I'm sick of the rabid Islamophobia on these boards...

[obadiah]

I’ll have to admit I’m one of those Islamophobes you’re talking about. In fact give me a horse and a coat of armor. I’m ready for the crusades…

:knight1: :knight2: Here ya go, count me in too. I’m tired of the wishy-washy namby-pamby do gooders who think that a lot of good words and fluff will hold back the radical islamists. They are out for our blood, we must defend ourselves, just like our Lord told us to.
Luke 22: 35-38 : And He said to them, " When I sent you forth without a purse and leathern pouch and sandals, did you lack anything?" And they said, " Nothing." He then said to them, " But now, the one who hath a purse, let him take it, and in like manner, a leathern pouch; and the one who hath not a sword, let him sell his outer garment and buy one. For I say to you that this that hath been written must yet be accomplished in Me: ’ And He was reckoned with the lawless ’ for also the things concerning Me have an end." And they said, " Lord, behold, here are two swords." And He said to them, " It is enough."

 

[obadiah]

Question for you: Is it “permissible” to love the sinner and hate the sin?

I love all moslems as people, but I “do not like” their sin of moslem-ness.

Am I to be banned?

What does “make look bad” mean?

What does “brings the forum down” mean?

What do YOU mean by “troll”?

If you’re going to pronounce “banning” for these behaviors, let’s understand what you mean by your terms.

Thanks. Looking forward to your meaningful response to these questions.

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

ALOHA NUI LOA Keikiolu. I agree with you. As for the Muslim defender, how has the West oppressed Islam for 200 years?

 

[Keikiolu]

I am glad to hear you’d protect your Muslim neighbor.

I am no less frustrated that moderate Muslims do not make more of an effort to oppose the extremists, but look at your own language, “tighten the screws.” The authoritarian governments (including Saddam himself) which Western powers have been propping up were doing quite an adequate job of suppressing extremists. Those sorts of regimes certainly knew literally how to tighten the screws.

And what is the result? Moderate Muslims alienated from our client states (even one that often undermines our interests lkike Saudi Arabia is at the end of the day a client state of ours) and ever more receptive to the extremists’ message.

You don’t turn a “moderate moslem” into an “extremist moslem”. That particular “moderate moslem”, or non-moslem, is informed of the extremely attractive message that is in the koran and acts in accord with actual (true) islam.

A “moderate moslem” who does not become an “extremist” simply doesn’t know their religion very well, and is not motivated to remain what the “extremists (jihadis)” would call a non-moslem.

It is not just extremists on the Muslim side whose actions are polarizing the relationship between Muslims and Christians/Jews.

What “polarizes” moslems, which actually means “gives them motivation to discover the true meaning of islam”, is the same “force” that drives a bully to be a bully. The realization that he can do whatever he wants as long as he has the shear power to not (immediately) pay for his bullying.

What “polarizes” Jews/Christians/Hindus/Animists/any-non-moslem is the behavior of “polarized” moslems.

What is this “mess” that afflicts so much of the Islamic world? Is it just that mess created by extremist violence? Or does it include the mess which we in the West have had a hand in making in the Islamic world for the last two centuries?

What is “the islamic world”? Isn’t it a huge number of “tribes” that act as they do for their own reasons?

Has “the west” offered them help in all possible ways, and in every sphere of life?

Should “the west” be blamed because they have refused to take it?

That mess to which extremist terrorism is a response, if a horribly and inexcusably misguided one?

Everything is a response. Yours is a meaningless statement, as it is applicable to any “victimization” situation.

The real question is why does this “victim” persist in bad (evil) behavior?

Simple answer: It works for them is some, or several ways.

How do we “lovingly” show them that their bad behavior is no longer “working for them”…?

I don’t consider what I am saying to reflect “political correctness” – just intellectual honesty, without which there can be no political realism that is other than rationalizing one’s own will to power.

You basically state that “the poor little victimized islamists need to be FIXED by the big evil west who was so bad to them”.

How do you suggest we “fix” these poor little victims?

(( And yes, you are spouting PC claptrap, as there’s no meat in anything you’ve said that justifies it as “intellectual honesty”. ))

Mahalo ke Akua…!
E pili mau na pomaikai ia oe. Aloha nui.

 

[pismopal]

Speaking the hard truth is " Bigotry" , “Islamophobic” , " should be banned" . Notice the hurling of terms meant to discourage but not a word of criticism for those who murder and persecute their neighbors worldwide. Christians and other non Islamic religions are raped, murdered, enslaved and dhimmified all over the world but not a word in support.
Not a plea for their persecutors to relent…have mercy…repent. Just…shut up you bigot…you islamophobic hate monger. When the murder, enslavement and crimes against humanity stop then I can be more conciliatory.

 

[nonsumd]

I’d say that they are meant not “to anger muslims” but to “defend the faith against muslims’ misrepresentations of themselves.”

Which Muslims’ misrepresentations of themselves?

The extremists of their extremism? Or the moderates of their non-extremism?

Or Muslims’ misrepresentations of Christianity?

Many posters appear to start from a premise that Islam is a completely evil religion, a blanket judgment that is bound to infuriate Muslims.

And, for the most part, Wiccans are far more like Christians than many care to admit in their moral viewpoint than muslims are; still, a goodly way apart. For the Wiccan Rede: “Do what thou whilst, aine ye harm none,” is a far sight more in line with the the messages of Christ:

Really? That’s the same Christ who said, “If you but look with lust upon a woman, you have already commited adultery with her”?

Clearly a Sola Scriptura mentality is further from the essence of Christianity than from that of Islam; this is so because in Islam the Word of God is a Book (the Qur’an) while in Christianity the Word of God is a Person (Jesus Christ).

However, if we really look at Islamic history and practice, we see it is only recently (beginning with the rise of the Wahabbis in the 18th c.) that Muslims have approached the Qur’an in a way similar to the way Sola Scriptura Protestants have looked at the Bible.

Up to that point, Muslims looked for guidance to a much larger body of writings than just the Qur’an and to traditions and did not approach either without the guidance of established legal schools (the madhdhab), the closest equivalent Islam has had to the Catholic magisterium. Moreover, before the rise of Wahhabism the majority orientation of the whole Islamic world was Sufi rather than purely legalist (and that legalism was something different from the scripturalism of modern extremists).

The shift to Wahhabi-style scripturalism by a minority of Muslims parallels the rise of Christian fundamentalism; both are reactions to secularization. In the Islamic case secularization arrives in tandem with colonialism and neo-colonialism.

The more I study any religion the more complex and diverse it appears to me and the more useless and even unjust seem all my previous generalizations about it.

That is a separate issue from whether we should reduce people and their motivations to any ideological system to which they happen to subscribe. Ideology is only one factor among many that motivate people to any action, including violence.

I do understand the attraction of blaming Muhammad’s military activity 1400 years ago for the Palestinian youth who becomes a suicide bomber.

We don’t need to remind ourselves that his family has been dispossessed of their homeland, that he lives in oppressive conditions in a refugee camp or in a bantustan ringed by checkpoints, etc., etc. It absolves us of having to address his grievances. We are far more powerful than his people are, so we can actually afford to let terrorism continue. Certainly that we are willing to let terrorism perpetuate itself is evident in how willing we are to ignore root causes other than an “evil religion.”

 

[nonsumd]

I just see that no one gets anywhere by claiming exclusive victimhood, not self-righteous, self-blind Muslims and not self-righteous, self-blind Christians or Jews.

If you don’t think that Western powers have contributed to the present crisis of the Islamic world, then you don’t know history and, as the saying goes, you are bound to repeat it.

If a Muslim maintains that Muslims have always approached the Christian world in peace or never waged war against Christians unjustifiably or that Muslims have never oppressed non-Muslims, that Muslim does not know history either and is bound to repeat it.

Many posters can’t seem to see that they are applying a double standard to Christian and Muslim actions, which makes them no different from Muslim extremists who say violence in the name of Islam is right while violence in the name of anything else is wrong.

The Perpetual Victim sees himself as always in the right, even when he is doing something that manifestly puts him in the wrong.

 

[RevDrNorth]

What is this “mess” that afflicts so much of the Islamic world? Is it just that mess created by extremist violence? Or does it include the mess which we in the West have had a hand in making in the Islamic world for the last two centuries? That mess to which extremist terrorism is a response, if a horribly and inexcusably misguided one?

I don’t consider what I am saying to reflect “political correctness” – just intellectual honesty, without which there can be no political realism that is other than rationalizing one’s own will to power.

I am afraid I do not consider that intellectual honesty but rather stunted intellectual thought processes. That is somewhat like a child who blames his parents for everything in his life (even though he is 40) and says…I stole because you would not let me watch TV whenever I wanted, I committed rape because my father yelled at me, I beat women because my mother put me in time out and on and on. Except that we had less influence than a parent.

As long as people keep making excuses the problem will never be fixed.

This is one case where I have to say that Papal Infallability ought to be invoked. The Pope beautifully and succinctly stated the problem with extreme Islam. Mind you he got death threats for thinking the wrong thoughts and making them known. No I know… they just threatend him because of the Wests imperialist trends and history in the Middle East coupled with the fact that the Pope wears expensive robes and this leads to a have and have not situation in which the West is materialistic and creates envy in a suffering Islamic world. Therefore they being poor must react in the only way possible for poor people. Suicide bombing after all is simply the poor mans atomic bomb and so they really cannot be held responsible for the murders and torture since this is the result of oppresive Western culture. In fact let’s just imprison the Pope now for causing all of this to begin with.

This smacks of blame the victim nonesene and I find excuses such as yours to be highly paternalistic and disrespectful of Islam in that it implies they are children who cannot be held responsible for their actions since they are merely reacting as children to Western provocation.

 

[Montalban]

I just see that no one gets anywhere by claiming exclusive victimhood, not self-righteous, self-blind Muslims and not self-righteous, self-blind Christians or Jews.

If you don’t think that Western powers have contributed to the present crisis of the Islamic world, then you don’t know history and, as the saying goes, you are bound to repeat it.

The Perpetual Victim sees himself as always in the right, even when he is doing something that manifestly puts him in the wrong.

The role of perpetual victim is that played by Moslems and fostered by apologists such as yourself who ask questions about the past 200 years of western influence and ignore Islam started the war against Christendom.

 

[nonsumd]

I am afraid I do nto consider that intellectual honesty but rather stunted intellectual thought processes. That is somewhat like a child who blames his parents for everything in his life (even though he is 40) and says…I stole because you would not let me watch TV whenever I wanted, I committed rape because my father yelled at me, I beat women because my mother put me in time out and on and on. Except that we had less influence than a parent.

You are confusing what I consider to be my perspective and what you see to be the Muslims’ viewpoint.

I repeat yet again, to recognize what motivates people to do what they do is not to make excuses for them.

To ignore a people’s legitimate grievances against one’s people is to make excuses for one’s own people.

As long as people keep making excuses the problem will never be fixed.

I agree, but everyone, not just Muslims, should stop making excuses.

It is sad that the honest examination of conscience that Pope John Paul made on behalf of the Catholic people has not moved all Catholics to be as self-honest… or all non-Catholics.

This is one case where I have to say that Papal Infallability ought to be invoked. The Pope beautifully and succinctly stated the problem with extreme Islam…

I myself defended the Pope’s Regensburg speech on message boards. He was correct about the problem with extreme Islam, but what he said about extreme Islam does not change the fact that the Catechism recognizes that Muslims share with us faith in the God of Abraham and as such deserve more fraternal solidarity than I have seen expressed very often here.

And, lest we forget, the Pope’s real targets in that speech were secularism and a certain brand of Protestantism.

This smacks of blame the victim nonesene and I find excuses such as yours to be highly paternalistic and disrespectful of Islam in that it implies they are children who cannot be held responsible for their actions since they are merely reacting as children to Western provocation.

Time and again, I have said that no one, not Muslims, not Christians, not Jews, can claim to be a pure victim, so I find it odd that you should accuse me of “‘blame the victim’ nonsense.”

I wouldn’t call two hundred years of colonialism and neo-colonialism a mere “provocation.” And to refuse to dismiss that history of aggression agianst and exploitation of Muslims is not to refuse to condemn atrocities by Muslims, whether directly anti-colonial or not.

I don’t absolve Muslims of any crimes they have committed against Muslims, but nor do I absolve non-Muslims of any crimes they have committed against Muslims.

People seem to have forgotten that I first weighed in on this issue to challenge Muslim posters’ whitewashing the image of Muhammad.

 

[nonsumd]

The role of perpetual victim is that played by Moslems and fostered by apologists such as yourself who ask questions about the past 200 years of western influence and ignore Islam started the war against Christendom.

This is patent ignorance of history.

The Western assault on the Islamic world of the last two centuries began with Napoleon, who by the way tried to sell himself to the Egyptians as some kind of fellow Muslim. Interestingly, subjugating the Islamic Middle East was not an end in itself for him; it was only part of his grand strategy to challenge British power.

I am not an apologist for either side’s ungodliness. To try to be just to one side is not automatically to be unjust to another side.

As for the earlier history of Muslim-Christian conflict going back to the rise of Islam itself, it’s not a tale of only Muslims commiting atrocities against Christians.

Have you never heard of the Crusaders’ massacring almost the entire Muslim and Jewish population of Jerusalem? We know that from Christian chronicles, not just Muslim ones.

 

[Montalban]

[Koran 3.151] We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they set up with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and their abode is the fire, and evil is the abode of the unjust.

You are confusing what I consider to be my perspective and what you see to be the Muslims’ viewpoint.

I repeat yet again, to recognize what motivates people to do what they do is not to make excuses for them.

You are making exuses for them, or more precisely their religion; acting as an Islamic apologist, even if that’s not your intent.

You deny that they are acting “Islamically” because of certain notions about the undefninable nature of what it is to be Moslem.

I repeat my plea to you to read Bostom’s book “The Legacy of Jihad”. It’s a great sourcebook on Islamic opinion.

In fact read him in discussion here where he says, amongst others
“jihad is a fard al-kifaya, that is, that one must begin the fight against the enemy, even when he [the enemy] may not have taken the initiative to fight, because the Prophet…early on…allowed believers to defend themselves, later, however, he ordered them to take the initiative at certain times of the year, that is, at the end of the haram months, saying, “Kill the idolaters wherever you find them…” (Q9:5).
He finally ordered fighting without limitations, at all times and in all places, saying, “Fight those who do not believe in God, and in the Last Day…”(Q9:29); there are also other [similar] verses on the subject. This shows that it is a fard al-kifaya”

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Not just on Non-Catholic Religions, but what feels like every single board people are saying how all muslims are violent people who want to take over the world. Get a freaking grip. Everyone should just admit right here they hardly know anything about Islam apart from what they hear on the news about the latest body count from the Middle East. There are muslim terrorists and there is brutal sectarianism. Christians too have done these things in the past. Does that justify it? No but it should tell you something: that there are good and bad people of all faiths. Do you not know that there are many Muslims who despise all of this stuff? Probably not, most of you guys would likely rank them along with Santa Claus and Bigfoot.

**Maybe we enjoy our rabid Islamophobia **​

 

[Montalban]

This is patent ignorance of history.

No, it’s acceptance of history. It’s to acknowledge that the ‘west’ didn’t exist when Islamic terror began. I’ve already noted this.

Muhammad offered terrorism as a legitimate weapon and England, France, Italy, Spain etc weren’t even nations yet.

What you’re doing is what you’re accusing others of; ignoring history.

The Western assault on the Islamic world of the last two centuries began with Napoleon, who by the way tried to sell himself to the Egyptians as some kind of fellow Muslim. Interestingly, subjugating the Islamic Middle East was not an end in itself for him; it was only part of his grand strategy to challenge British power.

I don’t deny Napoleon attacked Egypt. This secularist’s actions aren’t therefore a contributor to Christian -v- Islamic animosity. France at that time had thrown out the Catholic church, officially (though of course there continued to be great public affinity with that church).

So your example is an officially atheist state attacks an Islamic state 1,100 years after Muhammad and this is the cause of, or the start of animosity between ‘the west’ and Islam?

I am not an apologist for either side’s ungodliness. To try to be just to one side is not automatically to be unjust to another side.

You say this, but you are an apologist WHEN you pretend that what they’re doing is not part of their faith.

As for the earlier history of Muslim-Christian conflict going back to the rise of Islam itself, it’s not a tale of only Muslims committing atrocities against Christians.

Cite me some examples. Moslems wiped out the Banu Quaresh tribe after they’d surrendered. This was admittedly a Jewish tribe, but it was done under Muhammad’s supervision

Have you never heard of the Crusaders’ massacring almost the entire Muslim and Jewish population of Jerusalem? We know that from Christian chronicles, not just Muslim ones.

I have indeed. That’s 600 years after Islam’s beginning. Somehow Islam was ‘reacting’ to atrocities that took place 600 years later?

So the sum of your argument is to pretend that Moslems aren’t acting Moslem, just ‘horrendous’ and it’s response to the west attacking them centuries after Moslems committed atrocities. That’s an apology for sure!

 

[Montalban]

**Maybe we enjoy our rabid Islamophobia **​

It’s a hobby!

 

[Athanasiy]

I do not justify the war in Iraq , but I justify the just war.
Thats the reason I was quoting the Bishopite not to justify the Iraq war , but to confirm that the war has a rules.

 

[Moneo]

Which Muslims’ misrepresentations of themselves? The extremists of their extremism? Or the moderates of their non-extremism? Or Muslims’ misrepresentations of Christianity?

Y’know, this would be an entirely new thread, but “moderate” and “extremist” sound like media jargon to me, just like the word “islamophobia”. I haven’t seen any evidence that Muslims perceive themselves in any such way within Islamic circles, only when it’s time to provide a soundbite for the evening news programme or the chat show for the consumption of non-Muslims. Even less is there an indication that those adjectives can be legitimately used to describe the interpretations of the Quran and the hadith which permit or incite to violence against non-Muslims and apostates.

Part of the problem is that lack of a magisterium or supreme, authoritative voice that can judge and determine which school of jurisprudence or theological thought represents orthodox Islam. The University of Al-Azhar in Cairo comes closest to fulfilling this role, and even their authority is often disputed by those who favour a stricter interpretation. And Al-Azhar doesn’t exactly appear to be a hotbed of Islamic liberalism.

What is an “extremist” interpretation? One that permits a Muslim to use violence to force conversion, punish apostasy, attack non-believers, etc.? But how is that extremism, when there are entire schools of legal thought in Islam, with no small number of followers, which support that interpretation and put it into practice?

Many posters appear to start from a premise that Islam is a completely evil religion, a blanket judgment that is bound to infuriate Muslims.

This may be so in some cases. I start from the premise that it is a false religion, and that whatever truth it may possess was lifted wholesale from Judaism and Christianity. If that infuriates them, tough. As others have pointed out, a significant portion of the Islamic population appears to enjoy playing the role of the infuriated, aggrieved victim. I don’t like it when Muslim posters on these forums say that we are wrong, that our Scriptures have been contaminated, that we’ve distorted God’s revelation, are blaspheming when we attribute divinity to Christ etc., etc., but I’ve got better things to do than go stomping around the streets in an infantile rage demanding that Muslims be punished for blaspheming and insulting Jesus.

However, if we really look at Islamic history and practice, we see it is only recently (beginning with the rise of the Wahabbis in the 18th c.) that Muslims have approached the Qur’an in a way similar to the way Sola Scriptura Protestants have looked at the Bible.

Up to that point, Muslims looked for guidance to a much larger body of writings than just the Qur’an and to traditions and did not approach either without the guidance of established legal schools (the madhdhab), the closest equivalent Islam has had to the Catholic magisterium. Moreover, before the rise of Wahhabism the majority orientation of the whole Islamic world was Sufi rather than purely legalist (and that legalism was something different from the scripturalism of modern extremists).

The shift to Wahhabi-style scripturalism by a minority of Muslims parallels the rise of Christian fundamentalism; both are reactions to secularization. In the Islamic case secularization arrives in tandem with colonialism and neo-colonialism.

Hmmm … lots of meat here. Let’s just try to cut to the bone … violent fundamentalism is by no means a recent phenomena in Islam, rather it is recurring theme every time some group or another decides that the ummah have drifted away from the purity of Quranic teaching, or have been contaminated by contact with the kaffir. The Wahhabis are really just the latest in a long line of fanatical “purifiers” of Islam. It’s actually a permanent, monotonous theme in the religion. The Almoravids and the Almohads are just two of examples of this, along with everybody’s favourite party guests, the Taliban.

But even if we allow that the Wahhabi’s represent some kind of a break with the predominant orientation in Islamic history, then we still have a problem in that it is the Wahhabis who, funded by the Saudi Arabian government, are busily founding Quranic schools around the world, including in Western nations and that their interpretation is therefore the one in which young, Muslim men are schooled when they go off to become imans, the preachers in mosques. So, Wahhabist Islamic theology is the dominant theological school in Islam at the moment. I don’t think the Wahhabists are therefore such a minority.

 

[nonsumd]

Since a number of you are accusing me of being an “apologist for Islam,” I am going to share something that I posted on the Guardian (the UK newspaper)‘s website in the wake of Pope Benedict’s Regensburg lecture. I was writing in response to an article by Soumaya Ghanoushi that condemned the Pope for his references to the Islamic example of separating faith from reason (though his main targets were a certain brand of Protestants’ doing the same thing and secularists dropping faith altogether).

Here’s the original link:

guardian.co.uk/pope/story/0,1875581,00.html

[My comment is under the alias “nonsumdignus”]

Here’s what I wrote:

---

Soumaya Ghanoushi writes:

“Islam is still perceived [by the Catholic Church] as
the other, the embodiment of evil. Only in this
context can we make full sense of the Pope’s
statements, and indeed of much of what is said today
on the subject of Islam.”

I am dismayed at the ignorance such an assertion
betrays. The actual context of the Pope’s statements,
i.e. the official teaching of the Catholic Church as
proclaimed in “The Catechism of the Catholic Church”
promulgated in 1997 by Pope John Paul II (whose
principal adviser in matters of theology was Cardinal
Ratzinger, now Pope Benedict XVI), maintains this:

"841 The Church’s relationship with the Muslims. “The
plan of salvation also includes those who acknowledge
the Creator, in the first place amongst whom are the
Muslims; these profess to hold the faith of Abraham,
and together with us they adore the one, merciful God,
mankind’s judge on the last day.”

Moreover, this understanding of the relationship
between Catholicism and Islam is not something tucked
away in a book ordinary believers never read (quite a
few do read it, actually) – the sentiment is
expressed every year during the petitions offered
during the Holy Saturday/Easter Vigil liturgy when
Catholics pray for Muslims as fellow heirs of God’s
promise to Abraham.

Responsible scholars should work to challenge
stereotypes, not perpetuate them – including such
stereotypes as the one that reduces the Catholic
Church’s approach to Islam to stereotyping it as a
“demonic other.” The truth is rather more complex than
that, just as the historical reality of Islam’s
attitude to other religions is more complex than the
attitude refelcted in the Qur’anic injunction “There
is no compulsion in religion” (a line that Pope
Benedict quoted before quoting Emperor Manuel
Palaiologos’ words).

The Catholic Church respects Islam and Muslims, but it
does not condone violence done in the name of Islam.
Nor does it ignore its own history of using violence
– Pope John Paul II officially and publicly asked
forgiveness from other faith communities, including
Muslims, for violence Catholics have committed against
them in history. The context of Pope Benedict’s
statements includes this process of the Catholic
Church’s examination of conscience. It is those
outside the Church who choose to forget this history
who are really guilty of “reviving medieval poison.”

(cont.)

 

[nonsumd]

(My response to anti-Benedict comment in the Guardian, cont.)

There is much that I would like to say on this subject
if I had the time, but there is one of Ghannoushi’s
rhetorical flourishes that I cannot let go:

“Who is to convince Muslims now that the west is not
waging a crusade against them, in an alliance between
Bush and Benedict, between the powers of the temporal
and the sacred?”

In the recent conflict between Israel and Hizbullah,
Pope Benedict called for an immediate ceasefire while
the USA, the UK, and some other Western governments
approved of Israel taking the time it needed to
suppress Hizbullah. After Condoleeza Rice proclaimed
that Israel’s aggression marked the “birth pangs of a
new Middle East,” the Pope condemned the fighting as
“feeding hatred and the desire for revenge.” Let us
not forget that Pope John Paul opposed the US-led war
on Iraq, saying warfare is never the solution.

Pope Benedict’s speech was far more aimed at
criticizing the secular West and even the Protestant
Reformers than at criticizing any sector or strand
within Islam. The eclipse of reason within the
Islamic tradition is a real issue of concern for
Muslims and non-Muslims (in the middle ages there was
debate over the relationship between philosophy and
theology among Muslim thinkers and Muslim thinkers who
grappled with Aristotle were precisely those who
inspired Catholic thinkers to work to reconcile faith
and reason). The ascendancy of groups willing to use
violence to promote their interpretation of Islam is a
real issue of concern to Muslims and non-Muslims.

It might be hard for many to recognize this, but the
greatest friend of the Muslim community in the West is
the Catholic Church (though the Church cannot be
reduced to what we label as the “West”) – and
sometimes the greatest thing a true friend can do for
a friend is to invite him to self-examination and
self-criticism.

 

[TobyLue]

Please bear with me – I’m going to post this for what its worth. I received it as an e-mail from a priest friend of mine. It was sent to him and he forwarded to me. It make take two posts. I don’t know if the name of the pilot is fictitious or not. But I think it bears contemplation…

Subject: YOU WORRY ME!

This pilot hit the nail on the head in his open letter. He needs to be awarded a Medal for having the FORTITUDE to say all this in a very profound way!

The paper stated today that some Muslim doctor is saying we are profiling him because he has been checked three times while getting on an airplane.

The following is a letter from a pilot. This well-spoken man, who is a >pilot with American Airlines, says what is in his heart, beautifully.

Read, absorb, and pass this on.

“YOU WORRY ME!”
By American Airlines Pilot - Captain John Maniscalco

I’ve been trying to say this since 9-11, but you worry me. I wish you didn’t. I wish when I walked down the streets of this country that I love, that your color and culture still blended with the beautiful human landscape we enjoy in this country. But you don’t blend in anymore. I notice you, and it worries me.
I notice you because I can’t help it anymore. People from your homelands, professing to be Muslims, have been attacking and killing my fellow citizens and our friends for more than 20 years now. I don’t fully understand their grievances and hate, but I know that nothing can justify the inhumanity of their attacks.

On September 11, nineteen ARAB-MUSLIMS hijacked four jetliners in my country. They cut the throats of women in front of children and brutally stabbed to death others. They took control of those planes and crashed them into buildings killing thousands of proud fathers, loving sons, wise grandparents, elegant daughters, best friends, favorite coaches, fearless public servants, and children’s mothers.
The Palestinians celebrated, the Iraqis were overjoyed, as was most of the Arab world. So, I notice you now. I don’t want to be worried. I don’t want to be consumed by the same rage and hate and prejudice that has destroyed the soul of these terrorists. But, I need your help. As a rational American, trying to protect my country and family in an irrational and unsafe world, I must know how to tell the difference between you, and the Arab/Muslim terrorist.

How do I differentiate between the true Arab/Muslim-Americans and the Arab/Muslim terrorists in our communities who are attending our schools, enjoying our parks, and living in OUR communities under the protection of OUR constitution, while they plot the next attack that will slaughter these same good neighbors and children?
The events of September 11th changed the answer. It is not my responsibility to determine which of you embraces our great country, with ALL of its religions, with ALL of its different citizens, with all of its faults. It is time for every Arab/Muslim in this country to determine it for me.

I want to know, I demand to know, and I have a right to know, whether or not you love America. Do you pledge allegiance to its flag? Do you proudly display it in front of your house, or on your car? Do you pray in your many daily prayers that Allah will bless this nation, that He will protect and prosper it? Or, do you pray that Allah with destroy it in one of your Jihads? Are you thankful for the freedom that only this nation affords? A freedom that was paid for by the blood of hundreds of thousands of patriots who gave their lives for this country? Are you willing to preserve this freedom by also paying the ultimate sacrifice? Do you love America? If this is your commitment, then I need YOU to start letting ME know
about it.
Your Muslim leaders in this nation should be flooding the media at this time with hard facts on your faith, and what hard actions you are taking as a community and as a religion to protect the United States of America.

Please, no more benign overtures of regret for the death of the innocent, because I worry about who you regard as innocent. No more benign overtures of condemnation for the unprovoked attacks, because I worry about what is unprovoked to you I am not interested in any more sympathy. I am interested only in action. What will you do for America - our great country - at this time of crisis, at this time of war?
I want to see Arab-Muslims waving the AMERICAN flag in the streets. I want to hear you chanting “Allah Bless America.” I want to see young Arab/Muslim men enlisting in the military. I want to see a commitment of money, time, and emotion to the victims of this butchering and to this nation as a whole.
–contd…

 

[TobyLue]

–continued

The FBI has a list of over 400 people they want to talk to regarding the WTC attack. Many of these people live and socialize right now in Muslim communities. You know them. You know where they are. Hand them over to us, now! But I have seen little even approaching this sort of action. Instead I have seen an already closed and secretive community close even tighter. You have disappeared from the streets. You have posted armed security guards at your facilities. You have threatened lawsuits. You have screamed for protection from reprisals.

The very few Arab/Muslim representatives that HAVE appeared in the media were defensive and equivocating. They seemed more concerned with making sure that the United States proves who was responsible before taking action. They seemed more concerned with protecting their fellow Muslims from violence directed towards them in the United States and abroad than they did with supporting our country and denouncing “leaders” like Khadafi, Hussein, Farrakhan, and Arafat.
If the true teachings of Islam proclaim tolerance and peace and love for all people, then I want chapter and verse from the Koran and statements from popular Muslim leaders to back it up. What good is it if the teachings in the Koran are good, and pure, and true, when your
“leaders” are teaching fanatical interpretations, terrorism, and intolerance? It matters little how good Islam SHOULD BE if huge numbers of the world’s

Muslims interpret the teachings of Mohammed incorrectly and adhere to a degenerative form of the religion. A form that has been demonstrated to us over and over again. A form whose structure is built upon a foundation of violence, death, and suicide. A form whose members are recruited from the prisons around the world. A form whose members (some as young as five years old) are seen day after day, week in and week out, year after year, marching in the streets around the world, burning effigies of our presidents, burning the American flag, shooting weapons into the air. A form whose members convert from a peaceful religion, only to take up arms against the great United States of America, the country of their birth. A form whose rules are so twisted, that their traveling members refuse to show their faces at airport security checkpoints, in the name of Islam.

We will NEVER allow the attacks of September 11, or any others for that matter, to take way that which is so precious to us: Our rights under the greatest constitution in the world.

I want to know where every Arab Muslim in this country stands, and I think it is my right and the right of every true citizen of this country to demand it. A right paid for by the blood of thousands of my brothers and sisters who died protecting the very constitution that is protecting you and your family. I am pleading with you to let me know. I want you here as my brother, my neighbor, my friend, as a fellow American.

But there can be no gray areas or ambivalence regarding your allegiance, and it is up to YOU, to show ME, where YOU stand. Until then, “YOU WORRY ME!”