wrote:How about abolishing all religions?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Muslima habibtee- I would love your opinion on just one matter. I promise not to go back and forth with you on this thread as that can get overly tedious.

I recently read an article talking about the number of beheadings that take place in Saudi Arabia. I think there are about 79 or 80 that take place every year. The beheader prays for the imprisoned prior to the execution. Tell me, is Saudi Arabia's use of beheadings as a form of execution Islamic?

Sexist and condescending.