Why do Catholics distrust Muslims?

[pismopal]

Hello, I just have a quick question: when you say that you distrust Muslims, are you speaking on a large scale, such as countries? Or are you speaking on an isolated one, such as you don’t trust the average American Muslim walking down the street? If the former, we were arguing about very, very different things, and I would like to apologize for misinterpreting your stance.

In my personal experience with muslims…I worked among them for over a decade…some were very personable…some sullen and unfriendly…some friendly but not good mixers. Just like any other group with big cultural differences I suppose with the exception that I knew that their loyalty to Islam trumped their friendliness toward me…if there was any…and it trumped any attachment to a free society since Islam is not about freedom. When I know that a person would select Sharia law over the constitutional protections that we enjoy here in this country…how much trust can there really be? Going from the micro to the macro…which Islamic countries leaders do we trust? There are a lot of Islamic countries to choose from…which one are we closest to…which one has leaders who are friendly towards western style free societies? If for example we awoke to find that a substantial percentage of our citizens…voters.were now muslim. Where do you think they would want to go in terms of freedom of religion…freedom of association? I would give a muslim who needed assistance the same help that I would give anyone else who needed it but I am not obligated by my religion or any other code to trust someone who has not or who cannot earn it.
Thanks…I hope my position is clearer

 

[pismopal]

I don’t care about you being blunt. I care that you have engaged in malicious speculation and that your reasons are patently flimsy.

OK…thank you for your forthright opinion. It is not that I don’t care what you think…it is just that I cannot do anything about it. I don’t think my expressed opinion about a certain poster were any more malicious than your expressed opinion of my motives. I could not just be wrong in your opinion…I am malicious.

 

[Contarini]

OK…thank you for your forthright opinion. It is not that I don’t care what you think…it is just that I cannot do anything about it. I don’t think my expressed opinion about a certain poster were any more malicious than your expressed opinion of my motives. I could not just be wrong in your opinion…I am malicious.

It’s objectively malicious to put the worst possible construction on someone’s posts.

Peace_of_Cake has said nothing that even remotely justifies your speculation. If I were to speculate that you are really a Muslim trying to make Christians look bad, I would be malicious, right? And I hope if I said anything so silly, people would call me on it.

There are Christians who hold views you disagree with. You don’t have to like the fact, but if you choose to make up paranoid fantasies about these Christians really being Muslims you are doing yourself a serious disservice.

Edwin

 

[pismopal]

It’s objectively malicious to put the worst possible construction on someone’s posts.

Peace_of_Cake has said nothing that even remotely justifies your speculation. If I were to speculate that you are really a Muslim trying to make Christians look bad, I would be malicious, right? And I hope if I said anything so silly, people would call me on it.

There are Christians who hold views you disagree with. You don’t have to like the fact, but if you choose to make up paranoid fantasies about these Christians really being Muslims you are doing yourself a serious disservice.

Edwin

Try looking up words before you use them because they all mean something.
I hope you don’t expect a fee for your psychoanalysis of my posts. If you think there aren’t people on blogs who misrepresent themselves you are mistaken. You are certainly not qualified to recognise paranoid fantasies at any rate. And by the way, I have lived a long, happy and successful life without your help and advice…let me struggle on without it for as long as I am able. And I will be the judge of what does and doesn’t justify what I say in a post…got it:thumbsup:

 

[Marybeloved]

Edwin, Peace of Cake has herself confessed severally to being taken for a Muslim online. I don’t think that it’s unjustified speculation when admittedly so many people get that same impression. I think Pismol may have also expressed himself rather sharply. I myself have thought the same thing, though- That Peace of Cake, even if not officially, or even if only unconsciously, at least holds Islamic beliefs by conviction though she may not admit it probably even to herself. In any case, this is off topic and might get the thread closed (perhaps it should?) You two are starting to snap at each other rather uncharitably, you might get a little ‘spanking’ if it goes further than it has.

Peace!

 

[JRRTFAN]

As title suggests… Discuss

I don’t personally know any Muslims. But if you watch “Of Gods and Men” and look at what has happened to Christians in the Muslim middle East you might come away with a certain sense of caution. Personally, I’d be scared to death to be a practicing Christian in some place like Egypt or Libya. Maybe the resedent persons are abusive to Catholics because they don’t like the pope or they just like to be abusive but my guess is there is something about the tenets of Islam that holds the key.

 

[schaick]

I don’t personally know any Muslims. But if you watch “Of Gods and Men” and look at what has happened to Christians in the Muslim middle East you might come away with a certain sense of caution. Personally, I’d be scared to death to be a practicing Christian in some place like Egypt or Libya. Maybe the resedent persons are abusive to Catholics because they don’t like the pope or they just like to be abusive but my guess is there is something about the tenets of Islam that holds the key.

*After the rapid expansion of the Muslim dominion in the 7th century, Muslims leaders were required to work out a way of dealing with Non-Muslims, who remained in the majority in many areas for centuries. The solution was to develop the notion of the “dhimma”, or “protected person”. The Dhimmi were required to pay an extra tax, but usually they were unmolested. This compares well with the treatment meted out to non-Christians in Christian Europe. The Pact of Umar is supposed to have been the peace accord offered by the Caliph Umar to the Christians of Syria, a “pact” which formed the patter of later interaction. *

fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.html

In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. This is a letter to the servant of God Umar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of such-and-such a city. When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct (aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:

We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks’ cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims.

We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.

We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.

We shall not teach the Qur’an to our children.

We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.

We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.

We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.

We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.

We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.

We shall not sell fermented drinks.

We shall clip the fronts of our heads.

We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists

We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.

We shall not take slaves who have been allotted to Muslims.

We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.

(When I brought the letter to Umar, may God be pleased with him, he added, “We shall not strike a Muslim.”)

We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.

If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.

Umar ibn al-Khittab replied: Sign what they ask, but add two clauses and impose them in addition to those which they have undertaken. They are: “They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims,” and “Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact.”

from Al-Turtushi, Siraj al-Muluk, pp. 229-230.

 

[Contarini]

Try looking up words before you use them because they all mean something.
I hope you don’t expect a fee for your psychoanalysis of my posts. If you think there aren’t people on blogs who misrepresent themselves you are mistaken. You are certainly not qualified to recognise paranoid fantasies at any rate. And by the way, I have lived a long, happy and successful life without your help and advice…let me struggle on without it for as long as I am able. And I will be the judge of what does and doesn’t justify what I say in a post…got it:thumbsup:

My remarks are not intended as psychoanalysis. “Paranoid” is a term used in the vernacular and not merely a term of art.

It is paranoid, in the vernacular sense, to assume that someone who holds a more favorable view of Islam than you do must be a Muslim.

I am happy that you have lived a long, happy, and successful life. However, that does not excuse your irrational accusation against a fellow poster.

Edwin

 

[Contarini]

Edwin, Peace of Cake has herself confessed severally to being taken for a Muslim online. I don’t think that it’s unjustified speculation when admittedly so many people get that same impression.

Of course. It’s move 1 in the irrational anti-Islamist’s arsenal–accuse anyone who disagrees with you of being a Muslim in disguise. Since we all “know” that Muslims are compulsive liars under the rubric of “taqiyya” (exactly the same thing that Protestants once “knew” about Catholics, by the way), this accusation cannot be disproven and is accepted automatically as plausible by many people. Such an accusation poisons the discussion into which it is introduced.

I have been “accused” of being a Muslim myself, simply for disagreeing with some of the extreme things people say about Islam. This tactic is an irresponsible and immoral one and I will oppose it wherever I see it.

myself have thought the same thing, though- That Peace of Cake, even if not officially, or even if only unconsciously, at least holds Islamic beliefs by conviction though she may not admit it probably even to herself.

Well, that thought was unworthy of you and makes no sense. Now we not only have secret Muslims who lie about being Muslims, but unconscious Muslims who don’t even know they are Muslims? What is this, Manchurian Candidate? Can you not hear how paranoid your speculations sound?

There are a lot of Christians who hold much more favorable views of Islam than are commonly accepted on this forum. Now these people may be deluded, but they exist, and they are not Muslims. That is simply a fact. Nothing peace_of_cake has said is unusual for a moderate Christian interested in pursuing peace and common understanding with Muslims. There are many, many Christians who say exactly the same things. (My own views are a bit more cautious, as I’ve indicated.) The fact that expression of such views gets someone accused of being a Muslim says something disturbing about the climate of this forum.

In any case, this is off topic and might get the thread closed (perhaps it should?) You two are starting to snap at each other rather uncharitably, you might get a little ‘spanking’ if it goes further than it has.

LOL! I have nothing to lose here. I hope the moderators do pay some attention to what is going on in this thread, and I hope they make the right decision–that is to say, that accusations of dishonesty are illegitimate unless there is some concrete evidence (and the fact that someone has a more favorable view of Islam than you do is certainly not concrete evidence). One of the many silly patterns that develops in online discussions is to accuse someone of being uncharitable for speaking sternly against an uncharitable post. Accusing people of dishonesty without any evidence is uncharitable. Calling out such behavior is not uncharitable. If the moderators decide otherwise, that’s fine. If I get banned from the forum (which hasn’t happened in seven years of my participation), I might get more “real work” done.

Edwin

 

[karebear92]

LOL! I have nothing to lose here. I hope the moderators do pay some attention to what is going on in this thread, and I hope they make the right decision–that is to say, that accusations of dishonesty are illegitimate unless there is some concrete evidence (and the fact that someone has a more favorable view of Islam than you do is certainly not concrete evidence). One of the many silly patterns that develops in online discussions is to accuse someone of being uncharitable for speaking sternly against an uncharitable post. Accusing people of dishonesty without any evidence is uncharitable. Calling out such behavior is not uncharitable. If the moderators decide otherwise, that’s fine. If I get banned from the forum (which hasn’t happened in seven years of my participation), I might get more “real work” done.

Edwin

I agree, and peace_of_cake and I seemed to hold somewhat similar views, but I will admit that if you look at his/her posting history, he/she tends to favor those regarding Muslims. Not that it is proof that he/she is a muslim, but I can certainly see how it could lead one to believe that he/she is a Muslim.

 

[Marybeloved]

Of course. It’s move 1 in the irrational anti-Islamist’s arsenal–accuse anyone who disagrees with you of being a Muslim in disguise. Since we all “know” that Muslims are compulsive liars under the rubric of “taqiyya” (exactly the same thing that Protestants once “knew” about Catholics, by the way), this accusation cannot be disproven and is accepted automatically as plausible by many people. Such an accusation poisons the discussion into which it is introduced.

I have been “accused” of being a Muslim myself, simply for disagreeing with some of the extreme things people say about Islam. This tactic is an irresponsible and immoral one and I will oppose it wherever I see it.

There’s a clear difference between someone who speaks favorably about Islam and someone who displays offence at objections to Muhammad’s behavior as recorded in Islamic texts and says that they fall short of a person claiming a divine calling. There’s plenty of the former here w/out suspicions of being a Muslim. The latter, however, can be expected from a Muslim and is very strange for someone who is not. A catholic can object to lies about Muhammad being peddled around, but about what authentic hadith tells of Muhammad? Only a person with some personal investment in his claims would be offended. You yourself are displaying the same irrationality and paranoia that you are accusing others of in lumping it all together in your self-righteous indignation.

Well, that thought was unworthy of you and makes no sense. Now we not only have secret Muslims who lie about being Muslims, but unconscious Muslims who don’t even know they are Muslims? What is this, Manchurian Candidate? Can you not hear how paranoid your speculations sound?

Mock my views all you want. They are perfectly valid given my own interactions with Peace and I made them known to her, that I believed that whatever she called herself, Catholic by baptism or not, she has developed some convictions about Muhammad’s claims having been true.

There are a lot of Christians who hold much more favorable views of Islam than are commonly accepted on this forum. Now these people may be deluded, but they exist, and they are not Muslims. That is simply a fact. Nothing peace_of_cake has said is unusual for a moderate Christian interested in pursuing peace and common understanding with Muslims. There are many, many Christians who say exactly the same things. (My own views are a bit more cautious, as I’ve indicated.) The fact that expression of such views gets someone accused of being a Muslim says something disturbing about the climate of this forum.

The fact that you assume your views are the only rational ones is what is disturbing. I myself expressed the same views you expressed here, that Peace may just be progressive though she appears Muslim, but the fact is that she does come off as Muslim and people are not dumb or paranoid because they notice the obvious and the reasonable suspicions that flow from it. Pismopal could have phrased his views much better than he did, that’s for sure, but his conclusions are not so ridiculous as you insist they are.

One of the many silly patterns that develops in online discussions is to accuse someone of being uncharitable for speaking sternly against an uncharitable post.

More paranoia from you- I was asking you both to cool it as it was starting to look nasty. Correcting an uncharitable post by being uncharitable is not cool either.

Accusing people of dishonesty without any evidence is uncharitable. Calling out such behavior is not uncharitable.

No it’s not, but you don’t get to be nasty yourself because you’re the one doing the correcting. Take your imbalanced response to my post, for example. You should take your own advise, Edwin. And I was not issuing threats about getting you banned, That’s just more irrationality and paranoia on your part- I was asking you both (from my own unpleasant experience) to take a step back rather than risk loosing the privileges of conversing here unnecessarily, temporarily or not.

 

[Contarini]

There’s a clear difference between someone who speaks favorably about Islam and someone who displays offence at objections to Muhammad’s behavior as recorded in Islamic texts and says that they fall short of a person claiming a divine calling.

Not necessarily. For instance, an ecumenical Protestant is typically going to object to the version of anti-Catholicism that consists in exaggerating both the evidence for and significance of papal misbehavior. That doesn’t have anything to do with the Protestant in question believing in papal authority (necessarily). In fact, those of us who think there may be something to papal authority are more likely to be bothered by the evidence for bad papal behavior. A Jew who wants good relationships with Christians is going to be rather hostile to Jewish descriptions of Jesus as a “false god” or to any attempt by fellow Jews to identify Jesus with the false prophets whose punishment in the next world is described in the Talmud. And so on. Religious communities develop patterns of vilifying each other’s venerated figures. Part of maintaining good relationships with people of other religious perspectives is moving away from those patterns.

Now as a historian, I’m cautious about any attempt to put interreligious diplomacy above the evidence. I have disagreed with PoC on several occasions, because I don’t want to whitewash Islam any more than I want to slander it (well, I’d rather err on the former side than the latter, but I’d rather not do either!). But that is no evidence for PoC being a Muslim.

The latter, however, can be expected from a Muslim and is very strange for someone who is not. A catholic can object to lies about Muhammad being peddled around, but about what authentic hadith tells of Muhammad? Only a person with some personal investment in his claims would be offended.

No, that’s not true. It is possible to take “authentic” traditions or evidence and put the worst possible construction on them. And a person with the perspective PoC claims–a Catholic who wants to understand Islam and promote peace between the two religions–would quite reasonably object to anything that remotely approached such a tactic.

You yourself are displaying the same irrationality and paranoia that you are accusing others of in lumping it all together in your self-righteous indignation.

There you go again with the “tu quoque.” It’s not paranoid to say that PoC has said nothing that remotely implies being a Muslim.

The fact that you assume your views are the only rational ones is what is disturbing. I myself expressed the same views you expressed here, that Peace may just be progressive though she appears Muslim, but the fact is that she does come off as Muslim and people are not dumb or paranoid because they notice the obvious and the reasonable suspicions that flow from it.

Dumb has nothing to do with it. I never suggested that anyone here was dumb. But you and others are working with a paradigm that assumes that if people defend Islam or Muhammad they must be Muslim and can’t simply be interested in promoting a fair and sympathetic understanding of other religious traditions. That’s a toxic paradigm. It makes serious discussion impossible. Hence my strong opposition to it.

And I was not issuing threats about getting you banned,

I didn’t think you were. I was simply saying that I’m going to go on calling it as I see it, and if the moderators don’t like what I’m doing, that’s not the end of the world as far as I’m concerned.

A final note: it is of course possible that PoC really is interested in converting to Islam. But for that matter, it’s also possible that pismopal or one of the other very anti-Muslim folks here will wind up becoming a Muslim. It’s often the most virulent anti-Catholics who wind up becoming Catholic–Protestants who have a more moderate attitude to Catholicism in the first place often see no need to do so. Expressing a moderate, sympathetic view of a religion is not in itself evidence that one is considering conversion to that religion. If your opposition to Islam is based on the idea that Muhammad was a wicked person and/or that Islam promotes violence, then if you come to believe otherwise, you may consider converting to Islam. My own disagreement with Islam is based on my belief in the Incarnation. I could be persuaded that Islam was the most benign religion on the planet and that Muhammad was a worthy candidate for canonization and still not feel any desire to become a Muslim. (I do not, in fact, think either of these things!)

Edwin

 

[Marybeloved]

There you go again with the “tu quoque.” It’s not paranoid to say that PoC has said nothing that remotely implies being a Muslim.

You’re right, it’s not, but you certainly did more than make this sober little statement here. You mocked my views and told me I’m irrational and paranoid because I stated my own impression from my interactions with Peace that she may have developed convictions about Islam.

Dumb has nothing to do with it. I never suggested that anyone here was dumb.

Not in those words you didn’t.

But you and others are working with a paradigm that assumes that if people defend Islam or Muhammad they must be Muslim and can’t simply be interested in promoting a fair and sympathetic understanding of other religious traditions.

This is an assumption you are making. I myself have expressed both views. There’s plenty of evidence for Catholics, liberal and conservative, defending Islam. The impression Peace gives is different, hence the suspicions which she herself admits she suffers.

Expressing a moderate, sympathetic view of a religion is not in itself evidence that one is considering conversion to that religion.

No its not, and again, Peace is not the only one who expresses these sympathetic views here.

If your opposition to Islam is based on the idea that Muhammad was a wicked person and/or that Islam promotes violence, then if you come to believe otherwise, you may consider converting to Islam.

I disbelieve Islam because it’s not true. I’m Catholic because it’s the truth.

 

[Peace_of_cake]

Yikes! I’ve left quite an impression…!?!
Ok so I’m male, late 20’s and based in Leeds, W Yorkshire, England. Originally from Manchester. I attend the Universities chaplancy there, St Mark’s, as I’m linked with the University (School of Arabic and Islamic studies). Although attend mass at Our Lady Of Lourdes. Do we need to go into that I follow the Latin rite, but unusually our priest can do both Latin and Ukranian. Amusingly we have little discussions over this as he keeps wanting to bring in icons etc. Fairly close with the Fransciscan friars in neighbouring Bradford too. I didn’t really bother putting anything in my profile because i thought it didnt matter; thought id be judged on the strength of my argument!? Had no idea this would be such an issue?
Anyway, some interesting posts both negative and positive. As for the positive then I think people feel much more comfortable distancing themselves from people that challenge there little world. As for the negative, the I was just being pro-Islam as a reaction to the comments and pointing out that ill thought out polemics will do nothing but cause resentment and entrench people so raise your game!
Hope that clears things up a bit

 

[Marybeloved]

Ok so I’m male…

Oops!:blushing: Why did I think you were a :curtsey:?

 

[the_muslim]

do not see to the muslims in theese days they get away by far from their religion …so
Because the only language that everyone can understand is the language of science; away from the emotions; away from history … Why there is no talk here about miracles of the Koran and the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad? you will find it wonderfull and you will see the origine and the reality of islam ,take it by the sciece language ,this religion is all right ;;;;;;;;;;;;
bye bye see you later and sory about my absent
do not forget take it by the sciece language
peace be upon you (salam alikom our brothers and sisters)

 

[the_muslim]

*After the rapid expansion of the Muslim dominion in the 7th century, Muslims leaders were required to work out a way of dealing with Non-Muslims, who remained in the majority in many areas for centuries. The solution was to develop the notion of the “dhimma”, or “protected person”. The Dhimmi were required to pay an extra tax, but usually they were unmolested. This compares well with the treatment meted out to non-Christians in Christian Europe. The Pact of Umar is supposed to have been the peace accord offered by the Caliph Umar to the Christians of Syria, a “pact” which formed the patter of later interaction. *

fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.html

In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. This is a letter to the servant of God Umar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of such-and-such a city. When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct (aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:

We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks’ cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims.

We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.

We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.

We shall not teach the Qur’an to our children.

We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.

We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.

We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.

We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.

We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.

We shall not sell fermented drinks.

We shall clip the fronts of our heads.

We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists

We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.

We shall not take slaves who have been allotted to Muslims.

We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.

(When I brought the letter to Umar, may God be pleased with him, he added, “We shall not strike a Muslim.”)

We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.

If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.

Umar ibn al-Khittab replied: Sign what they ask, but add two clauses and impose them in addition to those which they have undertaken. They are: “They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims,” and “Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact.”

from Al-Turtushi, Siraj al-Muluk, pp. 229-230./QUOte
and where do you get petrolum ?.

 

[pismopal]

This reminds me of the “Seinfeld” episode when the characters were mentioning a person they “thought” was gay and this would be followed by a quick, politically correct disclaimer…" not that there is anything wrong with it!" When of course…they thought there was something wrong with it or they would not use a disclaimer.

 

[pismopal]

I have thought about what I would think about history during the period of …say 1930- 1945 when I had not been taught anything about it during my youth. I would begin to read what I had time to read and then fairly quickly I could begin grasping the dynamics of the most important subject of the period…World War II. Lets assume that I am not of any nationalities invovled in that struggle…theoretically neutral. I think I could see that the leader of Germany had brought his country out of a depression…encouraged them to be proud of their race…encouraged sports…correct diet and life style…dedication to country and fellow citizens…OK fine. Japan was led by warlords and an emperor who was easy to intimidate and Japan wanted to expand because they had no natural resources…so they began war a of aggression to acquire them. Then there was Italy led by a meglomaniac who wanted to follow Germany into “greatness”. Now I think I could put all this together and come out with an opinion about which side I thought was wrong and which side is right even thought there were some good things about all of them…sort of.
My point is this…I would not need to study German…or the dynamics of National Socialism…or eat lots of German food to come to a fair conclusion. I would not need Japanese language lessons…flower arranging or anything else to know what went on during 1930-1945 and if I met someone who had been exposed to all the aforementioned experience…I would not be intimidated by them at all. My study of that period…on my own has led me to a clear picture of what happened. I mean no disrespect of anyone who has studied Arabic or Muhammad’s early life…or any other matter involving islam. People without that, can and do, put information together and come out with an accurate and fair idea of the situation.

 

[schaick]

*After the rapid expansion of the Muslim dominion in the 7th century, Muslims leaders were required to work out a way of dealing with Non-Muslims, who remained in the majority in many areas for centuries. The solution was to develop the notion of the “dhimma”, or “protected person”. The Dhimmi were required to pay an extra tax, but usually they were unmolested. This compares well with the treatment meted out to non-Christians in Christian Europe. The Pact of Umar is supposed to have been the peace accord offered by the Caliph Umar to the Christians of Syria, a “pact” which formed the patter of later interaction. *

fordham.edu/halsall/source/pact-umar.html

In the name of God, the Merciful and Compassionate. This is a letter to the servant of God Umar [ibn al-Khattab], Commander of the Faithful, from the Christians of such-and-such a city. When you came against us, we asked you for safe-conduct (aman) for ourselves, our descendants, our property, and the people of our community, and we undertook the following obligations toward you:

We shall not build, in our cities or in their neighborhood, new monasteries, Churches, convents, or monks’ cells, nor shall we repair, by day or by night, such of them as fall in ruins or are situated in the quarters of the Muslims.

We shall keep our gates wide open for passersby and travelers. We shall give board and lodging to all Muslims who pass our way for three days.

We shall not give shelter in our churches or in our dwellings to any spy, nor bide him from the Muslims.

We shall not teach the Qur’an to our children.

We shall not manifest our religion publicly nor convert anyone to it. We shall not prevent any of our kin from entering Islam if they wish it.

We shall show respect toward the Muslims, and we shall rise from our seats when they wish to sit.

We shall not seek to resemble the Muslims by imitating any of their garments, the qalansuwa, the turban, footwear, or the parting of the hair. We shall not speak as they do, nor shall we adopt their kunyas.

We shall not mount on saddles, nor shall we gird swords nor bear any kind of arms nor carry them on our- persons.

We shall not engrave Arabic inscriptions on our seals.

We shall not sell fermented drinks.

We shall clip the fronts of our heads.

We shall always dress in the same way wherever we may be, and we shall bind the zunar round our waists

We shall not display our crosses or our books in the roads or markets of the Muslims. We shall use only clappers in our churches very softly. We shall not raise our voices when following our dead. We shall not show lights on any of the roads of the Muslims or in their markets. We shall not bury our dead near the Muslims.

We shall not take slaves who have been allotted to Muslims.

We shall not build houses overtopping the houses of the Muslims.

(When I brought the letter to Umar, may God be pleased with him, he added, “We shall not strike a Muslim.”)

We accept these conditions for ourselves and for the people of our community, and in return we receive safe-conduct.

If we in any way violate these undertakings for which we ourselves stand surety, we forfeit our covenant [dhimma], and we become liable to the penalties for contumacy and sedition.

Umar ibn al-Khittab replied: Sign what they ask, but add two clauses and impose them in addition to those which they have undertaken. They are: “They shall not buy anyone made prisoner by the Muslims,” and “Whoever strikes a Muslim with deliberate intent shall forfeit the protection of this pact.”

from Al-Turtushi, Siraj al-Muluk, pp. 229-230.

consumerenergyreport.com/research/crude-oil/where-the-us-gets-its-oil-from/

If not for the west oil would still be underground and Saudi Arabia would be a very poor country.