How about this little bit of news (free registratio may be required)? A man killed another man when the first man encountered his wife and the second man apparently “in the act.” The first man’s wife cried out, “Rape!” Guess whot got charged with murder:
[list=A][li]The first man[/li][*]The first man’s wife[/list]
It only takes a few bad apples to spoil the whole bunch, yeah? So I don’t worry about the moderates in Islam, the same way I don’t worry about the moderate Catholics or Evangelicals or whatever, because the moderates aren’t the ones bombing abortion clinics or trying to pollute the minds of children with creationist nonsense. But the fact is, those people who ARE trying to bomb abortion clinics or enforce teaching of creationism are more faithful to their belief system than the moderates. Absolutely faithful Judaism, absolutely faithful Christianity, absolutely faithful Islam…all horrific, all brutal, all dangerous. The farther they get away from faithfulness, the better off we all are.
Edited for spelling
Tom, you did not highlight Britain, Sweden, Israel or Uganda on the grounds that it might be Muslim immigrants who are responsible. But you highlighted India, which in fact has the world’s third largest concentration of Muslims after Indonesia and Pakistan (138.2 million in 2001 according to this census report. .
Muslims are in fact 13 % of the population of India. On the other hand, nearly 4% of the population of Sweden is Muslim according to this cite.
I realize that feminist groups in India decry the murder of brides in Hindu families as well. But if you will reaserach the subject you will find that this is most often associated with the fact that the sizeable dowry promised by the family of the bride to clinch the marriage was not delivered. These women are frequently doused with cooking stove oil and set afire. In other words, it is a matter of greed, not fanatical religious puritanical belief.
Once again, I repeat that the possible occurrence of honour killings among the Rom or other groups does not change the fact that it is a practice closely associated with many Islamic societies, and as I have already proven, not only Arab ones.
I challenge your contention seems to be that something cannot legitimately be called “Islamic” unless it 1) occures in every single Muslim society including Dearborn MI, and 2) Does not occur in any other group outside Islam, ever. This is a ridiculous position.
For example, any reasonable person would agree that veiled faces and the hijab are “Islamic”. The fact that my mother was required to wear a head scarf or hat in a Catholic Church, or the fact that not every single Muslim woman covers her head woulkd be regarded as ridiculous nit-picking.
Here we have the Koran which contains literally hundreds of verses threatening cruelty and violence for all who oppose the message of Allah. Here we have millions of Muslim youth being indoctrinated daily in the Koran. But not a single charged of violence, cruelty or lust for conquest can be laid at the feet of Islam until we can prove that a particular belief is endorsed by every single Muslim and that such acts have not taken place anywhere outside Islam.
My post was in response to the question of whether there are groups outside of Islam that engage in the practice of honor killing. The practice of killing brides for having insufficient bride price and compelling young girls to commit suttee (a fortunately fading but not yet extinct practice), are explicitly rooted in Hinduism. I did not claim that no Muslims in India practiced honor killings; I noted that deaths in India can be traced to Hindu as well as Muslim practices.
Are you really going to ignore the information provided in my link simply so that you can pretend that all honor killings originate in Islam? I did not claim that honor killings did not tarnish Muslim cultures; I only noted that they crossed cultural boundaries and could be demonstrated in non-Muslim cultures, as well.
As long as the examples of France and Sweden have been brought up, let’s look at them.
Sweden’s population is less than 4% Muslim. But look at thge case of Malmo, Sweden, that has one of the largest concentration of Muslims of any European City. See this article .
Now, while the firebombing of the outside of the mosque is a reprehensible act that must be condemned in any western democracy, look at the rest of the article.
"But while the mosque has been a target for attacks since its founding, there is increasing evidence that Islamic militants are gaining a foothold in Sweden by successfully exploiting racial tensions and Muslim anger over economic underachievement, and ghettoization.
Bosnian authorities arrested a Muslim Swede in Sarajevo in October for possession of explosives while Islamist websites published several inflammatory but unsubstantiated claims in late summer that a mujahideen training camp has been established in southern Sweden."
Mere bigorty against a religious minority, you say? But this is the same Sweden that took in Jewish refusgees from the Holocaust. The same Sweden that also has 9,000 Hindu immigrants.
Now France, with 10% of its population Muslim, has the highest percentage in Western Europe (see this cite .
I am not going to haul out all of the news stories of riots and unrest by Muslims in France. Anyone can look them up. But if you will refer to my very first post by which I started this thread, you will see my quotes from an article by two French University Professors who make a genuine case that the secularism and individual right to religious freedom of the French Republic are under serious attack by Muslims. Please reread my OP, because that is the gist of what I have been saying here, no matter how far off track we have gotten.
Burnings of Indian brides who did not bring in a big enough dowry are not religiously motivated in any way. They are a question of pure greed.
Honour killings of gay men and preanant teenaged girls ARE based on religious sexual morality.
You fail to make that difference.
Please Tom, I beg you to show me in which posting I said that all honor killings originate in Islam, so that I can apologize and retract my statement. My point has been that it is ridiculous to demand that a phenomenon must be pactised exlsuively in Islam and practised by 100% of Islamic society in order for it to be closely associated with Islam.
My two cents for today.
I really don’t fear Islam at all. I just don’t like it. I don’t plan to travel or immigate to any Muslim country. I live in the boonies and can’t remember if I’ve ever met a real Muslim. As far as terrorism is concerned, I rarely get on a plane or get into a city. There is so much bullshit going on in the world and always has been going on that I just accept it. For the moment, I’m glad I live in a country that upholds western values, especially pluralism and what ever else they may be, because I do like my life and the role I’ve been allowed to choose in my society.
I couldnt care lesswhat religion people practice as long as it obeys the law of the land .
What really pisses me is when people travel hundreds or even thousands of miles to come to our countries,and its got to be said uninvited,and then expect us to tip toe around their beliefs in case we hurt their feelings instead of them respecting ours .
When I visit an Islamic,Buddhist or say an animistic cultured country Ido all in my power to conform to their customs ,indeed in most Muslim countrys you ll get arrested if you dont.
Not too long ago in England a Pub carpark with a porcine connected name had to change it because local Muslims had found it offensive.
In another case a shop had to withdraw fluffy (I think )Valentines day gift pigs.
Jews dont eat pig related products but I never hear of them being offended ,outraged even by the most blatant of pork merchandising .
And Im not Jewish by the way.
If they cant be bothered even to make the most basic attempt to integrate with our culture then why the hell do they bother immigrating here?
Tell you what !you stay there until we invite you and we ll stay here Byeeeeeeeeeeeeeee
Isn’t this the problem of the English pub and shop owners? Haven’t they ever heard of “No?”
Yes thank you for bringing up suttee and may I mention the worshippers of the god Kali.
Once again we expose the evil British for their oppressive measures imposed on all Indians when forced to bow the knee to the Colonial jackboot.
Simple devout Kali worshippers stopped from practicing their faith ,in fact quite often killed by the Brits for trying to do just that !if that isnt religous persecution then I dont know what is!
Fair enough the thugee showed their devotion by strangling innocent travellers and then stealing all their belongings but Christians eat communal wafers so we re even on that score.
Apart from stopping the good old Indian tradition of suttee the fascist bastards introduced a legal code instead of summary execution on the Moghuls whim and many other things of that sort that I just find too sickening to talk about .
Thank god now that the sub continent is free, though technically illegal suttee is practiced without much fear of restraint and in what is now Pakistan the Madrasses can instil plain old “down home” wisdom into young Muslim minds from all over the world.
If only all Brits (er white ones that is)could burn in hell and show that there is some justice in the world after all.
Valteron: Anyone at all–other than you–can readily see that your posts in this thread are, well, astonishing. If it’s something postive about Islam, you say, “Well, that’s not due to the religion!” If it’s something positive about non-Islamic religions, then you say, “Well, obviously that’s due to the religion!” If it’s something negative about a non-Islamic area, you say, “It’s not representative! It’s not due to the religion!” Yet, if it’s something negative from anywhere at all and you can somehow connect it to Islam, then you say, “It can only be from the religion!”
Why is that you can you not see what that really is?
Huh? What crime have I committed?
Thank you, L4L, for saying what needed to be said.
Perhaps this time I should be true to my word and really leave this thread, since several posters have said that it was going on so well without me 
But before I leave I think it only right to summarize my position. I started this thread quoting extensively from a French magazine article (the highly respected L’histoire - Thématique). France is the country with the highest proportion of Muslims in Western Europe (10%).
The authors, two university professors with excellent credentials, listed many, many examples of abusive, unyielding and unreasonable demands by Muslims in France, and concluded by saying that the same France that fought 30 years with the Catholic Church to achieve a secular state in 1905 is now once again faced with a major assault against its principle of secularism and freedom of religion. They conclude that it is time for the “good girl” republic to “show her claws”.
I also listed cases of Muslims in Canada refusing to let a female driving inspector ride next to them in the front seat of their car when taking a test for their driver’s licence. Imgaine for one second if I refused to let a black inspector sit next to me in my car.
For this, I have been called a racist and a bigot, and Tomndeb even implied that I wanted others to join me in a metaphorical mob of screaming peasants with pitchforks and torches to get the Muslims.
Islam is and has always been a conquering, uncompromising religion that believes not only that it is the one true faith. It follows a book filled with cruel and violent exhortations against unbelievers and demands that Muslims fight for the faith.
I do not for one second deny that many Muslims are nice, peaceful people. In fact I forgot to mention that I DID have a friend in the 1970s and 80s who was of Muslim origin. In those days there were very few Muslims in Canada. My friend identified himself as an EX-Muslim, drank alcohol, went swimming with guys and gals, etc.
Now the size of the Muslim community in Canada is many times greater than 20 years ago. I recently met my friend again, after not seeing him for many years. I noticed that he now identifies himself as a Muslim. When I asked him why he was no longer an EX-Muslim as in former days, he whispered to me that it could be dangerous for him, HERE IN CANADA, to be idenified as an apostate. He even attends mosque, not because he wants to, but because of the fear of retribution of those who are waching him for signs of apostasy.
There may be moderate, accomodating Muslims in Britain, Canada, France or even Malmo,Sweden. But as soon as a Muslim community grows, very often, so does the power of the hard-liners who refuse to make any accomodation with their western host countries. The moderate Muslims exist, to be sure, but how much of a voice do they get?
As ignorant as people like Tomndeb and my other critics like to think I am, I am very aware that moderate Muslims exist. Like Irshad Manji, a Canadian Muslim Lesbian who wrote a book entitled “The Trouble with Islam”. She has needed bodyguard protection here in Canada (perhaps still does). She is, incidentally a Muslim who agrees with me that Surah 4, verse 34 of the Koran alloows Muslims to beat their wives.
So I thank you all for your patience and in answer to your question, HERE IS WHAT I PROPOSE.
NOT mobs ith torches and pitchforks, but an end to the dangerous knee-jerk liberal delusion that Islam is just another religion, kind of like Presbyterians or Anglicans with funny clothes.
A willingness by people in the western democracies to draw the line, to accept the risk of being called bigoted, and to stand firm on our principles.
A Muslim taxi driver at a US airport refuses a passenger carrying wine from the duty-free? That is imposing HIS religion on that passenger. Buying and transporting booze is legal in our country. You have a taxi licence to serve the public. You can refuse a guy carring a bomb, for obvious safety reasons, but not liquor. And if three women are sharing a cab and one has to ride in front with you, you accept it, because that is how we do things in the west. You don’t like it? Hand in your taxi licence and get anorther job.
A Muslim gang goes around terrorizing Muslim girls into wearing hijabs? Stop them if you can directly, but if not, make a rule that no headgear of any kind is to be worn in the school. Here in the west, there is nothing wrong with being bare-headed.
An Imam preaches violence? Kick him out of the country. Or prosecute him if he is not an immigrant.
-You will not have a female driving inspector in the seat next to you? NO, WE WILL NOT ACCOMODATE YOU BY DISCRIMINATING AGAINST THIS WOMAN. Walk.
Frankly, not only do I believe that moderate Muslims exist, but I think that many of them would thank us for our formness and our insistence that western values be respected…
All I am saying is that we must recognize the clash of civilizations that is upon us. And if we are not willing to standup for our western identit nd values
Whooosh.
L4L simply forgot to include the [ sarcasm ] [ /sarcasm ] tags.
I suspect that the time to have summarized (or even presented) your position was in the OP, rather than wandering around citing anecdotes and ignoring facts while employing poor logic to simply whine “They’re ba-a-a-ad” until the thread got to 213 posts. (I also noticed that you rfused to address the information presented by calirobscur that provided more than a bit of counterbalance to the xenophobic claims of your “well respectred” experts. I’m sure that there are people in France and Canada who would consider Pat Buchanon a “respected” spokesman for his brand of xenophobia, as well.
To make my perspective clear: I have no problem withj telling the Minneapolis cabbies (who are basing their decisions on Somali cultural traditions, not on Muslim law) that they have to accept liquor bearing fares or move to the end of the line; I have no problem with telling some recent immigrant to pound salt if he insists that a pub owner change the name of the establishment to avoid offending the newcomer; I have no problem with telling anyone who wanders into our country that they must obey our laws.
I have rather more problem with running around shouting “The Muslims are coming. The Muslims are coming.” and pretending that every variant cultural idiosyncracy of every immigrant is based on a common religion when, in fact, it is based on many disparate cultural beliefs.
I believe the police apply pressure with the arrestable offence of “conduct liable to cause a breach of the peace” ie . one of the offended Muslims feels so outraged he feels obliged to put a brick through the window,the media turns up and wishing to get on telly some of his mates turn up and before you know it theres a mini riot.
The rioters of course get let off with a caution because the police dont want to inflame an already sensitive racial situation(and maybe get accused of institutional racism) and anyway they were only acting out of their religous beliefs and the businesses were advised to remove the offending items before hand,advice which they ignored .
In the aftermath the businesses find that any local ordinances applicable to them will be rigourously enforced by zealous coppers pissed because they werent listened to.
The Race Relations Board start poking around (they like to be seen on telly by their families aswell)just in case the landlord/shop owner and staff are racists .
The perception in Britain ,rightly or wrongly,is often that the accused has to prove their innocence of racial charges rather then vice versa,unless of course it is a white person making charges of racism against people of a different ethnicity when it is treated as a “silly season” item .
Boo. Oh well, I suppose it’s probably good I was mistaken.
No, the problem with this is that the shop owners enjoy breathing. The atmosphere this type of behavior springs from is a society of complete intolerance that is manifested in extreme violence.
In this case, the reality of the 80/20 rule is that a minority of people wish great harm on the majority.
I never understood this frothing of the mouth: “their threating our values” speech.
The only values my country has are those enshrined by law. When someone breaks that law (no matter their religion) they are punished. All those who think “we” should do otherwise are a shade away from fascists and really can go punch sand.