| GoodBai |
| ....Or supporters of extremism and hate the West. Most Westerners are anti-Muslim, pro-Israel and seek to harm the Islamic world. [color=red]The above are two complete misapprehensions but views held by people on each side of the argument. How the hell do you cut through this and get some understanding? I fear in the current climate it won't happen. Anyone with the answer would truly be the world's greatest peace-maker[/color] |
| sniper420 |
oh Good Bai if u look into the archives of this forum there have been lloads of issues. Why the hell do u bring same thing up again and again? |
| Linda_Stuiv |
| It's an important issue, therefore I think it should be raised again and again. People living in/and cocooning around their own culture are invariably going to develop stereotypes about other groups of people. Westerners, no matter how much we pretend, are not less cocooned than a lot of muslims, around our culture, and that's human nature (you want proof? check abcd's thread). I think some positive development can be achieved through the communities living together, namely in major metropolises, like London, AMsterdam, Dubai ..etc. Also through open-minded people seeking true knowledge about "The Other", but that's a farshot. I think the major blame falls on the shoulders of the media. Never before has been such a concentration of vain and uninteresting people/writers/reporters, so visible more than today in most media outlets. The masses are ignorant, the elite have the responsibility of ushering everybody forward. Media used to be a medium to educate and enlighten you. But now it's nothing but a tool to further your ignorance and self-centredness. I bet "yes by Jove :D " that if some story that would shake people's beliefs reaches some news outlet, the response would be "Oh wait .... people won't like this, and we want to give people what they like!! Shred it!"...... it used to be "This is unbelievable! People must know about this! Integrity!" Rotten consumerism |
| kanelli |
| I think one main issue is that some Arabs are treating the perceived problems with the West as a religious issue. For example, the US going into Iraq has nothing to do with Islam, it has to do with politics and economics. The moment that both sides use religion to be biased against one another and claim that God is telling them to cleanse the world of non-believers of their faith - there is no more hope, because we'll be back in a situation like the Crusades. That is a disgusting period in history, and we all should know by now that no one religion is better than another. |
| Liban |
George Bush said God "spoke" to him and told him to go to Iraq... Thats what the crusaders said... |
| kanelli |
| So because George Bush is Christian and he attacked Iraq, that means that all the Western countries who are also mostly Christian want to have a holy war with the Arab world? Give me a f-ing break! |
| Liban |
Look at Europe banning people from wearing the headscarf in public or in cinemas (like in certain places in Belgium) and like the Dutch are planning... Whats that? |
| kanelli |
| France you mean? I would hardly consider them a good example of cultural understanding. Look at the recent riots! Let social problems fester in immigrant communities and that is what will happen... I think the main reason for the banning of headscarves was to prevent prejudice. It is deemed too visible a sign of one's religion and could cause problems in a mixed-religion, mixed-cultural setting. Really, it is more for the protection of the Muslims wearing them, because it seems that France is aware that too much visibility of Islam could stir up problems with the non-Islamic citizens - probably the ones with long French ancestry who might feel threatened about an increasing group of immigrants from a different religious background. I belive that this ruling is unfair if Christians and Jews and people of other religions are allowed to wear symbols of their faith. Perhaps it is true that one can hide a cross or star of David on a necklace under one's shirt, but still - fair should be fair. It will be interesting to see what happens with all this banning head scarf business. I understand that some European countries who had a homogenous culture for hundreds and hundreds of years are struggling with immigration and cultural issues. This is after trying hard to understand, because as a Canadian I don't see anything threatening about different cultures and different religions living together. Europe needs more convincing of that, and immigrants need to be patient, or move elsewhere. |
| sniper420 |
French have always been sissy in their culture and demeanor. I am not trying to generalize but if u read their history u will see it's in their blood. French soldiers have been inefficient and had to discipline if they did have the discipline and efficiency like britain they would have built better empire. Now I dont any positive reasons for those morons to ban head scarf. one hand they talk about secularism other hand they take off the freedom to wear scarf and turban etc... those sissys will run again (they gave up Paris 2 god damn times in first and second world war without even firing a bullet!) taking there @sses off if there was any third world war. :x |
| Linda_Stuiv |
The solution to keep "safety" in a multi-cultural society, is to force one unique group of people to look like the majority?? I fail to see the logic.
This is your interpretation, but I disagree.... They banned the headscarf to protect muslims? Muslims don't really need protection, they are a big and thriving sector of French society. What you're basically saying that instead of educating the "original" french (are you implying that a "new" french is less of a citizen?) about tolerance, the solution would be to ban muslims from practicing their religion? If the french have allowed immigrants under the premise of eqaulity and secularism, then they should maintain their promise.
Wearing a cross or the star of david is not a religious duty. Headscarf is.
I'm a European (Of a pure Scandinavian lineage). Nevertheless, my motto has always been : "You can't change the rules of the game, once it has begun" It's criminal to allow people in, promising them freedom of practice and equality, then discriminate against them and FORCE them to integrate when you clearly think of them as less than you are. I think a solution is to stop immigration to Europe. I mean the initial reason was rebuilding after WW2, and that has long ended, so closing down the doors of immigration -because society can't take it- is more fair than screweing the ones you already have. Just my two cents |
| kanelli |
| I really struggle with intolerant societies. I know it is natural for people of one kind to stick together, but we are supposed to be well educated and beyond that basic animal instinct. I lived in a European country and I feel that it isn't the place for me to spend the rest of my days. I don't thrive in a homogenous culture, even though I looked the part where I was living. We came to the UAE for a cultural experience and of course, financial gain after struggling with huge student loans and high taxes in Europe. I feel fortunate to live in an Arab country where I can see really what it is like in the society here. (And I hope to travel to other neighbouring Arab countries too.) After this we'll head back to Canada, because that is the country that suits me best (don't know about my husband :)). Sure, Canada has some racism and there is religious tension when it comes to issues like banning the Lord's Prayer from the morning announcements in schools, and trying to ban turbans in the Royal Canadian Mounted Police force etc. You'll find this kind of struggle in any country that is made up of many cultures and religions - but I think Canada does a much better job dealing with this than most European countries. Sniper, be careful about bashing the French as wussies. Canada isn't exactly known as a military power, and we focus on peace-keeping, which many might consider wussy-ish :) |
| sniper420 |
Well Fremch are causing trouble in Canada, first they want to seperate, they made the poor chretein cry. they opened and have so many gay s and lesbos, and lastley recently they legalized orgy party. :x |
| kanelli |
| Sniper, you are really stirring the pot now! :? |
| Linda_Stuiv |
| Whats with the "Turbans" ? Muslims don't wear turbans anymore, they stopped 300-400 years ago. What you see in Dubai (the locals) is the traditional gulf outfit, and they don't usually wear it abroad. The only ones who wear turbans are the Sikhs, which is a religion majorly from India. Are you referring to the headscarf? Because that's called "Hijab" I think. |
| kanelli |
| I knew I'd get jumped on about the new vs old French. It is the old French that would have more of a problem with less cultural and religous purity than the new French. I don't get what your problem is with that statement. Why is it hard to understand that the French would want to make everyone look the same so that no one is discrimated against? Yes, not wearing a headscarf would protect a Muslim woman from attracting attention from religiously biased people. I'm well aware that the head scarf is a different issue to the cross or star of David etc. Yes, I was talking about Sihks. You may not be aware, but there was big controversy in Canada in the 90's because a young Sihk man wanted to wear his turban with is RCMP uniform. The RCMP are Canada's pride, and they have a very distinct uniform. Wearing a turban would alter the uniform, and some people were wondering why the man just couldn't conform to the uniform instead of standing out from everyone else. I didn't see the big deal, but many people to this day are divided about it. In the end, it was determined that Sihks could wear their turbans. It looks good actually - they use the black ones with their regular uniform, and tan coloured ones with the dress uniform, so it doesn't really wreck the look of the uniform in any way. More importantly, it doesn't affect his work and he can keep his religious obligation. A happy compromise in my opinion. |
| Linda_Stuiv |
Simple. If the French as a society were that "sectored" into new and old, and incapable of granting equal rights (socially and legally) to immigrants, then they shouldn't have allowed immigrants in the first place. But to allow them then bash them is what I have a problem with. I can respect a society wanting to remain homogenous, but to pretend it's not, and wreck people's beliefs in the process is what I'm against.
I believe that the correct way to counter/respond to biased people is by education and law, not by indulging their bias on the expense of the minority. But that's just me.
Because these "some people" fail to see the importance of religious duties to other people. |
| kanelli |
| I agree with you Linda. Despite what many of us would consider a stupid and intolerant ruling on head scarves, do the French deserve to be killed over it? Some Islamic extremists would say yes, and that is wrong! If people feel they are being biased against in Europe, and they don't have the patience and persistence to try to change attitudes - they should leave to a more open society, or to a country they feel they have more in common with (perhaps ancenstral home country?) It always takes time for people to change - look at how long it took the world to give women a chance to vote. Is some countries women still can't vote. If the women are happy that way, fine, but if they aren't - the change needed to accomplish their goal needs to be worked on. ------------------------------------------------------ Here is an interesting article about the US. Do we just love to hate them? David's friend Goliath. http://www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php?story_id=3331&page=0 My opinion is that this piece doesn't deal adequately with the fact that big business has a large role in manipulating foreign policy. However, there are some good points there, and the US being the large power that it is has had a positive influence on the world in many ways. The author, Michael Mandelbaum, is an expert in this area and has done more reading than I have, so I can't totally pick him to pieces. What do you guys think? |
| Linda_Stuiv |
| Simplistic and relishing the fact that the US is most powerful. The notion that since there is no anti-US coalition, then the people of the world must be secretly enjoying the US patronage is beyond silly. I've read many articles by equally self-deceiving "commentators". Whats with your infatuation with "Islamic Extremists!!!!" ? Don't worry, you're canadian, Canada has had no hand in any Arab/Muslim catastrophe, no body will bomb Toronto soon. Nobody said that the French should be killed for banning Hijab, it's their country and they can decide whatever suits them (irrespective of my feelings towards that decision). How about some examples of anybody calling out to kill the French? Don't presume, that's dangerous (and I hope you're not referring to the idiotic Abu Hamza piece in 7Days) |
| GAB |
Oh, pleeeeez! Don't categorise everyone according to his statements. Don't you guys have friends whose religion, race, nationality etc are different to your own? Yes, I do. Who gives a flying fish? Some people are nice and some are not- it has nothing to do with race, religion, nationality, gender or how big their car is!! End of story. :roll: |
| kanelli |
| Sorry, keep referring to extremists because they are the ones calling for Westerners to die every time there is an offence against their religion, or a political or economic offence against their country. There is an increasing tendency for some Muslims who are against the policies of some Western governments to take up extremism , and this is a threat to peace and security. Everyone should be concerned about this. http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/03/26/world/main608832.shtml http://www.alwayson-network.com/comments.php?id=P5652_0_6_0_C I'm not saying that all Muslims called for aggression against non-Muslim French citizens. Many Muslims have followed the ban without complaint - wearing the scarf when not on school property. Here's an interesting article too, What the French Ban on Head Scarves Says About France By Sarah A. Curtis http://hnn.us/articles/printfriendly/7442.html |
| GAB |
| There are extremists in every religion and there are non-religious nutters as well. Why single out one religion or for that matter race or for that matter nationality or for that matter country???? :? |
| kanelli |
| Are you claiming that the 7Days article was misleading about Abu Hamza? Here are some other articles that report on videos that prove he was inciting hatred. Who cares whether the media outlets reporting are from the West, there are videos to prove it and people have viewed these, or are you suggesting that all of this is fabricated? http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/01/12/nhamz12.xml&sSheet=/portal/2006/01/12/ixportaltop.html http://edition.cnn.com/2006/WORLD/europe/01/13/britain.hamza/ http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3752517.stm http://www.cbc.ca/national/news/recruiters/hamza_interview.html - in this interview he totally blurrs politics and religion. The US did not invade Afghanistan or Iraq on religious grounds to humilate those nations! He is very contradictory, with words saying we aren't a target, yet other words that imply that we are. Which is it? A small sample of links to support my claim that Islamic extremism seems to be increasing in Western countries. In Australia http://www.abc.net.au/worldtoday/content/2005/s1516896.htm In Canada http://www.canada.com/national/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=cb4b3799-46b2-4bff-b42e-852d05978222&page=1 In USA http://www.washtimes.com/national/20040209-115406-6221r.htm In Europe http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2006/01/15/europe_confronted_with_a_new_type_of_jihadist/ BUT, I found this encouraging. Islamic Extremism: Common Concern for Muslim and Western Publics Support for Terror Wanes Among Muslim Publics http://pewglobal.org/reports/display.php?ReportID=248 |
| kanelli |
Have you been reading any of these recent threads and posts, or did you just skip to the last page of this discussion and then post? EDIT: Okay, I did see your previous posts now. Sorry! In any case, your comment is very basic and if you were reading carefully you'd see why we are talking in particular about Islamic extremism. It is not a bias on my part, because I am well aware of other extremist groups - they just aren't relevant to this current discussion. |
| GAB |
| Basic?? A little insulting. But if the shoe fits I'll wear it happily. I just find that this sort of posting is pot stirring and antagonostic-my basic, naive view. |
| Liban |
| Lets stop talking about Islamic extremism right now. The greatest number of atrocities in history were commited by Christians and Jews. Muslims are a distant third. So please get off your high horses and look at your own bretheren for a change... |
| kanelli |
| Liban, are you implying that because Christians and Jews were cruel and barbaric in the past, that it is now okay for Islam to have a go? Why am I getting the flack for discussing the exact topic that this thread first brought up? I didn't start this thread by the way. I've made it pretty clear that not all Muslims are extremists, so agree with the original poster that that is a stereotype. What I am saying based on some evidence from professionals and people keeping an eye on the situation, is that Islamic extremism seems to be increasing in Western countries, and this is something we should all be concerned about. I'll be quiet now because obviously the politically correct squad and living back in history squad are here to shut me down. |
| arniegang |
Its a bit like banging your own head on a brick wall Kanelli. :wink: |
| Linda_Stuiv |
| -Sigh- It's really sad the obvious degree of rabid fear people have... but then again, looking at the media and it's unholy mission nowadays, I'm not surprised. Kanelli, none of what you mentioned is "evidence", articles reflecting their writers' personal opinion are not "Evidence". Who's the most notorius "terrorist"? And I don't mean some chickenshit like Abu Hamza, but someone who had actually got the capability/will/track record of carrying out deadly attacks? Bin Laden right? It's interesting, but I was witnessing a pseudo-debate the other day between an annoying American soccer mom, and this Brit reporter in Dubai that works for the BBC, and when the lady said something like : Islamic extremists want all westerners to die, the reporter put his foot down and said: I'm sorry Mrs.xxxxx , but no where in any press release/theological "sermon" has any of those groups called for killing westerners. And she says: Oh yeah? What about the westerners dying in Iraq and in housing complexes in Saudi Arabia? And his reply (which I found to be golden) was : There's a difference between legitimizing killing ANY western for the mere purpose of eradicating westerners, and between using western individuals -in hot zones- as pawns of political pressure against governments . Yes the latter is terrorism as well, but it has been used by most political movements -I add : including American revolutionaries- , and we never said that the IRA wanted the eradication of all Brits because of a bombing in London. And I think that that is an important distinction. A lot of westerners (apparently including you Kanelli) seem to think that a brand of muslims (that is growing) just views any blonde-blue-eyed person as a legitimate enemy who's killing would only get them closer to Heaven. I'm sorry, but no one is that way. When you recite stuff from the media, opinions and what not, you're doing exactly what I've been complaining about. Namely : The villification of muslims in the media. Yes sure everybody will say :"Oh no, we just mean the fundamentalists!!" but in a lower tone will continue to say/imply : "But they are growing and it seems that most disgruntled muslims are good candidates to be become extremist". Nothing is further from the truth. I know that this is something that is usually never discussed in the media, but I'll put it forward nevertheless: The general Muslim public shares these same concerns (of which MOST are are legitimate and valid) with what we call "Terrorists". It is the way the two parties act upon it that is different. And we should draw that line. Being anti-war on Iraq, didn't mean that that person was pro-Saddam (Although for some news outlets, that was the motto for a while). Similarly, being anti-western policy, doesn't necessarily mean Pro-Terrorism. I'll say it again, being anti-western policy, doesn't necessarily mean Pro-Terrorism. I'm repeating it because it seems that once anybody critisizes the West in anyway, he/she is looked upon as someone either extremist, or on the way to extremism. And by the way Kanelli, if the media and the media people were so accurate and unbiased in their opinion, there wouldn't be such a gap betweem european/american populations and the Arab/Islamic ones. Do your own "excavation", talk to the people and listen to their concerns. This forum is a good place to start. I recommend the books :"Silent no more" by Paul Findley (any of his books would be good). Any of the recent books by Noam Chomsky. And "Orientalism" by Edward Saeed. As a matter of fact, I have some of Edward Saeed recorded "lectures" on the computer, if you have P2P like e-mule or any other similar program, I'd be happy to upload it to you. It's very insightful. |
| GAB |
Yee haa to that!! |
| kanelli |
| Thank you Linda :) I'm sorry if you are getting the impression that I mean this: "I'll say it again, being anti-western policy, doesn't necessarily mean Pro-Terrorism." - a quote from your last post. I really didn't feel that I was claiming that anywhere. I simply can't believe that the West is evil because I am from the West and I have no ill intention towards others, and do not support injustices to others. I also don't believe that the media in the West is too biased to be reliable as a source of valid information. All media has a slant, including the media coming from Arab countries, but ultimately, there are truths in there. I still don't think I am wrong about more Muslims, particularly in the West, moving into the extremist end of the spectrum due to events like the invasion of Iraq, and problems with relations when living in European communities. Are all the news outlets really getting it wrong? Where are all the articles and expert opinions that say otherwise? I already posted one link to an opinion poll that showed that support for terrorist attacks was dwindling in many Arab nations, but couldn't find anything refuting my claim that Islamic extremism was growing in Western countries. These discussions are very useful for me because I need to see other perspectives and need to get over any biases or misconceptions that I have. In the end it will make me a better and more understanding person. Sorry Linda, I don't have p2p - but would be interested to read some books or articles that you suggest. If anyone has useful links or info related to busting up the myths that were given in the original thread, please feel free to list them. |
| Linda_Stuiv |
I drew that conclusion from you labelling Liban an "extremist", although he never tried to suggest violence against the West/Westerners. He just expressed very blatantly phrased concerns, pertaining to the western government's policies. [code:1]I simply can't believe that the West is evil [/code:1] Who said the West was evil? The only people I saw/heard describing the West as evil are those actors in the cheap B-class movies of the 80s. But then again, the media sends these subliminal messages all the time. Some people view the western culture as "immoral", but bear in mind that a good deal of religious westerners believe the same thing. We should draw a line between "I disagree with the western policies, and despise Western culture" and "I want to kill westerners". Westerners despise a lot of the Islamic traditions which they find anti-freedom, anti-women's rights... etc. Am I not right? Why can't it go the other way around? Because we're absolutely right? Reaching the pinnacle of human social evolution? Bullshit. If -for some reason- it was the Islamic world with the military/economic might (which has nothing to do with the social/religious factor) today, we'd be having the reverse conversation. It's all a matter of perspective. What I'm trying to outline here, is that the "Islamic Threat" is non-existent, not in the way the western media portrays it at least. The extremists in the West, would love nothing more, than for ordinary individuals like you and me, to view every muslim in our community as a potential suicide-bomber, no matter how educated/englightened that person might be. Such a result ends any chance of true people-to-people dialogue, which facilitates the "plan" of absolute Western hegemony. I don't believe that the muslim communities in the West are leaning towards extremism. Out of I don't know how many million muslims in the West, how many people actually went to Iraq/Palestine/Afghanistan to fight the Americans (which I still don't see as terrorism, since they'd be fighting against an Arny, not civilians)? Only a handful. But they've been paraded in the media over and over again to reinforce the notion of the "Islamic threat growing in our midst!!" You said yourself that polls show that muslim support for "terrorism" is dwindling in the Arab World. How do you explain that, considering that the media attacks on the Western policies ...etc, is the fiercest here? IF -just for the sake of the arguement- there were indeed, thousands of muslim youth being recruited to become fireworks in Baghdad, then I think that it's not indicative of the nature of Islam/Muslims, but an indication of the ghettos they've been forced to live in, in Europe. Ignorance + Hunger = Golden recipe for fanaticsm. Many of the good french schools (for example), still have very minute "quotas" for "immigrant" students. That is discrimination and racism at their unholy zenith. If these people didn't turn to religious extremism, they'd turn to crime. And that is very visible as well. The media in the West IS biased. It doesn't make up stories (although sometimes it does). But it focuses on the negative aspects in 99% of the time. Imagine a so-called independent newspaper in Canada, that ONLY publishes stories about rape, crime, corruption, terrorism, and every other negative phenomenon in the Canadian society. You -as a canadian- would find it strange that a newspaper would do such thing, and you might label it as biased. But if that newspaper was ...say... Americans' only way of knowing about Canada, then you shouldn't be surprised that Americans would have negative opinions about Canada. It's the same for muslims. Our media has been smearing them for centuries. When was the last time you saw a piece of news that would give you a positive opinion about anything Islamic or Arab? Is it possible that NOTHING good ever comes out from one fifth of the globe? The reasons for this bias are long, and I'd get into them in detail later on (if the need arises). |
| kanelli |
| Linda I do agree with quite a bit of what you are saying, and I am starting to see that perhaps my current viewpoints about terrorism and terrorists are a result of paying too much attention to the negative articles from the news media. I don't think I am the only one doing this though, because there are also Arab citizens who believe the negative propaganda about the West as well. Linda said, What I'm trying to outline here, is that the "Islamic Threat" is non-existent, not in the way the western media portrays it at least. " Why isn't this message getting out? More importantly, how can this message be spread? Also, who should be responsible for getting this message out? It seems to me that media from every country love to report negative news because it is more shocking and newsworthy and sells more papers. The Arab media (what I can read in English) is constantly emphasising the negatives about Israel and the West, just as the same is going on in the West about other countries. Let's be fair! Throughout history all kinds of civilisations thought themselves superior to what they consider less powerful civilisations. This brought difficulties in relations, and suppression and war. It is sad to see this continuing, and I will certainly try to re-think my view on things. You mentioned in your last post some areas where different cultures might clash, like views on immorality and women's rights. I am not religious, but I definitely think that there is a lot of rot developing in my own culture. Look at the reality shows that broadcast young people getting drunk and having sex with or fooling around with many people. Not exactly a positive message to youth. There is a lot of fashion in the West that I consider too revealing. With the exception of bathing suits at the beach, why do we need to go to the mall and see someone's butt cheeks hanging out the back of shorts or a skirt, and why do we need see-through dresses and tops with necklines that plunge to the bellybutton? I'm a believer in free speech, but it does get abused. What on earth makes people want to watch Jerry Springer or Maury Povich, which show a bunch of uneducated people with major social problems. What is with The Osbournes and Jackass - that show more disfunctional people saying and doing stupid things. There is some kind of weird psychology to it, but in the end the result is the dumbing down of the culture. When it comes to women's rights, I don't consider wearing an Abaya as a suppression of rights as long as it is the woman's choice to wear it or not. If a religious woman wants to cover herself so that she doesn't attract the attention of men, that is fine. It is always a bit annoying to see a man wearing shorts and a fitted t-shirt on a hot day, while his wife is covered in long black cloth from head to toe. It just doesn't seem fair that he exposes his limbs and body for women to see, yet his wife has to cover everything. I suppose that is their business though... In Saudi Arabia I think it is a shame that women can't drive a car, but I don't have to live there. If I did, I'd follow the rules. In some countries and cultural communities honour killings are acceptable, as is forced circumcision, and forced arranged marriages. In my culture those would be viewed as barbaric and old-fashioned. Even less significant traditions can cause some cultures to feel more civilised than another. For example, did you read the amusing letter in 7days that talked about the practice of slaughtering goats for Eid in the Springs? I can't believe the woman wrote it. She thought it was disgusting and upsetting to everyone else that the goats were slaughtered "in an upscale neighbourhood like the Springs". Hey, we are living in a culture where this is accepted and it is not less civilised to do so. Killing an animal for meat isn't pretty, whether it is done in a backyard or an abatoir. That woman really needs to get some perspective. Every culture has traditions that are misunderstood or completely contrary to the practices of other cultures. People need to understand and respect the differences if possible. (Though I can admit that I would never have respect for a family that kills one of their family members for a perceived wrong-doing or failure to marry a chosen person. I have limits :)) |
| GAB |
| Quote:Every culture has traditions that are misunderstood or completely contrary to the practices of other cultures. People need to understand and respect the differences if possible. Absolutely! To learn about other cultures is more than just being a voyeur,say, as a tourist is in a country. Living in a country is a great opportunity to really understand some one else's culture. I lived with a Muslim family many years ago-people are just peple and they were and still are great people. It is an interesting religion and peaceful. Religion doesn't have to be an underlying factor in friendship. Hate is learned and based on misconceptions and ignorance. I find it inconceivable (and naively so I guess) that people pass on their fears about other cultures to their children-perpetuating an endless circle of hate. Just remeber too that posting a whole bunch of web page references doesn't give creedance to your argument. I could point you to a whole bunch of stuff on the web-stats, medical evidence etc that supports circumcision in males. Why stir up a hornets nest where people feel an obligation to be outraged and then they can post all the sources that state it is medically non-essential etc. ? The best research on a topic like this one (topic of this thread) is real life. My little rant. Finished. |
| kanelli |
| Some good points in there GAB. I'd still like to point out that this thread was meant for discussion. Why are you trying to silence anyone who wants to discuss in it? If you don't like it, don't post in this thread, but leave the rest of us to talk if we wish. If you can't see any benefit coming from these discussions I am sorry, but I certainly feel like I am learning. It would be nice to hear more views, not just Linda and I doing all the talking. |
| Linda_Stuiv |
I'm glad I was able to present a different opinion to the discourse, always enlightening to have discussions like these. Sadly not everybody is willing to genuinely have a constructive dialogue, like you did.
I completely agree, and think that a major reformation in the way Arab media addresses the West, is in order. We must keep in mind though, that: 1-The Arab "propaganda" is not really harmful to the West, since apart from influential channels such as Al-Jazeera, the Arab world possesses no real weapons in it's arsenal, to further it's desired "policy" on the ground. They're almost like a goat on Eid waiting for the slaughter..... whining in their media is all they can do. On the other hand, if the western populations believed the stuff their media spewes, wars could go with their consent, which happened and is continuing to happen. And that is extremely devastating for the Arab/Islamic world. 2-It is very hard for the Arab media, to be impartial in its coverage, when the negative aspects of the western policies is affecting the Arab/Islamic world on a daily basis. I don't really blame them for the "negative" coverage, because what they cover is not emphazised.... it is truly what is relevant to their plight. a-The west supports some of the most ruthless dictatorships in the Arab world. b-The West created and helped ensure the survival of an alien state (Israel) of which the repercussions are still echoing today. Everytime an Arab sees a Palestinian (brother) anywhere, he/she is reminded of the western bias. c-Iraq, Syria, Sudan ....and more. Wheres the context of making stories about how wonderful the West is, when it's irrelevant to the Arab/Muslim mind, considering the factors I mentioned above. Arabs/Muslims naturally blame western populations on some level, and we should blmae ourselves too, since our governments' policies don't spring out of thin air, they are democratic entities of which we should have control over, or else what are we doing trying to shove that model down the world's throat, if we ourselves have no real control over them? Do we have the illusion of democracy? Since most of the candidates have been picked out by the corporations anyway? And the really good ones don't have money to get on the media and for us to know about them? But that's another issue.
1-Because the current in our culture that advocates peace and harmony has been under fierce attacks. The wing that believes in war/clash of civilizations is the one in charge. 2-Because of continuous villification of Islam and Muslims going on since the Crusades, it's a natural series of events to lead to this animosity. 3-Because Islam is a useful "demon" for those who wish no peace. Or else how can we justify this huge arsenal the West has after the fall of USSR? 4-Because we need a foreign enemy to divert our attention from our own society's inequities. 5-Because The West as a "loose" front would disintegrate into quarreling entities, if it weren't for new "unifying" enemies. I think that the notion of Islamic terrorism and threat is beyond repair in the USA. But there is hope in Europe. I think that muslim communities in Europe should bite the bullet and do much more to let out this message. Also some of our own enlightened "elite" should be up to the task of reversing this sickening growing fundamentalism in Europe. I mean almost every EU country has seen an unimaginable rise in Right Wing parties. It would be hard to imagine that happening without the act of scaring people shitless of muslims. You can do a small part (Like I try to do) in talking about it with the western expats here in Dubai.... They'll go back to their countries at one point. Hopefully with a more balanced view.
Already replied to that in the start. Israel -as far as Arabs and Muslims go- is a state that kicked a part of them out of their country, and established a reign of blood and fire..... What should they be reporting about it?
I agree. It's funny, but industrial/economic might is what enhances, and sometimes even creates this sense of superiority. Asia's motto in the 60s (apart from China) was following the West's ways and abolishing the hindering factors (their original Asian local beliefs). Nevertheless, as soon as the boom happened, we saw a reverse. And Asian leaders (and people) saw this as an indication of Asian/Eastern superiority to the West. "Gone are the days when the West sneezing, would give Asia a flu" is one bellowing statments made by Malaysia's PM during the peak of their growth.
Hmm .... I think that it's each to their own. I just think that you should handle whatever consequences your choice of lifestyle entitles. But I do agree that it seems that a major part of the Western youth are becoming more and more vain. I shake my head in sorrow everytime an Arab youth (even if someone who might be a drinker/adulterer) sits before me and goes on and on about his nation's plight, and explains the factors/consequences ....etc etc, when at the same time, his peer in Europe/US is worrying about the next rave party, or whether Brad and Jen are staying together or breaking up. Our youth is apathetic and pathetic. I do not exclude myself. If it weren't for getting engaged to an Arab man, I think that I would have probably stayed away from these very important issues affecting our lives today. I used to work like a mule from Monday to Friday, only waiting to get shitfaced on the weekend, repeat cycle. At the same time relishing at the notion of my "kind's" superiority. How stupid. How misled.
I agree. And it's sad that what used to be "enlightened" and "sophisticated" Europe is following suite.
No it's not fair. I think muslims have their share of social/tradition-opposed-to-Islam problems for them to solve. I know a gay local, who enjoys the most extreme of gay-sex "fetishism", but who said -nevertheless- that he wouldn't go with his wife (future wife) to a mixed gathering, even if she was wearing her Hijab. Now that's retarded. And I'm saying this because every non-local muslim sitting there almost jumped to beat this guy up. It's a twisted adherence to "traditions", when Islam came to eradicate false traditions in the first place. I'm not saying the above is the rule, but I do think that a lot of people should have more courage to follow what they think is right.
Retarded as well. And has no basis in Islam, since women even at the Prophet Mohammed's days used to go to war with men, riding on their camels ...etc. I think it's just chauvinistic male behaviour.
1-Forced female circumcision has been outlawed/banned by the congregation of Islamic scholars a while back. But like I said, these traditions are hard to kill. Even before that "fatwa" the phenomenon was not widespread and only limited to some areas of Africa, where Pagans. muslims, and christians did it alike. I don't think you were referring to male circumcision were you? 2-Arranged marriages have got to go. And again, it has no basis in Islam. A clear independent YES by both the bride-to-be and groom-to-be is required for the marriage to be authentic in Islam.
I live in the Springs, but have no idea about that story. It's so annoying to see this brand of self-centrism and gigly-head bimboism. I'll check on it, and maybe give her a piece of my mind if I could identify her. Where does the idiot think that all the meat products she eats come from?
Also against Islam. Everybody is to be trialled for his/her own sins, and it's no body else's business. Honour-killing is only valid in Jordan I think. And it's easy to see why. It's a way for a king with an english mom who can't even speak Arabic correctly, and who's the West's puppet (while being a ruthless dictator by the way) to indulge the ancient and chauvinist traditions to safe-guard his rule in a tribal setting. |
| GoodBai |
| Linda, You do seem to have a very jaundiced view of the western media. While there is no doubt good and bad journalism everywhere - and I can't vouch for your country of birth - in the UK there are several extremely good, balanced and responsible newspapers such as the Independent, Guardian and Observer. Because it is a free press, newspapers such as these analyse, dissect and investigate all aspects of Government policy in a very critical way. This includes attitudes and policies towards the Islamic world. And this also includes issues surrounding Iraq and the Palestinian question. Readers are able to get a very clear idea of what is going on and the facts are presented very carefully and responsibly... and critically. The other side of the coin is that such press freedom does not always exist in Arab countries and the important issues are not always presented in the way I have described above. Indeed the UAE is one of the better nations in this respect but still has major restrictions on its newspapers which make it a frustrating job for a good journalist wanting to get at the important stories and see them in print. Everyone knows, for instance, that Dubai is teeming with interesting material - such as the labour camps, money-laundering and people trafficking, to name but a few - but they are often no-go areas. Newspapers who step out of line here and get hold of some of the delicate issues and tackle them in a robust and investigative manner would quickly find themselves subject to a state crackdown. And the situation with the media is much worse in other Arab countries. I think you need a little more balance on this subject. |
| kanelli |
| GoodBai, nice to see you posting here. I was starting to think you were one of those annoying types of people who start up controversial threads, then hide away to watch all the action. :) |
| GoodBai |
| "Annoying".... yes! " :D "Hiding".... no! It's mostly just a question of finding the time, particularly when it comes to some of the more detailed 'War And Peace' length discussions :lol: . |
| sniper420 |
A very good point Good bhai, freedom of speech and writng is suppressed in the whole Middle East. |
| Liban |
As of April 30th 2005, feedom of speech exists in Lebanon. Palestine has a somewhat liberal press. Morocco is inching towards that. |
| sniper420 |
Well it comes at a cost. A reputed Lebanese journalist was killed-as usual blamed on Syrians. :roll: |
| HP |
Also at Dubaiforum.com :P sniper ,you shouldnt be talking about freedom of speech , the way you understand freedom of speech is quite different . Every country has some special rules and it doesnt mean they are restricting freedom of speech. Let say if Dubai let the freedom of speech ,everyday Pakistani will protest against India and Arab will protest to kick out Jewish or other white people from country . Some times Governments have to take measure in order to stop mishap in society. The world is worried about Iraq ,Afghanistan and philistine and the top news on BBC is “whale in thames”. What I mean is that only certain countries use the media and other country doesn’t have access t it , so where is the damn freedom of speech? When a Arab network rise the voice of arab then US even plan to attack on its headquarter in Qatar. Let say u have freedom of speech in UK ,can u write anything against British Queen? :P |
| arniegang |
HP I am only going to be factual, and not give any form of opinion. When you post, either ask a question or at least have the good manners to get your facts correct. Indeed, our press regularly speak ill of our Monarchy. In fact most weeks the press have a go and critise any one or maybe more of the royal family. Even so, the level of any disrespect shown to them in any of our newspapers, do not come any where near to how disrespectful you have referred to the Queen in your post. HP i do not know your nationality, but however i, or any respectful person felt towards the leader or head of state of your country, it could never come anywhere near as personal and distasteful as you speak. You should be ashamed of yourself. |
| HP |
| sorry dear ,i didnt know that you were so sensitive about Queen ,my appology :0) Well i am from Pakistan and you are free to talk about our head of state.We do not worship him and if i have guts ,i ll try to answer u :roll: :0) |
| arniegang |
| HP I am not particulary sensitive about the Queen. I am sensitive to the way you write as disrespectfully as you do, whether it be the Queen or anyone else. MY point about your head of state is: whether i like them or not, i would not talk or refer to them as you do about others. |
| HP |
Sweetheart , its kinda joke in Pak ,when we are not allowed to speak about a person then we always ask" if he or she is pious cow" . Cow is quite respectable animal in India and they also worship cow and no one is allowed to slaughter it :wink: The hero of one country is mostly the villain of another country,so you should expect such kind of remarks :). For example how many people talk about Bush? Are u gonna shut all mouths? |
| GoodBai |
| The point I was making is that in the UK there is the freedom to investigate and publish highly critical material about just about whatever or whoever you want. Whether that is the Royal family, Blair, Bush, the policy in Iraq, the Palestinian question. Government policy on just about everything is thoroughly dissected, investigated and criticised on a daily basis. And that is why you will find there are many people in the UK who against British troops being in Iraq (as well as those who support it) and many who sympathise greatly with the Palestinians (as well as those who side with Israel). And I get the feeling that many people in Arab nations just don't know that. There isn't the indirect or direct censorship that you find in some of the Arab countries. That is an indisputable fact and it means that people in a place like the UK are much more easily able to get at the truth of the big, important and controversial issues than those people in some of the Arab nations are. Things have improved in the UAE but anyone who has worked in the media within this state will tell you that they still have to operate with one hand tied behind their backs. That is the truth and it is much worse in other Arab states. |
| arniegang |
| Well put GB Another thing to consider especially on cable and Sat TV in the middle east, is that a lot of the programmes on the History and Discovery channels for example are censored, and do not trasmit the same as the channels we receive in Europe. I have also noticed that in the last year, all the adverts have been removed. Also Sky News now has to produce a different version to broadcast in the middle east. They have even removed the "time stamp" so no one can know if it is being broadcast in "tandem" with the UK. So in fairness to all the population that watch TV in the middle east, they cannot possibly know this. |
| HP |
I used to read at this forum if you dont like the rules then go back to your own countries :0) ,its so simple instead of boiling your blood all the time . |
| kanelli |
| With respect HP, making an observation that Western media has more freedom to print different and critical points of view than media outlets in many of the Arab nations (or elsewhere), doesn't mean we should have to go back to our own countries. |
| HP |
i didnt know it was obseravation ,i thought it was complain,so again sorry :0) . But one has to admit that freedom of speech doesnt exist in Gulf states ,the reason culd be " these countries or states belong to individual families ". When one dies then another ( bin) or dust bin takes over without election or public opinion. [/u] |
| GoodBai |
| This attitude of "Go home if you don't like it" really irks me and it's usually used by those without rational argument when they are backed into a corner. Surely it's a good thing for people to hear different views and ways of doing things from around the world. And it's only by questioning things and looking at how they can be done differently that change is effected. This is one of the ways in which the UAE has moved forward and adapted. It seems to me that the "Go home" brigade are the intransigent ones with their fingers stuck in their ears in the face of any argument they don't like, whether it makes sense or not. |
| arniegang |
| Well said Kanelli and GB. I think HP has a agenda on this forum, what it is, who knows? |
| HP |
Hidden agenda :pirate: |