Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Already signed up?
Log in now.
Forgot your password?
Recover it now.
Not yet a member? No problem!
Sign-up just takes a second.
Remember your password?
Log in now.
15 Comments
Pprtsays...Typical Muslim debate tactics: divert the question, guilt the interrogator, rinse, repeat.
bcglorfsays...>> ^Pprt:
Typical Muslim debate tactics: divert the question, guilt the interrogator, rinse, repeat.
His tactics aren't 'Muslim' they are propagandist who coincidentally calls himself Muslim. There are an equal(or better) number of Muslims fighting against this kind of insanity.
Pprtsays...Perhaps you haven't been attentive when watching interviews where the subject is asked to defend something typical of Islam or a common Muslim viewpoint.
Here's a brief exchange I heard a few months ago on a talk show:
Western interviewer: You are a well respected Imam that has chosen to immigrate to a Western nation. One concern that many people have is the treatement of women in Muslim countries. For instance, violence towards women seems to be a particular aspect that worries many people.
Muslim: That is a very interesting question, and the Koran is very clear on the matter. I read in the paper today that (insert western-sounding name here) was convicted for raping a woman. Do you know that there are hundreds of shelters for abused women in THIS country? Your government spent X many million dollars last year to fight against spousal abuse. It is very ignorant to think that the maltreatement of women is typical of a Muslim men. Islam is a religion of peace, we do not encourage violence of any kind.
That's the basics of it: divert, guilt, evade. Many Islamic schools in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia provide entire courses on how to handle critical (and sympathetic) interviewers. They have it down to a science.
bcglorfsays...>> ^Pprt:
Perhaps you haven't been attentive when watching interviews where the subject is asked to defend something typical of Islam or a common Muslim viewpoint.
Here's a brief exchange I heard a few months ago on a talk show:
Western interviewer: You are a well respected Imam that has chosen to immigrate to a Western nation. One concern that many people have is the treatement of women in Muslim countries. For instance, violence towards women seems to be a particular aspect that worries many people.
Muslim: That is a very interesting question, and the Koran is very clear on the matter. I read in the paper today that (insert western-sounding name here) was convicted for raping a woman. Do you know that there are hundreds of shelters for abused women in THIS country? Your government spent X many million dollars last year to fight against spousal abuse. It is very ignorant to think that the maltreatement of women is typical of a Muslim men. Islam is a religion of peace, we do not encourage violence of any kind.
That's the basics of it: divert, guilt, evade. Many Islamic schools in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia provide entire courses on how to handle critical (and sympathetic) interviewers. They have it down to a science.
All I'm saying is that is a particular brand of Islam. Just like John Haggee offers a particular form of christianity, which is equally vile. Watch some documentaries by moderate muslims like this one to see that many are working against the fundamentalists. Whether the extremists try to act like moderates in public or not is not what I take issue with, as they do. The problem I have is to say there are no moderates.
If you fail to recognize the moderates then you turn a war within Islam against the extremists into war with all Muslims, moderate and extremist alike.
siftbotsays...Moving this video to bcglorf's personal queue. It failed to receive enough votes to get sifted up to the front page within 2 days.
bcglorfsays...*beg
siftbotsays...Sending this video to Beggar's Canyon to plea for a little attention - beg requested by original submitter bcglorf.
bcglorfsays...*beg
siftbotsays...Sending this video to Beggar's Canyon to plea for a little attention - beg requested by original submitter bcglorf.
bcglorfsays...*beg
siftbotsays...Sending this video to Beggar's Canyon to plea for a little attention - beg requested by original submitter bcglorf.
thealisays...Just listen to 5:40 on going, and tell me what is wrong with the argument he is making.
Also know the history of the land, before it was promise land: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaan
HollywoodBobsays...>> ^theali:
Just listen to 5:40 on going, and tell me what is wrong with the argument he is making.
It's not fashionable. It's been 60 years since the creation of Israel, and no one wants to admit that the UN made a mistake in dividing the country. Jews in Palestine was nothing new, in the 40's they'd been living there (albeit in smaller numbers) for hundreds of years, peacefully I might add. But as antisemitism grew in Europe and more and more Jews left for Palestine, that's when the conflicts began, but much of those early conflicts were similar to conflicts anywhere you have a large immigrant population, they were over resources and jobs, not who gets what holy land.
bcglorfsays...>> ^theali:
Just listen to 5:40 on going, and tell me what is wrong with the argument he is making.
Also know the history of the land, before it was promise land: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canaan
What's wrong with his argument is that he is changing the subject. What does the holocaust have to do with Israel and Palestine? He asks this, and the answer is it shouldn't. Since it has nothing to do with it, why is HE bringing it up when he is being asked about the holocaust? The problem with his argument is that he is trying to deflect attention from the fact he questions the accuracy of what really happened in the Nazi death camps.
It's a pretty normal move we see from many of our own political figures, only made more despicable as the question being dodged is the holocaust and he's drawing on anti-Israeli sentiments to dodge it.
HollywoodBobsays...Of course he's avoiding the question. From his ignorant "academicist" point of view the only way justify his opinion is to deny the Holocaust, because without it Israel has no reason for being.
You don't have to be a holocaust denier or antisemitic to be anti-Israel. Just look at anti-zionist Jews.
The problem is that the damage was done 60 years ago, Israel is a nation, and the Palestinians lost their country and their home. But until both sides realize that the only solution is to share, the fighting will continue. It would help though if the rest of the nations would stop pretending that the Israelis are the only victims here.
Discuss...
Enable JavaScript to submit a comment.