Islam Today....and Yesterday

[PoliticalChic]

1. Today, July 16th.....
622 AD Hegira: Mohammad forced to flee Mecca for Medina, where he became king. The Moslim era dates from the first day of the lunar year in which the Hegira took place.
Hegira | Infoplease.com




2. Events that have taken place between the West, and the Moslem world, present a picture which may, in fact be distorted. In a speech, Bernard Lewis provided a view of a culture that may hint at a kind of democracy:

a. "To view traditional Islamic leadership, consider this letter by Mssr. Count de Choiseul-Gouffier, the French ambassador in Istanbul, written in 1786, in which he is trying to explain why he is making rather slow progress with the tasks entrusted to him by his government in dealing with the Ottoman government.

“Here,” he says, “things are not as in France where the king is sole master and does as he pleases.” “Here,” he says, “the sultan has to consult.” He has to consult with the former holders of high offices, with the leaders of various groups and so on. And this is a slow process. This scenario is something radically different than the common image of Middle Eastern government today. And it is a description that ceased to be true because of a number of changes that occurred."
https://www.hillsdale.edu/news/imprimis/archive/issue.asp?year=2006&month=09





3.This is not to ignore a darker side to the culture.

a. Jews had lived in Iraq for some 2600 years, but the origin of this mass Muslim movement was in 627. At that time, Mohammed, defending Medina, judged the Jewish tribe to be guilty of aiding the Meccan attackers, and oversaw such acts as the beheading of 900 captives of the Banu Qurayzah tribe, he watched the bodies thrown into a pit.(… in his 1895 biography of Muhammad ("Mahomet and Islam", London, 1895, p. 151), which relied entirely on the original Muslim sources, the scholar Sir William Muir observed:

"The massacre of the Banu Coreiza was a barbarous deed which cannot be justified by any reason of political necessity the indiscriminate slaughter of the whole tribe cannot be recognized otherwise than as an act of monstrous cruelty?")
http://www.andrewbostom.org/loj//content/view/38/27/

b. The extermination of the Jews of Medina represents the iconic moment in Islam, just as the Sermon on the Mount is the iconic moment of Christianity, or the parting of the Red Sea is for the Jews.
Edwin Black in his book, “ The Farhud: The Roots of the Arab-Nazi Alliance in the Holocaust.”





There is one and only one possible bridge, synthesis, between item #2 and item #3 above, and that is the power and repute of the United States of America.

And, that is one of the reasons why placing our current President in his position of power was a terrible mistake.
His withdrawal of America from the equation, his 'leading from behind,' his lack of vision has resulted in a Middle East in worse shape than when he took office.


"Our administration's narrative has been that we need to do less in the world,” Nasr told CNN’s Christiane Amanpour. “We don't need to take leadership on varieties of issues around the world, that American leadership is no longer necessary and that critical areas of the world, such as the Middle East, are not as important as they were."
Is America giving the cold shoulder to the world? ? Amanpour - CNN.com Blogs


Really?


Really?

 

[Osomir]

A couple of things here:

1.) Muhammad never expanded into Iraq, so I'm not sure why it is mentioned.

2.) There was more than one Jewish tribe that lived in the Medina region.

3.) The conflict with the Banu Qurayzah broke out when they violated the Constitution of Medina during the Battle of the Trench.

4.) Muhammad did not sit in judgement over them. the dispute was mediated via third party arbitration. To arbitrate, one of the heads of the tribe of Aws (who was an ally of the Banu Qurayzah): Sa’d ibn Mu'adh, was appointed to issue a verdict (something the Banu Qurayzah agreed to). this is something that Muir's book would have told you had you read it. Luckily I have a copy, and am also familiar with Hishram and Tabari's accounts, and with the modern historical version created by former Catholic nun Karen Armstrong.

5.) The verdict which resulted in the killing of the post-pubescent males of the tribe, was formulated based on Jewish conducts of warfare, not based on Islamic theological constructs. he based it on the Torah, you can open any Bible and find Moses doing the same thing.

6.) I'm not sure what point it is you are trying to make here.

 

[PoliticalChic]

A couple of things here:

1.) Muhammad never expanded into Iraq, so I'm not sure why it is mentioned.

2.) There was more than one Jewish tribe that lived in the Medina region.

3.) The conflict with the Banu Qurayzah broke out when they violated the Constitution of Medina during the Battle of the Trench.

4.) Muhammad did not sit in judgement over them. the dispute was mediated via third party arbitration. To arbitrate, one of the heads of the tribe of Aws (who was an ally of the Banu Qurayzah): Sa’d ibn Mu'adh, was appointed to issue a verdict (something the Banu Qurayzah agreed to). this is something that Muir's book would have told you had you read it. Luckily I have a copy, and am also familiar with Hishram and Tabari's accounts, and with the modern historical version created by former Catholic nun Karen Armstrong.

5.) The verdict which resulted in the killing of the post-pubescent males of the tribe, was formulated based on Jewish conducts of warfare, not based on Islamic theological constructs. he based it on the Torah, you can open any Bible and find Moses doing the same thing.

6.) I'm not sure what point it is you are trying to make here.

The section to which you refer was the background to the events discussed in Black's book.

1. The Farhud, in this case, means the June 1941 Nazi-style pogrom in Baghdad that set the stage for the devastation and expulsion of the Iraqi Jews and ultimately almost a million Jews across the Arab world. But it also means, in the larger sense, the Nazia-Arab alliance, the mutual attempts at genocide of the Jews.

Black explained the massacre in connection with the actions in Medina, the actions for which you'd like to expiate Mohammad.


a. When the progrom did not accomplish the extermination of Iraq’s Jews, the Arabs joined with the Iranians. The name Iran means ‘Aryan,’ and was chosen to support a massive Nazi-dominated infrastructure which was ready to provide oil to the Nazis. By the early 1930s, Reza Pahlavi's close ties with Nazi Germany began worrying the Allied states.[8] Germany's modern state and economy highly impressed the Shah, and there were hundreds of Germans involved in every aspect of the state, from setting up factories to building roads, railroads and bridges.[9] Germany?Iran relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia



2. Were it not for the ancient event in question, contemporary history might be very different.

a. . “Our hatred for the Jews dates from God's condemnation of them for their persecution and rejection of Isa (Jesus) and their subsequent rejection of His chosen Prophet." He added "that for a Muslim to kill a Jew, or for him to be killed by a Jew ensures him an immediate entry into Heaven and into the august presence of God Almighty."
November 23, 1937, Saudi Arabia's King Ibn Saud told British Colonel H.R.P. Dickson. Official British document, Foreign Office File No. 371/20822 E 7201/22/31; Elie Kedourie, Islam in the Modern World, (London: Mansell, 1980), pp. 69-72.



b. Therefore, "The extermination of the Jews of Medina represents the iconic moment in Islam,..." is correct.

 

[Trajan]

well, I know that a large part of the source/impetus of the Intellectual Renaissance in Europe was driven by texts translated form Arabic in Cordoba and other Arab cities. They were well advanced, tolerant ( more tolerant than Europe was at the time ) etc.

Until......

 

[PoliticalChic]

well, I know that a large part of the source/impetus of the Intellectual Renaissance in Europe was driven by texts translated form Arabic in Cordoba and other Arab cities. They were well advanced, tolerant ( more tolerant than Europe was at the time ) etc.

Until......

......Ibn Abd al-Wahhab....

and....

...."the discovery of oil. With that, this extremist sect found itself not only in possession of Mecca and Medina, but also of wealth beyond the dreams of avarice. As a result, what would otherwise have been a lunatic fringe in a marginal country became a major force in the world of Islam. Now, its influence spreads far beyond the region."
Hillsdale, Op.Cit.

 

[Osomir]

The section to which you refer was the background to the events discussed in Black's book.

1. The Farhud, in this case, means the June 1941 Nazi-style pogrom in Baghdad that set the stage for the devastation and expulsion of the Iraqi Jews and ultimately almost a million Jews across the Arab world. But it also means, in the larger sense, the Nazia-Arab alliance, the mutual attempts at genocide of the Jews.

And prior to that large numbers of Jews lived peacefully in Iraq along with Nestorian Christians and Muslims for over a thousand years.

Black explained the massacre in connection with the actions in Medina,

Seems like a fairly flimsy connection given the historical roles of Jews within Middle Eastern society between the two incidents.

the actions for which you'd like to expiate Mohammad.

I didn't notice you debate them at all and I even utilized Black's own source (Muir) to provide more info about it. Not sure why you would be dismissive of it. it can easily be coorborated with the other biographies I mentioned as well (Hishram, Tabari, the remnants of ibn Ishaq's works, Armstrong, etc).

The name Iran means ‘Aryan,’ and was chosen to support a massive Nazi-dominated infrastructure which was ready to provide oil to the Nazis. By the early 1930s, Reza Pahlavi's close ties with Nazi Germany began worrying the Allied states.[8] Germany's modern state and economy highly impressed the Shah, and there were hundreds of Germans involved in every aspect of the state, from setting up factories to building roads, railroads and bridges.[9] Germany?Iran relations - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

And yet Iran has the Middle East's largest population of Jews outside of Israel; As well as reserved seats for the minority within its legislature.

2. Were it not for the ancient event in question, contemporary history might be very different.

It seems highly unlikely. The creation of Israel and the civil conflict with landless workers there coupled with the simultaneous rise of Arab nationalism has more to do with current ethnic divides than any historical act from over a thousand years ago.

a. . “Our hatred for the Jews dates from God's condemnation of them for their persecution and rejection of Isa (Jesus) and their subsequent rejection of His chosen Prophet." He added "that for a Muslim to kill a Jew, or for him to be killed by a Jew ensures him an immediate entry into Heaven and into the august presence of God Almighty."
November 23, 1937, Saudi Arabia's King Ibn Saud told British Colonel H.R.P. Dickson. Official British document, Foreign Office File No. 371/20822 E 7201/22/31; Elie Kedourie, Islam in the Modern World, (London: Mansell, 1980), pp. 69-72.

Which directly contradicts the Quran and the Jews' status as a people of the book, and thus a protected class.

b. Therefore, "The extermination of the Jews of Medina represents the iconic moment in Islam,..." is correct.

Only half of one tribe was killed. Once again, that was in accordance to the Torah, which was what the decision was rooted in. I also feel inclined to point out, once again, that there was more than one Jewish tribe in Medina and that the Banu Qurayzah weren't the only Jews there.

 

[Sunni Man]

Events that have taken place between the West, and the Moslem world, present a picture which may, in fact be distorted. In a speech, Bernard Lewis provided a view of a culture that may hint at a kind of democracy:

a. "To view traditional Islamic leadership, consider this letter by Mssr. Count de Choiseul-Gouffier, the French ambassador in Istanbul, written in 1786, in which he is trying to explain why he is making rather slow progress with the tasks entrusted to him by his government in dealing with the Ottoman government.

“Here,” he says, “things are not as in France where the king is sole master and does as he pleases.” “Here,” he says, “the sultan has to consult.” He has to consult with the former holders of high offices, with the leaders of various groups and so on. And this is a slow process. This scenario is something radically different than the common image of Middle Eastern government today. And it is a description that ceased to be true because of a number of changes that occurred."
year=2006&month=09[/url]

Shura (Arabic: شورى shūr&#257 is an Arabic word for "consultation". The Quran and Muhammad encourage Muslims to decide their affairs in consultation with those who will be affected by that decision.

Shura is mentioned three times in the Quran as a praiseworthy activity, and is a word often used in organizing the affairs of a mosque, an Islamic organization, and in parliaments on democratic votes.

Shura - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[PoliticalChic]

The section to which you refer was the background to the events discussed in Black's book.

1. The Farhud, in this case, means the June 1941 Nazi-style pogrom in Baghdad that set the stage for the devastation and expulsion of the Iraqi Jews and ultimately almost a million Jews across the Arab world. But it also means, in the larger sense, the Nazia-Arab alliance, the mutual attempts at genocide of the Jews.

And prior to that large numbers of Jews lived peacefully in Iraq along with Nestorian Christians and Muslims for over a thousand years.

Black explained the massacre in connection with the actions in Medina,

Seems like a fairly flimsy connection given the historical roles of Jews within Middle Eastern society between the two incidents.



I didn't notice you debate them at all and I even utilized Black's own source (Muir) to provide more info about it. Not sure why you would be dismissive of it. it can easily be coorborated with the other biographies I mentioned as well (Hishram, Tabari, the remnants of ibn Ishaq's works, Armstrong, etc).



And yet Iran has the Middle East's largest population of Jews outside of Israel; As well as reserved seats for the minority within its legislature.



It seems highly unlikely. The creation of Israel and the civil conflict with landless workers there coupled with the simultaneous rise of Arab nationalism has more to do with current ethnic divides than any historical act from over a thousand years ago.

a. . “Our hatred for the Jews dates from God's condemnation of them for their persecution and rejection of Isa (Jesus) and their subsequent rejection of His chosen Prophet." He added "that for a Muslim to kill a Jew, or for him to be killed by a Jew ensures him an immediate entry into Heaven and into the august presence of God Almighty."
November 23, 1937, Saudi Arabia's King Ibn Saud told British Colonel H.R.P. Dickson. Official British document, Foreign Office File No. 371/20822 E 7201/22/31; Elie Kedourie, Islam in the Modern World, (London: Mansell, 1980), pp. 69-72.

Which directly contradicts the Quran and the Jews' status as a people of the book, and thus a protected class.

b. Therefore, "The extermination of the Jews of Medina represents the iconic moment in Islam,..." is correct.

Only half of one tribe was killed. Once again, that was in accordance to the Torah, which was what the decision was rooted in. I also feel inclined to point out, once again, that there was more than one Jewish tribe in Medina and that the Banu Qurayzah weren't the only Jews there.

"Which directly contradicts the Quran and the Jews' status as a people of the book, and thus a protected class."

b. Therefore, "The extermination of the Jews of Medina represents the iconic moment in Islam,..." is correct.

While informed and interesting, your posts are merely another in a long series of 'everything is just fine..."

No, they are not.




Savage as this act was, adherents believe that they are directed to continue such behavior today.
a. Blood is the only element that will cleans the believer, and is always required in dealing with enemies. Martyrdom and suicide are the tools used to bring about the earthly utopia.

b. Intolerance is the hallmark of the faith. Mohammad spoke of the cleansing of the Arabian peninsula of all non-Moslems.
Conversation with Lawrence Wright, page 4 of 6

and "Muslims must present non-Muslims with the three choices of Sura 9:29 of the (Koran): conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."



Until this is admitted and corrected....a reformation......there cannot be peace.

The bridge must be built to the 21st century, not to the 7th.

 

[Osomir]

While informed and interesting, your posts are merely another in a long series of 'everything is just fine..."

No they weren't. They were point by point responses to what it is you were posting. responses that had content that has thus far gone unaddressed.

Savage as this act was, adherents believe that they are directed to continue such behavior today.
a. Blood is the only element that will cleans the believer, and is always required in dealing with enemies. Martyrdom and suicide are the tools used to bring about the earthly utopia.

What exactly are you basing this on / he basing this on? Suicide has traditionally been forbidden within Islamic societies, and thus far you have posted no evidence that the incident with the Banu Qurayzah is in any way link to current ethnic feuds within the Middle East.

b. Intolerance is the hallmark of the faith. Mohammad spoke of the cleansing of the Arabian peninsula of all non-Moslems.

This isn't true though and Muhammad's own life and actions contradict this. He was allied with non-Islamic tribes during his life time; how could he be allied with non-Islamic tribes if Muslims are theologically required to kill non-Muslims? Wouldn't that be a pretty big slip up by the religion's own founder?

and "Muslims must present non-Muslims with the three choices of Sura 9:29 of the (Koran): conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."

No it doesn't. You should actually read Sura 9. That section was revealed during the Battle of Tabuk and Muhammad was also allied with non-Muslim tribes then too. The start of Sura 9 even mentions them.

 

[PoliticalChic]

While informed and interesting, your posts are merely another in a long series of 'everything is just fine..."

No they weren't. They were point by point responses to what it is you were posting. responses that had content that has thus far gone unaddressed.

Savage as this act was, adherents believe that they are directed to continue such behavior today.
a. Blood is the only element that will cleans the believer, and is always required in dealing with enemies. Martyrdom and suicide are the tools used to bring about the earthly utopia.

What exactly are you basing this on / he basing this on? Suicide has traditionally been forbidden within Islamic societies, and thus far you have posted no evidence that the incident with the Banu Qurayzah is in any way link to current ethnic feuds within the Middle East.

b. Intolerance is the hallmark of the faith. Mohammad spoke of the cleansing of the Arabian peninsula of all non-Moslems.

This isn't true though and Muhammad's own life and actions contradict this. He was allied with non-Islamic tribes during his life time; how could he be allied with non-Islamic tribes if Muslims are theologically required to kill non-Muslims? Wouldn't that be a pretty big slip up by the religion's own founder?

and "Muslims must present non-Muslims with the three choices of Sura 9:29 of the (Koran): conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."

No it doesn't. You should actually read Sura 9. That section was revealed during the Battle of Tabuk and Muhammad was also allied with non-Muslim tribes then too. The start of Sura 9 even mentions them.

conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."


Or?

 

[Gardener]

Is this the appropriate place to attack Islam and call Muslims, Nazis?

 

[Osomir]

conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."


Or?

Once again, I suggest that you take the time to actually read the Quran for yourself.

 

[Gardener]

Another example of Judea working tirelessly to defame Islam.

The soldiers of Christ and Muhammed see through this disgusting attempt.

Keep it up and the Inquisition will return.

 

[Agit8r]

The Farhud, in this case, means the June 1941 Nazi-style pogrom in Baghdad that set the stage for the devastation and expulsion of the Iraqi Jews and ultimately almost a million Jews across the Arab world. But it also means, in the larger sense, the Nazia-Arab alliance, the mutual attempts at genocide of the Jews.

That is spinning a narrative.

The Farhud

 

[Osomir]

Another example of Judea working tirelessly to defame Islam.

The soldiers of Christ and Muhammed see through this disgusting attempt.

Keep it up and the Inquisition will return.

You're bad at trolling.

 

[PoliticalChic]

conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."


Or?

Once again, I suggest that you take the time to actually read the Quran for yourself.

Why won't you answer the question?


"conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."

 

[Osomir]

conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."


Or?

Once again, I suggest that you take the time to actually read the Quran for yourself.

Why won't you answer the question?


"conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."

I already responded to that interpretation. You ignored it. Feel free to address it though at any time.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Once again, I suggest that you take the time to actually read the Quran for yourself.

Why won't you answer the question?


"conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."

I already responded to that interpretation. You ignored it. Feel free to address it though at any time.

Is there an alternative to the following:

"conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."



If not.....you'll accept 'intolerant' as the operative appellation.

 

[Osomir]

Is there an alternative to the following:

"conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."

I already said there was and you ignored my comments concerning the passage. Are you not even reading my responses now?

 

[PoliticalChic]

Is there an alternative to the following:

"conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."

I already said there was and you ignored my comments concerning the passage. Are you not even reading my responses now?

Is there an alternative to the following:

"conversion, submission with second-class status under Islamic rule, or death."



A simple "no" would be informative.