![](http://globalvoicesonline.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/10/405px-obsessionradicalislam.jpg "\\"Obsession\\" the movie poster")
Last week, many newspaper subscribers across the United States were surprised to discover a DVD inserted into their Sunday paper. The video, which can be viewed in its entirety on YouTube, is entitled Obsession: Radical Islam's War With the West and portends to compare the threat of radical Islamism with that of Nazi Germany prior to World War II. The DVD's release was timed to match the upcoming elections, and distribution of the DVD was almost entirely within swing states.
Almost immediately, newspapers began receiving complaints for their inclusion of the DVD, which was funded by The Clarion Fund, a group set up to combat “the most urgent threat of radical Islam.” Bloggers in the U.S. and abroad have expressed anger at both the distribution of the DVDs and the related crime.
Jordanian blogger Ali was understandably outraged at the timing:
While We Arabs and Muslims were busy thinking of food during Ramadan and watching Bab El Harra and Asmahan and the remaining 120 series on TV, having our delicious Sheesha’s (Water pipe) after Iftar, some mysterious group or organization was sending this disturbing DVD. The DVD bashes Islam and Muslims and warning Americans from expected terrorists attacks.
I see this as a typical fear-mongering propaganda that is always targeting the American people around Public Holidays and Anniversaries to remind the average American that those uneducated savage killers are still out there and they are ready to get to you.
Can you imagine the damage that was done to Muslims and Arabs and the lousy image we have in the west and the USA?
Not all Americans are well informed or well travelled, or have even met a Muslim. Therefore such hate DVDs will make a huge negative impact on the way they view Muslims and Middle Eastern. This will not be difficult for the relations between the West and East but also for Americans with Arab background living in America who can be harassed or be involved in hate crimes.
A Tale of Three Beans, also a Jordanian blogger, responded to Ali's post in her own blog. She wrote:
So, while I'm on the topic of misleading and outright lying, I wanted to go back to a post by Ali. I know he thought I missed his comment, but this is one of those conversations that requires thought and mulling over. Ali's post was on the mailing of 28 million copies of an inflammatory movie called Obsession to voters in swing states in the US. Now, long ago in my life, I learned not to comment on something about which I have no personal knowledge. So, I went out to youtube and watched the movie. It's divided into 10 six (ish) minute segments. So, now I've mulled and fermented my ideas and have some thoughts.
She then dug deeper into several of the issues related to the video, debunking myths and correcting poor translations. She also pointed out that there are a few valid points in the DVD, saying:
One fundamental message that followers of Islam would do well to heed is that Americans, average Americans, are scared of you. No, not just the radical Muslims -all Muslims. This is normal, it's natural. We're almost always scared of anything that's different. And, you look different. Sadly, both non-Muslims and Muslims alike get drawn into the trap of focusing on differences. Instead of pointing out the similarities between Ramadan and Lent to help bridge the understanding gap, the message delivered is that Christians wouldn't understand fasting (which says more about a lack of understanding of Christianity than anything). Islam and Christianity may vary widely, but they also share similarities. If you can help Americans (and Westerners in general) see that, you will be doing all of us favor. Each of you can play a role as an ambassador of your faith.
Finally, she concludes:
The reality about Americans is that while we may not be the most aware people in the world (nor are we the least, by the way), it's mostly a country of good people. They get up every morning and eat breakfast. They work hard to provide for their families. They love their children and want the best for them. The more things are different, the more they are the same. Americans are just like Jordanians. They're people who try their best to live life and ensure the well-being of their families. Understanding that whatever differences in tradition are just that - differences in tradition - may help bridge this gap. Remember that while you may even agree that American women are immoral, in the same way Americans agree that Arab women are subjugated and without rights. Neither picture is either wholly true or accurate. I think if we all try to understand each other better (not necessarily become like each other), our conversation will be richer and we may be able to leave fear behind and move forward with understanding and respect.
Writer and blogger Laila Lalami expresses few feelings toward the DVD but states that it won't make a difference anyhow:
I don’t, however, think that the DVD will have any effect on swing voters. We are so awash in Islamophobia in the States that any voters likely to be swayed by yet another Muslims-equal-terrorists rant are likely to have already made up their mind by now (and it’s not for Obama, let’s face it.)
Global Voices Morocco author Lalla Lydia explains why we should all watch the video:
I've noted that a lot of you are recognizing this sweet and unseasonal valentine as propaganda and tossing it in the trash.
I wish you wouldn't. Watch it. Like I did. And take notes.
I think it's well done. It reached its goal of scaring the crap out of viewers with all its rising crescendos of fear mongering, driving music and fast-paced images of terrorist attacks around the world.
Less than a week after the DVDs were distributed, children at a Dayton, Ohio mosque were the victims of an apparent hate crime in which gas was sprayed through a window of the building. Bloggers immediately connected the two incidents, despite the mainstream media's denial.
KABOBfest, a blog written by a group of mostly Arab-Americans, reported on the incident:
Is it mere coincidence that this attack comes after the “Obsession” DVD was distributed in the area? It just may be, and hopefully the policy investigate this vigorously enough to give us an answer.
This alarmist, Islamophobic video has been sent to swing states by a shadowy non-profit, the Clarion Fund. It is claiming to have sent 28 million copies. Most of the recipients will recognize it as the hate-ridden drivel it clearly is; but others may be inspired to secure the homeland and attack the enemy within — and this senseless attack may be one such case.
Interestingly, none of the mainstream media have covered this story. Perhaps if a Muslim committed a parallel attack at a church or synagogue, it would be newsworthy. What ever happened to the “man bites dog” theory of media interest? Perhaps we should update the adage to reflect the modern ethnogeography of violence: “White man attacks Muslims, that's not news. But when Muslims attack Whites, now that's a story!”
A Diamond's Eye View of the World, an American who blogs about Lebanon, reminds us that we have the right to protest the distribution of this DVD, sharing the Clarion Fund's address and urging us to write polite letters:
And if you want to contact the Clarion Fund, the address given on the DVD packaging is:
255 W. 36th Street, Ste. 800
New York, NY 10018
(646) 308-1230Just remember: be polite, be professional, and articulate your position using evidence, not personal insults.
Also of note is that a group called Obsession With Hate has been set up to combat the propaganda perpetuated by the film.
Send this by E-mail
actually the dvd is being sent at random people in swing states: we got one the other day (in new mexico) and was planning to watch it and look up online to better see who/what was behind this kind of propaganda - even if the timing says it all (a month before elections)
beside the dvd content itself, i think that such operations will mostly have a ‘boomerang effect’ for conservatives and fear-mongers, though…let’s just hope it won’t stir up any (other) hate crimes
thanks jillian for the timely post! we are already translating it in italian!
Wow, you got yours in the MAIL? Please do watch it, let me know what you think.
I cannot believe that they’re mailing them out. I do agree with you; the vast majority of people who have actually viewed the DVD agreed that it is propaganda.
Thanks for translation!
It makes me think of the film ‘Fitna’ by a politician from my country: Geert Wilders. (Which can also be found on sites such as Youtube.) The man`s speech in the media is almost always filled with Islam bashing rethoric. For example his film was an expose of Quran verses and images we`ve seen in the media in order to establish a causal relationship between the images and verses.
However: some verses were misinterpreted. One part of a certain verse meant ‘to bring fear upon’ whilst it was translated as ‘to terrorize’.
Films like these only widen the gap between the groups of people in question. Best thing to do - if you ask me - is to mock these films and to start a dialogue. Even though that it`s not always the easiest thing to do.
Oh yes, Fitna which was protested around the world, and even caused the blocking of YouTube in Indonesia (has since been unblocked).
http://advocacy.globalvoicesonline.org/2008/04/05/indonesia-blocks-youtube-over-fitna-the-movie/
My favorite response to Fitna were the Iranian bloggers who started writing letters to Christ.
http://globalvoicesonline.org/2008/04/11/iranian-bloggers-write-letters-to-christ/
I think this stuff (both films!) should be outed for what it is - dangerous racism which pushes the boundaries for what it is deemed acceptable to espouse in public.
Dangerous racism? This movie is entirely accurate, and is fair and even-handed to the Muslim faith as a whole. It even has a disclaimer at the beginning noting that it’s sole focus are the radical Muslims who are hell-bent on destroying the west. These issues are critical, and to dismiss this movie as “garbage” is sad and a rash to judgment.
It’s an emotionally charged narrative, seemingly created with the intent to instill fear in thousands of people. I think one has to ask what the motives are of people who distribute this sort of thing, not simply take it at face value. Is it helpful? Constructive? Open and honest about intentions, donors, and organizational affiliations?
Ben,
How so? How does this DVD portray an entire population fairly? Even if we could agree that it portrays a minority of the population fairly (and we cannot), this film is an ugly stain on our country.
Jillian
it’s very very difficult to believe such “disclaimer” displayed for a few moments at the beginning of the film, when the rest of it does nothing else but portray as “jihad” practically any activity and anybody in muslim countries: people at markets and in the streets, children at school, people praying in mosques, etc.
it’s crystal clear that the movie does not focus on those supposed “radical muslims”, quite the opposite: it attempts to portray an entire population as such, trying therefore to instill a general fear of any muslim anywhere…
If the acts of terror that are mentioned in this film; there are many that are not mentioned because it would be hard to bring up all of them in the length of time permitted, had not occurred, do you think that the DVD would have been made? I think not.
Hi there,
I’ve translated this post for GVO.it. Jillian, keep up the good work!
This video is far from being accurate, and the emotional approach is far from being useful in analytical terms. Just to be sure, I do not want to deny the existence of such a problem. But this is the worst approach one could ever choose in dealing with it. The authors constantly play with the notions of culture, religion, and political ideology in a confusing fashion. They refer to political violence using these three notions as synonyms, as if they were interchangeable. Just few quick points:
To begin with the title. Is radical Islam a region of the world? I did not know that? No ?! So, why do we keep confronting Islam and the West, then? Does it represent a culture? Perhaps, it’s a political ideology. Also, does the term West refer to a culture? And if it’s a culture, what culture? The French, the European, the American? Maybe, it’s a geographical category. Comparing oranges with apples does not help, at all.
Second, I agree with Bernardo. The “moderate Muslims we are not against you” disclaimer is a ludicrous trick. The sections clearly speak about “culture of hatred” or “of Jihad”. Again, are we dealing with a culture, a religion, or a political ideology? Presenting under the same banner Hamas, Hezbollah, and particular traits of the Egyptian and Iranian popular cultures, this video gives the idea that we are facing a homogeneous and widely shared cultural setting. As for those who would share - or would be part of - such a culture, do they really feel represented by the gents portrayed in this video? The Arab/Muslim interviewees always talked in terms of “Islam being infiltrated”, “being corrupted”. But, what about other people - religious scholars, academics, thinkers and ordinary citizens - who directly refer to such phenomenon labeling it as “un-Islamic”? Many Muslims do regard radical Islam as being not Islam at all! Why were they left out from the narrative? What about the Saudi muftis who issued several fatwas condemning AQ’s strategy? Even some AQ militants harshly criticized its use of violence which often targets Muslims as well. There is no evidence which could support any counter-argument. For the authors’ aim was not to produce a balanced analysis, nor an accurate one, but something completely different. Arabs/Muslims must stand up and debunk these myths.
Finally, the juxtaposition of the Nazi ideology with radical Islam is hilarious. Do they really have the same agenda? As for the radical Islam, are we talking about Hamas? Hezbollah? The Iranian government? Al Qaeda? Who are the supreme leaders, the key figures? Where are they based? Everywhere and nowhere. In sum, these movements, jointly with Iran and UK’s muhajiroun, want to dominate the world, establish the Shari’a and kill all the Jews because they all have Nazi spider on their caps and do the Hitler salute. So, what about our “Western” nazis? Do they want the same thing? Are they Islamofascists’ allies? Mhmh, I’m quite puzzled. But, hey, it’s Daniel Pipes speaking …
Have you ever heard about the “Smearcasters”? Here they are: http://www.smearcasting.com/
As for the radical Islam, I advise to watch the Doha Debate (6 parts), which is entirely available on Youtube.
Here is the first one: http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=TLiqgv3Zq2g&feature=related.
Have a nice day
Paolo
Doug,
How come no one has made a film about the violence perpetuated against Muslims every day? In Iraq, in Palestine…I could go on.
None of us are denying that there are Muslims who commit crimes and acts of terrorism. That’s a fact. But to discriminate against the whole of the Muslim community based on those crimes is shameful.
I agree with Jillian York and Paolo but stounchly condemn Ben Norman’s remarks. First of all what is West? is it an organization or a union of countries! I agree there are a minority of muslims, most of them victims of the double standards of USA & its un-official puppet state UK. We should first try to define “West”. Other than the Madrid bombing its only the US and UK which can be included in the “Targeted West by these radical muslims” France, Belgium, the Scandinavian countries and specially Canada were never threatened by any Muslim groups. Therefore there is a reason why people in the middle east and muslims in these countries hate these two countries so much.
Radical islamist, mujahideens and Bin ladin (Al Qeida)are products of CIA to combat the USSR, USA and UK armed,supported and initiated the 8 years long Iran-Iraq war which annihilated millions from both sides. It was a US arms company through CIA who supplied the biological weapons which killed so many Kurds. USA supplied the cluster bombs to Israel who used them illegally (against UN conventions) in the heavily populated South Lebanon (Millions of dollars are spent to clear the un-exploded ones whereby these funds could be used to feed the starving,aid-victims,Natural dister related victims etc.)
An Isreili connected to the high ranks of Likud party once boasted to a friend (sorry no names!!) that USA is a Mighty Robot cum ATM and we the Isreli’s (via AIPAC) have the remote control. Our citizens live with more income from US than average Americans.Whenever any resolution agaisnt Isreal is put forward in the UN Security Council, we press the “VETO” button and the Mighty US humbly obliges. 80% of the espionage cases in US are committed by US-Israel dual citizens or supporters of Israel, the percentage has dropped a little due to Chinese involvement.
Therefore I would suggest to The Clarion Fund to re-name the title as “CIA produced(mostly muslim)Radicals, against US and UK ”
Thanks - Gasia2008
in the west we have books and movies only on the ‘radical islam’ and not on violence perpetuated against Muslims every day, because, borrowing from Antony Loewenstein, author of “Blogging revolution”:
“…our press is obsessed with Ahmadinejad, terrorism, Iraq or human rights. These are all vitally important issues, but they don’t define the place.”
it’s not a secret that today (most of) western media and culture are actually obsessed with this kind of terrorism, of course in the name of ‘national security’
now i do understand what “obsession” in the movie title is referring to….
I will be honest, I have not seen this movie and I most likely never will but I can only gather what the message is, and that really makes me angry and sad. I think there is too much emphasis being but on terrorisim and Islam and not enough on the goodness of the people and the beauty of their culture and faith. What makes me angry the most is the fact that these “Propaganda” movies are being made and people who know absoultely nothing about Islam and the Muslim culture are getting there first lesson from that! This only increases the divide, fear, and hate.
I live in a predomonitely Arabic/Muslim neighborhood, it is mostly Egyptians. The culture I see around me is amazing and I have talked with some beautiful people and I have respect for them as they do for everyone else in the community. It makes me sad that the only venue through which people learn about one another if from the media propagandists.
Jillian, the explanation should have been clear from my first comment. The vast majority of Muslims are moderate, maybe even “peace-loving” although the term is hard to take seriously now it’s a cliche.
The movie does portray Islamists accurately, and I am sure some people in the U.S. think this way, but most are in the Middle East and Europe. Why is it a “stain” on the country? I cannot let that kind of hyperbole slide. This movie is about a controversial subject, it does not help to distort its contents.
A religion than condones/encourages sexual mutilation of girls and the selling (marriage) at 9 years old to a pedofile chosen by their pimp/father … an in the name of God… is evil and an abomination.
There are monsters in every religion and country but in civilized places such a thing is agains the law and any human decency. No wonder you are thoroughly disliked and despised.
Ben,
Your second comment was much clearer.
Nevertheless, I disagree with you. The film ignores what drove Islamists to their extreme acts in the first place; we cannot discount the effect American policy, Israeli policy, and hatred have had on bringing about extremism in these communities. That does not by any means excuse violent acts, but neither is there an excuse for American policy of the past several decades toward Arab countries.
Jullian York. I can not answer that question. It would seem that they have the capability to do so judging from the number of films that they make of decapitations of captives in Muslim hands, reactions in the Muslim world over Danish cartoons, Muslims reactions to 3,000 innocent people in the U.S. being murdered, etc.
Jillian York: A follow up: Most of the violence “perpetrated against Muslims ever day” is perpetrated by Muslims against Muslims. Maybe it would be hard to separate the directors and writers for the task of making a film about this. They would likely be trying to kill each other before any footage was shot. The shame of the whole situation is
That there is a “religion” that justifies the killing of innocent people just trying to go about their duties of the day, riding in airplanes or just being in an airport trying to get ready to go somewhere, remember the terrorist attacks in the late 80’s in Rome and Vienna, busses, subways or just being in a hotel lobby or on the street, you should get the point, this is the shame of jihad. Until the perpetrators of such crimes cease their mindless killing, you will see a need for such films as “Obsession” being made. Perhaps if you had lost a loved one in one of these senseless acts of violence you would do some study and try to find out what Islam is all about and then have a better understanding of what is occurring world wide.**** Bernardo Parrella: Why wouldn’t folks be obsessed with this when there is a group of people that are out to kill you? It is said that only 10% of the 1.3 billion are extremist but do the math. I think that figures out to some where around 130 million folks that want maybe want to do you harm. Just a side note: in the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul there at 6 Swords of the Prophet. Tell me where there are any Swords of Jesus or Swords of the Buddha.
> doug: i think we’d never forget global and historical perspectives here
in many places in the world people have lived for decades under the constant threat of holy and unholy acts of terror, and still do it now — and yet people still get on buses and subways and airplanes, and life goes on
and how many loved ones has been lost by many people in the world due senseless acts of violence perpetrated by the US in its history? and right now, how many innocent people are being killed in iraq by the coalition bombs? those that we never, ever read about in the US media? someone calculated in about a million - a million - the civilian people murdered so far by the US invasion of iraq
so, who is doing harm to whom here? and why US foreign policy had never had (and much less now) such great reputation in vast parts of the world?
and more importantly, who’s gaining from pushing this “obsession” all the time? there are already way too many threats and deaths and extremists around the world, why instill more of this useless and anachronistic feeling of “us vs. them”? why some americans want to push for more hatred? and in so doing, isolate even further the US from the rest of the world? could this truly be a good strategy to prevent “extremists to do us harm”? can’t we do better?
Jesus was a coward!! that is why he had no sword. We forget that jesus was betrayed by his fellow jews.(although as a pork eater and lover of non-jews, he was NOT technically a jew when he got ‘baptized’. Jews DO NOT baptize their kids.
‘David slew 10,000 Philistines’ is a quote from the bible. is that not violence?
The first modern terrrorist was David Ben Gurion who was ‘elected’ Israeli pime minister. Can you imagine Bin-Laden being elected president in Saudi Arabia?
By the way i am a Christian and christianity demands fairness.
mmxz,
First of all, apologies if I accidentally sent you a bizarre blank e-mail; I was on my mobile and meant to reply here.
Second, you said: “A religion than condones/encourages sexual mutilation of girls and the selling (marriage) at 9 years old to a pedofile chosen by their pimp/father … an in the name of God… is evil and an abomination.”
That’s untrue, and you have clearly not been doing your reading. Islam does not condone sexual mutilation of girls; in fact, the majority of FGM occurs in Sub-Saharan African countries (which are often nominally Christian) and is a traditional, rather than religious, practice. Almost every Muslim country has laws against such practices (those which don’t did not have a problem with it in the first place).
Second, Islam does not condone marriage of 9-year-olds. Yes, the Prophet’s wife was nine, but there is no evidence that their marriage was consummated when she was that young, and the majority of Muslim countries today have laws that prevent minors from marriage. Morocco is a great example; a recent case of a Sheikh promoting the marriage of 9-year-olds resulted in public outrage. And the 2004 Family Code there set the marriage age at 18.
I am disliked and despised? Fine. No idea who you’re talking about, but go ahead and feel that way.
Jillian
In case any of you are blind and missed it, the Quran is very clear about the duty of Muslims to fight, conquer or kill non-Muslims. There are about 40+ verses that teach this. In some verses there are limits, in other the command is open ended. Mohammad, the man who Muslims love, respect and consider a great moral example, fought war after war against infidels, and undertook over two dozens raids personally, plus another 2-4 dozens that he sent out. Muslims like to say these were defensive but that is not how the accounts read. Of all of these only two battles were defensive. At other times, Mohammad would proclaim that “his enemies” were going to attack and then he would attack first. This happens so often a normal person would be very suspicious. Take the Banu al-Mustaliq - suppossedly they were gathering with other tribes to attack. Mohammad preempted them (so Bush had justification - ha!). It so happens the Banu Mustaliq were in peace and “unaware” when they were attacked. No mention is made of other tribes. The tribe is taken captive but about half were freed when a captive princess married Mohammad after her husband was killed in raid (Hey, doesn’t the Quran say that widowes must wait 3-4 months to marry? I guess the rules don’t apply to everybody). I wont go on about what happened to other captives but it is not a nice story — and then there is the lost necklace, etc…
What I am saying is that violence is part of Islam. It started with Mohammad and continues until now. Look up names like Kharijites, Hashshashin, Ikhwan, Azraqi, Qarmati and so on if you with. Remember the Riddah wars? To give you an idea of the extent of this violence even in the era of the so-called “Rightly guided Caliphs”, in three campaigns (the Battle of Siffin, Nahrawan and Bassorah better known as the the battle of the Camel) Muslim records say that 85,000 Muslim warriors were killed by other Muslims as they cried “Allahu Akbar”. This period is known as the First Fitna, or Muslim civil war. This bloodshed came to a climax at Karbala where a victorious Muslims army carried away the head of Mohammads grandson (and even infant great grandson) as trophies for the Caliph. and continues to today as Muslims sects fight each other and non-Muslims.
I find Muslim history fastinating but I will get back to the topic. If anything, this DVD is too nice and the Muslim response is too predicable. It solves nothing and nothing changes. I just wonder what it will take for Muslims to start reading their own scripture and history with open minds. I fear there is no hope because Muslims refuse to be critical and open about their religion and what they do in their societies. Bad times are coming. You people can blame anybody you want (see comments above) but I blame Islam. I blame radicals for their hate and violence and I blame the so-called moderates for their blindness, denial and never=ending excuses.
Thank you, Jillian, for once again putting up with an old man. You take care. Continue the good work. Who knows, maybe some good with come out of these discussions at GVO but I am both pessimistic and cynical.
Jay kactuz
Doug,
I’ve read your comments and would like answer to a couple of points which are inaccurate.
First: “The shame of the whole situation is that there is a “religion” that justifies the killing of innocent people”. Wrong. Islam is constitued by a body of knowledge, a system of beliefs and a corpus of religious texts which are interpreted by men. Islam, per se, does not justify nothing. Men justify both violent and peaceful acts through the religion. There are Qur’anic verses about violence but they must be interpreted by bearing in mind the historical context in which they were revealed and not only the literal meaning. Just in case you would resort to the use of some Qur’anic quotations about violence, let me tell you that the literal interpretation of Qur’anic verses is heavily used by the bunch of guys portrayed in this video. Are you the same? Note that the majority of simple Muslim believers tries to understand and apply the message fo Qur’an according to actual needs, exigences and contexts. Also, as we’re talking about religious violence, are you Christian? Have you ever read St Paul? He is violent, isn’t he? Does that mean Christians and their own religion are inherently violent? I don’t think so …
Second: “in the Topkapi Museum in Istanbul there at 6 Swords of the Prophet. Tell me where there are any Swords of Jesus or Swords of the Buddha.” What does it mean? Do the number of swords determine the level of intrinsic violence? Jesus did not have any sword, but Crusaders did. So, what’s the point?
Finally, just a brief clarification. As I wrote earlier on, comparing oranges with apples does not help at all. The three historical figures you mentioned are different. The Prophet Muhammad was the Messenger of God, he gave Arabs a message, i.e. the Qur’an; in all classical/religious texts the human nature of Muhammad is constantly stressed. In being a human leader of a community he had to fulfil the political, religious and economic functions of a human being. Jesus Christ was the Message of God sent to earth, not the Messenger. Buddha did not need any sword because he was a well-off guy who decided to investigate the reality through meditation and seek the truth. Most important, he was not a god, nor even a prophet because Buddhism is not a religion.
Please …
Paolo: I will address your first point by supplying you with this appraisal of Mohammad, if you disagree, look some of the facts up for your self.
He was a ruthless mass murderer, a lustful sex maniac, a shameless pedophile, Mohammed was 54 and married Aiisha when she was 6. He consummated the marriage when she was 9, a cunning assassin, a marauding chieftain, a schizophrenic narcissist, a pathetic liar and many other vile qualities that disqualify him from being a decent human being let alone a messenger of God. Having a founder such as Muhammad, it is not difficult to understand how the Jihadist believe that they are on a mission from Allah. The point of the swords in the Topkapi should be obvious to anyone, Islam was founded on violent precepts; therefore the swords, where as Christianity and Buddhism were founded on peaceful foundations. The present day actions of the three faiths demonstrate the differences of this foundation. Then the Crusades must always be brought up: In 1009 the Egyptian Fatimid caliph, al-Hakim ordered the destruction of the Holy Sepulchre and all Christian establishments in Jerusalem. Understandably, this act and subsequent persecutions of native Christians and people on pilgrimages upset the Church and Urban 2 called for a crusade to try to return the area to Christian control. If this action by the caliph had not occurred there probably would have been no need for Crusades. One the last point it is clear that you totally miss the “point”. All three faiths mentioned have evolved into forces that guide peoples lives. Buddhist are peaceful and tolerant people, Christianity was established as a religion of peace but some of it’s adherents have turned it to other ends at times in the past while Islam was established in the very beginning as a cult of violence. I leave this by referring you to JAY KACTUZ post that makes it apparent that he has done some research into this topic and knows what he is talking.
Doug
I have met many Muslim, eaten with them and have had some heated discussions with them. Most of the ones unfortunately that I have met very closely do not accept us as regular people. They are not violent but some of them have changed their ways after Sept 11 and have become more defensive and more ANti-american. Some of them now take any argument as personal. The realtionship with oem Muslims have changed because they ahve changed their relationship with others also. It takes two to tango…
@Doug,
Just because someone has done research on a subject does not mean he knows what he is talking about.
Jillian
Jilian: What a strange observation? Does it mean that some that have done no research on a subject but go with what is fed to them by the media and comment on it anyway know what they are talking about? From what I have read here it would seem not. I assume that your statement is in reference to JAY KACTUZ who has obviously researched this question enough to back up the statements that are presented with some fact and not idle conjecture.
Doug
Doug,
I just saw this comment from you earlier, “Perhaps if you had lost a loved one in one of these senseless acts of violence you would do some study and try to find out what Islam is all about and then have a better understanding of what is occurring world wide.****”
Do you mean to say that if I had lost someone in, for example, the 9/11 attack, I would better understand Islam? Doug, wake up! I’ve lived in Muslim countries, I judge Islam by the Qur’an and by its practitioners, and while I am fully aware that there are Muslims who perpetuate crimes, I do not prescribe to the idea that Muslims are brainwashed or all the same.
JAY KACTUZ may have researched Islamic history; that does not mean his comments are even remotely relevant to modernity.
Doug, I find it difficult to defend any religion, as I personally am not religious. I do not, however, find it difficult to defend the people I love.
Jillian
Jullian: How in the world can Jay’s comments not be relevant about a cult that has not, nor will not, changed it’s philosophy since it’s inception. I would suggest that you do some study before degrading some one that has taken the time to do so. I have been to various Islamic countries and see how they operate and treat people that are “infidel”. Have eaten with them in Egypt out in their country side mud brick homes, regrettably this caused a reaction that I will not describe in detail, a day latter, and seen the horrid squalor that the Muslim in Cairo and other Muslims countries endure. What causes these conditions in most Islamic countries?
Jullian: The lost loved one need not have been murdered in the 9-11 attacks but could have been an athlete at the 1972 Munich games or maybe been on a bus in the Valley of the Kings to be murdered by having their throats cut, or to have been in Kuta, Bali at a night club, (Oct. 12 was the anniversary of this Islamic terrorist attack that killed 202 innocent tourist.) Do you know why the people that you seem to love killed these tourist? In Egypt it had to do with the fact that tourism is the main source of income for the nation and Anwar Sadat, a truly remarkable Muslim, had tried to establish peace with Israel. Your loving Muslims wanted none of that and wanted to try to keep tourist money coming into Egypt; therefore, hurting the majority of the population; but would this matter to them? The motives were the same in Bali. Because the progressive and modernizing Hindu residence of Bali were doing so well from the tourist business, why not try to keep any more tourist from coming? I spent a month in Bali last year and the Kuta attack is still felt on this beautiful island. I also went to Muslim Lombok, which is also a beautiful island, but not so many tourist want to go there because of the Islamic attitude that they encounter. You, Jillian, need to be the one to wake up and realize what is happening. I think that SAMANTHA’S some what sums up some of the post that I see here. She has not seen the DVD but knows all about it. How sad to then , after admitting this, to make comments regarding it.
Doug
[...] Tradotto da Paolo d’Urbano· Vai all’articolo originale [...]
Alright Doug, enough. You can’t even spell my name right, you keep telling me to “do some study” (which I have, thank you), and your comments are becoming less and less amusing and less and less palatable.
You’re unwilling to understand the reasons behind many of these attacks (guess what, it’s not Islam!) and unwilling to engage in discourse. Your only purpose here is to continue to try and convince me that I don’t know what I’m talking about (whilst continuing to ignore my own truths, including the damn spelling of my name!)
Enjoy yourself, Doug.
Doug,
Thank you very much for supplying me your value judgements about me and Muhammad. As for myself, I hold a degree in Arabic/Islamic Studies from Cà Foscari University of Venice (Italy), I’ve been doing an MA in Middle Eastern Studies at the School of Oriental and African Studies of London and am now an MPhil student at the same school. As for Muhammad, his image in the West evolved throughout historical periods. His representation was deeply negative and largely based on Christian, say, “perspective” and its initial hostility towards Islam. Early biographical accounts were focused on his alleged sexual proclivities and mental illnesses. However, as the amount of informations grew, the figure of Muhammad changed. Precisely, from the XVIIIth century onward, his figure ceased to be negatively portrayed and began to be approached through the use of historical methods of analysis. I went through several biographies of the Prophet and my teachers also taught me to understand how different accounts are affected by the historical periods in which they were produced and, as a consequence, by the body of knowledge at disposal. I’ve read Watt’s, Rodinson’s, Cook’s, Bausani’s, biographies of the prophet Muhammad and none of them talked about him using the terms you used. Also, my teachers never referred to him as “a ruthless mass murderer, a lustful sex maniac, a shameless pedophile, [...] a cunning assassin, a marauding chieftain, a schizophrenic narcissist, a pathetic liar [...]“. So, either I’ve been taught by a bunch of “Western Jihadis” or you must update your readings.
(Muhammad’s image in the West? Check this out: http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/396226/Muhammad)
As for the Crusade. Urban II called for a Crusade to liberate Jerusalem from Egyptian Fatimid Caliph. Are you sure? Well, just two quick points. The 1st Crusade was waged by Urban II in response to a call from Alexius I, Emperor of the Eastern Byzanthine Empire, in order to counteract the expasion of the Seljuks Turks into Anatolia. It wasn’t religion, but geopolitics. It wasn’t Fatimids, but Seljuks. Second, the military campaigns which mainly targeted Muslims, were also directed against Jews, Greek Orthodox Christians and other ethno-religious groups. In the siege of Jerusalem, Muslims and Jews fought together against the Franks in order to defend the city.
Wikipedia is enough. Here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusade#First_Crusade_1095-1099
Regarding the causal connection between Muhammad’s swords in the Topkapi and the violent essence of Islam. I did get your point, I was only trying to show you how deeply flawed it is. Your logic is the following: a) Muhammad had 6 swords; b) He founded Islam c) Islam is an intrinsic violent faith; d) Jihadis are Muslims and violent because Islam, per se, is violent. That’s a solid logic! Is there any causal relationship between these statements? Have you ever heard about words such as history, politics, economics, context, and evolution? You said that Christian believers “turned [their own religion] to other ends”. Why doesn’t this same logic apply to Muslims as well? Is Islam really inherently violent, whereas Christianity is a religion based on love? Again, have you ever read St. Paul? I strongly advise you to do so. St. Paul’s writings were violent indeed. Should I assume that even Christianity is based on violence? No. Once again, religion is a system of belief produced and constantly interpreted by human beings in different historical, economical, and socio-political contexts. There is no violent religion, but only violent human beings (I intentionally avoided the use of “believers” in this case).
Oh … for your own sake. Stop referring to Buddhism as a religion.
JILLIAN YORK: Please excuse the miss spelling of your name, I’m sorry that it has caused you such anguish. Maybe it came from my primitive typing abilities, note that the U & I are in close proximity, from the fact I do not recall having ever encountered the name, JILLIAN, before, or perhaps from a deeper Freudian cause.
“What’s in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet.” Shakespeare. OK JILLIAN, now we can move on from this & I could care less how you spell my name as long as I have an idea to whom your thoughts are addressed. Before Sept 11, 2001, I was perhaps as naive as you regarding Islam. I had been to countries where the principle religion is Islam and may have wondered why they appeared so different and the people seemed hostile & uncooperative, something that would take 10 min. to get done any place else, such as Thailand, might take all day, such as in Egypt. I really began to wonder about Islam when the Taliban ruled Afghanistan and what little information that came out of there seemed too bazaar to be true. “Afghanistan’s radical clerics began a campaign to crack down on “un-Islamic” segments of Afghan society. The Taliban soon banned all forms of imagery, music and sports, including television, in accordance with what they considered a strict interpretation of Islamic law” What was happening in Afghanistan makes Jay’s thoughts very relevant because this “religion” has not changed it’s philosophy since it’s inception.
What made me truly amazed how anyone could be so ignorant, no stupid, was when they destroyed the giant Buddha statues of Bamyan that were carved out of the cliff face in 507 & 554 AD; the first one carved was 180 feet high & the other was 121 feet in height. They were the tallest standing Buddha statues in the world, emphases on “were”.
On March 6, 2001 The Times quoted Mullah Mohammed Omar as stating, “Muslims should be proud of smashing idols. It has given praise to God that we have destroyed them.” He had changed his position from being in favor of the statues to being against them. During a March 13 interview for Japan’s Mainichi Shimbun, Afghan Foreign Minister Wakil Ahmad Mutawakel stated that the destruction was anything but a retaliation against the international community for economic sanctions: “We are destroying the Buddha statues in accordance with Islamic law and it is purely a religious issue”. Mind you, these were world heritage sites. Then came 9-11 and my study of Islam began. You say I’m not willing to engage in discourse when I offer up my views of an issue that obviously do not agree with your views. To study something is not the issue, to learn something from those studies is the issue. Just because I do not hold the normal liberal view of Islam certainly does not mean the my view, while different from yours, is incorrect. I leave you will a couple of applicable quotes:
“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.” — Thomas Paine
“We can easily forgive a child who is afraid of the dark; the real tragedy of life is when men are afraid of the light.” - Plato
JILLIAN, Have a nice day: Doug
CNN.com just published a story on the whole affair - a few quotes:
- Rima Barakat Sinclair, who is Muslim and a Republican, was so angry she called her local lawmakers in Denver. “It is riddled not only with misleading facts but outright fabrication,” said Barakat Sinclair.
- The Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR, a group that includes some Democratic donors, has filed complaints with the Internal Revenue Service and Federal Elections Commission, saying Clarion has violated its tax-exempt status.
- Linsley agreed and said newspapers should have made it clear the DVD was part of an ad campaign and not an editorial decision.
- The FEC and IRS would not comment on the specifics of the case, but said they investigate all complaints.
@ Doug Swallow:
“He was a ruthless mass murderer, a lustful sex maniac, a shameless pedophile, Mohammed was 54 and married Aiisha when she was 6. He consummated the marriage when she was 9, a cunning assassin, a marauding chieftain, a schizophrenic narcissist, a pathetic liar and many other vile qualities that disqualify him from being a decent human being let alone a messenger of God.”
This is classic. Shows how people can easily be brainwashed when they do not want to look beyond their cocoon. Child and minor marriage practices were prevalent in many societies. Even in the twentieth century it was norm in the Indian subcontinent and later the government had to make laws to stop it. We have folklore that even a new born was married. These does not correspond to any religion but social practices. Honor killings are purely tribal culture and were/are prevalent in tribal societies (like in Pakistan). So trying to generalize those as religious practices only shows one’s depth of knowledge.
The Indian Literature Nobel laureate Rabindranath Tagore’s wife was also a minor like Ayesha. They had four children, the eldest was born when Mrinalini was 13. He later marry off his daughters at the ages of 13 and ten-and-a-half respectively. This was Late nineteenth century not fifteen hundred years ago.
Would you feel the same way against him (he was not a Muslim)? No wait. I guess you are not interested anything other than venting hatred against one race.
How dare this lameduck so-called military-backed fanatic government allow the religious bigots destroy the great work of Lalon by Mrinal Haque!It is a slap on humanity and one of it`s superheroes.
This impotent illegitimate fascist dictatorship bowed to the fundamentalists as many elements within the self-imposed despotic regime harbor strong Islamic fundamentalist ideologies. The shameless parade of long list of support extended to this unconstitutional fascist regime by the US, UK, UN, EU and failed financial institutes like World Bank, WTO,FAO and IMF is slowly turning us into a miserable failed state.
Even today a US army officer and a visiting UK minister supported the fascist overtures of this communal government. SHAME, SHAME on you who are responsible for the worst genocide in history. History won`t forgive you. You will be tried for sure for war crimes and crimes against humanity at some point in history.
This undemocratic illegal government has tarnished the secular image of Bangladesh abroad by fully collaborating and executing the blueprint of Jamaat-e-Islami dominated army and civil administration to bludgeon democracy in Bangladesh. In justless than two years, accountability and transparency of any government in Bangladesh`s history is at it’s lowest ebb. Corruption among civil bureaucrats and the army have skyrocketed to levels far higher than what BNP and AL were accused of. Fakruddin and Moeen are the worst war criminals destroying the secular fabric of Bangladesh`s tolerant heritage. It is comparable to the killer TALIBAANS destroying the statue of Lord Buddha in Afghanistan.
Fakruddin and Moeen are the biggest MUNAAFIKS and rabid wolves who conspired to get into power by impersonating themselves as sheep.
Rezwan: No matter how many “wrongs” you want to add up, you will never get something to be right and proper if it is inherently “wrong” and one does not need religion to tell you which is which. The post by Hazrat Ali should be of interest to all.
“The truths of religion are never so well understood as by those who have lost the power of reasoning.”…Voltaire, Philosophical Dictionary, 1764
“I believe in Spinoza’s God who reveals Himself in the orderly harmony of what exists, not in a God who concerns himself with fates and actions of human beings.” - Albert Einstein
Paolo: What would make you believe that you have the right to tell me what I can assume to be a religion? As far as Buddhism goes, and I did not say it was a religion in previous post but I do so now, there are over 500 million people, some think considerably more, that do consider it to be a RELIGION. You have your work cut out for you if you are going to convince them that their faith of peace is not a RELIGION. Why, with all of your infinite wisdom, would you want to do so? Some more of your “LOGIC” at work, I would guess. I have been to many Buddhist countries and have always been amazed at their friendliness, humor, willingness to help even if not asked, honesty and just being good people in general. I have been to Chit wan Park in Nepal, which is near the birth place of the Buddha, and now regret that I did not go to Lumbini where, 2551 years ago according to the Buddhist calendar, he was born. This is the calendar that the Thais use today. I have seen the Swayambhunath Pagoda in Kathmandu several times plus the Buddhist temples and stupas on the trail to Everest base camp and witnessed the devotion of the Sherpa’s to their RELIGION, Buddhism. I bring this up because today the Buddhist and Hindus live side by side in peace in Nepal. This is different than when the Muslims invaded Nepal in the 1300s and damaged many Hindu and Buddhist shrines, and naturally, killed many of each faith, wouldn’t you say? I have seen the Potala Palace and the Jakhang Temple in Lhasa and seen how the Tibetans have steadfastly adhered to their RELIGION in spite of being illegally subjugated by the Chinese. I have been to the Shwedagon Pagoda in Rangoon, Burma (I refuse to refer to either by the names that the illegal military regime use) and also to Bagan on the banks of the Ayeyarwady river and seen some of the over 1,200 Buddhist pagodas and various temples. The Muslims didn’t get there to destroy these but earth quakes have done some damage. The Burmese also hold firm to their RELIGION, Buddhism. I have seen the revered Emerald Buddha in Bangkok many times and would guess that the Buddhist that was praying there would take exception to you claiming that theirs was not a RELIGION. I have on two different occasions been to Seam Reap, Cambodia and to Angkor Wat and up the steep stairs to the central pagoda where Buddhist RELIGIOUS rituals are still carried out today. Angkor Wat, the largest RELIGIOUS structure in the world was, granted, built originally as a Hindu temple, but has since the 14th century been used as a Buddhist Temple. Bayon, near by, is amazing also. The intricate carvings at the small Banteay Srei (Woman’s Temple) that is a far distance from the main temple are beyond belief and they all tell a story. Tell me again about RELIGION. The jungle has had it’s telling affect on these amazing temples and some are being put back to gather, such as near the elephant wall. I can only thank God that the Muslims didn’t get here and destroy this also, as they seem to be proficient at doing, because they would consider them to be part of the worship of idols. What gives them the right to decide what RELIGIOUS structures of antiquity have the right to survive and what need destroyed? The 1,500 year old Buddha statues that use to exist at Bamyan, Afghanistan are a case in point. I have also seen Buddhist temples in Japan, China, Mongolia, Vietnam and Lao. Mind you that The RELIGION spread by conversion covering the area between Asia Minor to Japan, not by the Muslim method which is through conquest at the point of a sword, but by peaceful conversion over a long period of time. The life of the Buddha should be mentioned at this point. It is true, as you so flippantly pointed out, that he was a well-off guy. That makes what he did all the more meaningful in that he forsakes all of this to search out the truth and at one point almost starved himself to death. This is much preferred to Mohammad’s thirst for wealth and power and somehow making that out to be a religion because he heard voices in his head. The Buddha did find that truth and it is within all if they seek it in the right manner by leading a correct life. Killing and cutting off heads is not the right way to go about finding that truth, according to Buddhist doctrine and their conduct, demeanor, fairness and respect for all living things is in sharp contrast to those that follow the example set by the “prophet”. Buddhism has different sects with some differing views but they do not kill each other over these differences, as do the Shi’ite and Sunnis’
Doug,
Ok, very briefly and for the last time. There’s no point in discussing with one who only wants to perform his own monologues. Doug, you just wrote 1,000 lines without addressing any of the points I made against you in my previous comment. No worries, your silence is more than self-explanatory. You are constantly skipping from one point to another and I do not intend to waste my time in following your deliria.
Very quickly on Buddhism. First, in your comment #26 you clearly referred to Buddhism, Christianity and Islam as “faiths”. Are you fooling me? Second, I do not have any right on you, Doug. However, according to a book called “Dictionary”, the term religion refers to a set of beliefs that considers a superhuman agency(/ies, for polytheism) as being the origin and the cause of evolution of the world as we know it. This is what religion stands for in, say, the classic, “Western” body of knowledge about the subject. Tell me, Doug: was Siddartha Gautama (Buddha) a God? No. Did he believe in a superhuman agency? No. In contrast, he believed an inner truth is hidden inside every single human being. In a latter stage, the practices you were talking about enter the scene. Practices, Doug, not beliefs. Are the worshiping a God? Or a man, an example? Are they the same thing?
Now, I’m sure you won’t address this point either, and will write something about something else completely different. Therefore, I rephrase Jillian and say goodbye.
Keep “enjoy[ing] yourself, Doug”
Paolo
Paolo: I concur with you that it is time to end this. Why would I want to waste my time trying to have a discussion with someone that can’t even get their mind around the fact that a faith that is 2,551 years old and has over 500 million followers is not a religion when it is listed as such anywhere one looks at a list of the world’s religions? How could I ever assume that this mind could ever fathom what Islam is all about and what it’s aims are for the world?
“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.” — Thomas Paine
indeed, doug:
“To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like administering medicine to the dead.” — Thomas Paine
Ok Doug,
I’ll spread your infinite (and inaccurate) knowledge about world religions. Just to have a laugh. In the meantime, keep in mind this:
“1,000s lines without addressing any of the points I made against you [...]. No worries, your silence is more than self-explanatory.”
Once you’ll learn to read others’ comments, and respond to them accordingly, maybe you’ll realize that “the dead” is you. Maybe …
Ps: oh, say hallo for me to the 500 millions of Buddhist followers who’ve been interviewed (personally?) by you. That’s a huge ethnography, Doug … well done!
“He was a ruthless mass murderer, a lustful sex maniac, a shameless pedophile, Mohammed was 54 and married Aiisha when she was 6. He consummated the marriage when she was 9,”
Doug, lets stick to the point. As I proved earlier, child marriage was a norm in many societies among millions of people. But you have judged one person out of those millions in today’s context because you want to reason your hatred. Moreover you chose these words to vilify a prophet out of a lie instead of reasoning with examples. Surely this tells a lot about your background, your ethics, how tolerant you are and what you exactly want. Sadly you are trying to preach your ignorance here thinking you are the most civilized one here.
We have seen this trick. These words will surely provoke some people and you want that reaction to point “oh here are those people who are not tolerant. Lets wipe’em out.”
I am not against your motive. Surely we are all against the bigots, fundamentalists, the rise of religious nationalism. But there are hundreds of ways to address that. Not by using the using the words you chose, generalizing people and by making people enemy.
Paolo: I must say that I’m sorry that your “goodbye” was for such a brief period of time. I also feel some what foolish to be wasting any time with this reply to your arrogant attacks on what I write to you. You incorrectly state that I did not address questions against me, do you not pay any attention to what you write or to replies that are received?
“Oh … for your own sake. Stop referring to Buddhism as a religion.”
Please attempt to see the connection between the “monologue” that I presented and your quote that appears above.
Congratulations on your academic accomplishments. I’m sure that you will continue to be comfortably sheltered by the halls of academia. It appears that you have chosen not to study in the Islamic world where you would, with out doubt, get the “real truth” regarding these issues. I noticed recently that some of the Wahabi were protesting Copernican’s concepts of the universe being taught at King Saud U. in Riyadh. You seem to prefer to sequester your self in the free and Democratic West where conflicting views on a subject, until recently, could be debated with out fear of death. (We should not forget about Theo van Gogh, more on that later) I will not elaborate on my academic background other than to say that after I had gotten what I felt I needed from academia, I went out into the real world and experienced what it had to offer.
I do not recall making any value judgment regarding you but I have now developed one. I am familiar with some of the people that you sat at the feet of and I am also not surprised that your views tend to be a mirror image of theirs, so much for independent thought. That there would be varying views of Mohammad is only natural and the views of the sources that I refer to have been shown to be true, by history. You mention how Western thought on Mohammad and Islam has evolved through the course of time. I challenge you to go to Islamic history sources and see what is maintained about such central figures as Jesus and the Christian bible. You find very little information about him and basically none about the Church that he founded put forth in a positive manner. See what information you find about the Battle of Tours, one of the most significant events in European history when Charles Martel and his 1,500 soldiers turned around the Muslim forces led by Abd El-Rahman Al Ghafiqi, who had bragged that he would stable his horses in St Peter’s in Rome. Abd had over 40,000 cavalry troops and yet, through superior tactics, Charles stopped the Muslim’s from advancing further into Christian Europe.
You say:” Note that the