http://freethoughtblogs.com/heinous/...iticism-islam/

its exactly what u wrote.


http://unpan1.un.org/intradoc/groups...NPAN003700.htm
Continuing the centuries old traditions of statehood, and taking as a basis the principles expressed in the Constitution act "On the State Independence of the Azerbaijan Republic", desiring to provide prosperity and welfare for the whole society and each individual, wishing to establish freedom and security, understanding the responsibility for past, present and future generations, using the right of its sovereignty declares solemnly its following intentions:
1 - to protect the independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity of the Azerbaijan Republic;
2 - to provide a democratic system within the framework of the Constitution;
3 - to achieve the establishment of a civil society;
4 - to build a law-based, secular state to provide the command of law as an expression of the will of the nation;
5 - to provide a worthy living standard for everybody in conformity with just economic and social order;
6 - to remain faithful to universal human values, to live in peace and freedom with all the nations of the world and co-operate with them for this purpose.
Having in mind the sincere intentions enumerated above the present Constitution is adopted through a poll of the general population by referendum. .

might be because the leaders value things differently? less influence of islam in public life? cause ull see the opposite in afgahnistan for example.

but i gotta admit that im not an Azerbaijan expert tbh.
whats ur explanation?

I appreciate your forthrightness.

I think the more you look carefully, the shallower you'll find Maher and Harris to be. But yes, they can sound compelling, but that's because they traffic in widely accepted cliches. Seeing through it takes more effort because new ideas are involved.

One place to poke around is juancole.com. He's an academic who knows his stuff, but writes engagingly and often takes down Islamophobia. For example, http://www.juancole.com/2012/08/top-...nd-others.html

yeah, so what violence and oppression are a far bigger problem in islamic families in the western than they are in non islamic families in the western! since the life situation is on average a way bettter one, whats the similarity?

whats the "heart of islam"? u study the Quran much bro?

coming from a guy, who claims i watch fox and cnn all day long, when i never watched either ur clueless when it comes to my state of mind. so back under u rock pls.

yes i do. what creates changes if nobody stands up against it? its not like the muslim dont have all the same tools to create a society were all people equal.

thats ur impression. was a boring day, so i thought i give my 2cents

Here's my explanation. Please bear with me.

I saw a play called Beauty and the Beast. It was based on an original old folktale; totally unlike Disney.

It was much darker, reflecting the concerns of people 200 years ago, not Hollywood. It was crystal clear that the moral of the tale was to obey ones father, even if he wants you to marry someone you consider a beast.

The Disney version -- it's feel good, about finding ones true self, accepting others, getting over resentment. Stuff girls like today.

The point is, folktales, religion, everything, gets reinterpreted for the needs of the present.

So even if one particular Islamic grouping is violent and judgmental, it is unsurprising that others, still calling themselves Muslims, will be totally different.

Azerbaijan and Afghanistan are very different because they had different histories.

ok, what kinda history u need to get each result? what has malaysia with afghanistan in common? and pls include folktales in it, i like them.

New question to help me understand. Keep in mind i'm starting from a place where i completely agree with Maher.

Is it true that children are being taught at a very young age to hate non-Muslims and even taught how to kill non-Muslims through suicide bombings? That's being reported, but is it true? And if it's true, where is this happening, and how prevalent is it? Is it taking place in the majority of schools in Iran, for instance?

These guys score God points the more of us they kill. As a Canadian I thought there was some protection as most of them hated the U.S. much more there wasnt as much danger up here.

But thats clearly wrong, they hate all western countries, and are even willing to kill Muslims as long as they kill some of us at the same time. That mall shooting in Kenya is example of that.

The mainstream Muslims need to doing more to stop these radical ones from forming. Unless there is underground support by the good Muslims, they need to do a lot more.

Sure it's occurring. I've been exposed to a wee bit of Hamas creating a cult of martyrdom in Gaza, especially some years back, and it's clearly going on in portions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

But there is no central command of Islam. These are locally produced phenomenon in response to local conditions. There is some conferencing and mutual reinforcement going on and ritualistic denunciations of the west. But there's something like a billion and a half Muslims. All sorts of things happen, most of it utterly mundane, people living their lives.

Ask yourself this. Could Catholics around the world cooperate in overthrowing the British monarchy, cancel King Henry VIII's 1534 Act of Supremacy, and reverse the Protestant ascendency in England? Of course not. Too many people would have to take off work. Despite the fact that Catholics vastly outnumber the Limeys and have little use for them.

Islam is far, far less hierarchical than Catholicism. There is no structure or authority that could make millions of people act in concert, even if they all suddenly became blood thirsty for infidel blood. They are not the zombie apocalypse.

As for a children's army being raised to kill us -- what does the record show? Al Qaida pulled off a spectacular success and then -- next to nothing. There are some bands of terrorists. It may increase, it may decrease. But an entire religion of people is not doing anything together.

Note the stats from the Pew poll posted above. Sharia law is desired by 8% of Muslims in Azabaijian, 99% in Afghanistan. There is immense variation.

The Soviet Union -- now there was an enemy. It had a huge ICBM arsenal and immense tank armies. It was centrally commanded by a powerful police state that controlled a distinct geographical area. It had the tools for immense mischief. Scattered groups of Muslim terrorists, thousands of miles apart, not even 1% of the religion, without even coordination much less central control, are not a ghost of the threat that the USSR could have been. So 19 people flew themselves against the walls of the WTC. That's ugly, but not remotely a threat to civilization.

This is all about fear of bogeymen. Allow me to mention a book by an Israeli, son of a hero of the 1967 war. Miko Peled turned against the occupation of the Muslim West Bank. He began meeting with Palestinians and getting to know them, but he still had to overcome his own visceral fear of Muslims. He drove to a West Bank town on his own once to meet a contact. He feared his Israeli license plates would attract a mob, but he couldn't find the house. He finally faced his fear, stopped and asked. The Muslims ------ gave him directions. It kept happening. He'd meet Muslims and be given warm hospitality, which is their specialty. He kept having normal interactions. Because they're like, people.

Andrew Sullivan's take on the Maher/Harris/Affleck discussion today seems like a pretty decent high level take on that argument to me.

I think what you're saying is that we should be focused on groups of individuals who kill and spread hatred in the name of religion, but we shouldn't believe they are truly representative of that religion. I think that's what Obama is saying:

like these Christians:

http://www.nizkor.org/hweb/orgs/amer...e-racists.html


But i would be terrified if those Christians were in power somewhere and widely supported. Isn't that what Bill Maher is trying to point out in regard to Muslims? And is he so wrong when you look at Saudi Arabia or Afghanistan? And I also admit to be turned off by the religion beyond terrorism. It seems ridiculously oppressive and bigoted. I don't understand how any western woman isn't disgusted by the treatment of women in these places.



So am I wrong that radical, oppressive, terror supporting Muslims are in power in some countries and widely supported by the citizens? And are you so sure Maher is so wrong when he says that your average joe Muslim in the middle east supports things like stoning for adultery?

Perhaps a distinction should be made between Muslims from one country to the next? These are still just questions at this point.

Sullivan says a lot of the right words, like of course most people are not terrorists, BUT MOOSLEMS ARE COMING and of course Islam has made immense contributions BUT MOOSLEMS and many dear friends pray five times BUT HELP, THE MOOSLEMS.

The problem is, Sullivan has no sense of scale. In the U.S., 500 people a year die from aspirin overdoses. That's many more civilians than are killed by terrorists in every year but one. He's still banging the scare drums, just for a more discerning audience.

He keeps on about how maybe the Arabs invented algebra, but present day Islam has become poisonous. That's just wrong. ISIL chops some heads off and suddenly he stops seeing 1.5 billion people washing dishes and taking out the trash and watching MTV.

If we're talking about US policy decisions regarding anti-terrorism I'm probably mostly in agreement with you as far as the actual threat to the US, at least at the moment.

What I was agreeing with was there being some middle ground between either painting Islam as a religion with too broad a brush on the one hand versus completely ignoring the religious aspect of the larger cultural issues on the other.

Yes to the focus on the specific haters. But I wouldn't say they are "not truly representative" because that suggests there is one authentic Islam. Terrorists do represent their version, but that interpretation is small.

Absolutely. But do they prove that Quakers and Presbyterians have an evil essence just waiting to come out? Are Methodists enablers because they do not attack the fascist dominionists enough? Does the Spanish Inquisition prove that Texas may introduce the rack? Or is the rack something that happened then and there for reasons of the time, with Jesus having nothing to do with it except by a huge stretch?

No. But does he remain right when you look at Turkey?

When you specify the place, you may be right. But does that translate into a threat to us? Only if it's specifically shown. Al Qaida, yes. ISIL, quite possibly but hasn't happened. The Saudi regime has all the negatives, but has a rock solid pledge of protection from the US military that has been in place since 1945. We are literally their bodyguard in a very dangerous neighborhood. As long as the House of Saud is in power, that country will not countenance attacks on the US. Some citizens participate, yes.

The thing about Maher, Harris, Pam Geller, is that they insist on an infinitely generalizable Islamic threat, independent of specifics. Yet even in a place like Saudi Arabia, with many extremists, the threat to us is not so clear. Maher et al can't deal in specifics because they don't know them and are only interested in a call and response with an audience that knows even less; they are intellectual con artists who've discovered fame through fear.

Yes. That's rare. Same with female genital mutilation. Watch Reza Aslan's inspired rant, linked above. And here.

Yes. And from one neighborhood to another, one mosque to the next, between social classes, generations, etc.

My wife informed me to not even think about applying for a job in UAE 'cuz she ain't going. But there's miniskirts in Beirut and female prime ministers in several countries. On balance, yes it is more oppressive for women and it ain't right. But will a fixation on virginity return to the US? Is the American pornography industry under threat? No and no. Does the Saudi ban on driving help demonstrate a terrorist threat? No. Is birth control and abortion in danger? Yes, but not from overseas.

What percentage of Muslims would push a button if there were no repercussions to them and the button killed all adult non Muslims who would not consider converting to Islam?

Same question for Hindus, Jews, Christians, Buddhists and Sikhs?

I agree. It's important that attacking Islamophobia does not become apology for ugly traditions just cuz multiculturalism yo. After the Iranian revolution in 1979, I was among those who poo-pooed the threat from Ayatollah Khomeini. My bad.

But in the US, our problem is Islamophobia giving the government a free hand for pointless wars. If you're Iranian, that's not the danger.

No, I have yet to hear Maher speak about any type of Muslims who are against ISIS, weather its Muslims who fight ISIS or Muslims who denouce ISIS from countries like the USA and the UK.

One should also disagree with Mahers and just the general Anti Islam approach, which expects Muslims to rise up and publicly denounce radical Islam, its just an odd thing to do.

Why dont we see Maher asking Jews around the world to denounce the fanatical Jews that do exist in Israel? I think the answer is because Maher doesn't want to offend Jews.

Comparing Saudi to Afghanistan, really, are you that bought by the Fox News type media outlets that you have come to this standard tow the line conclusion? Unreal, I figured you would be a critical thinker and look beyond the simple stuff that Fox News dishes out.





Yes you are wrong irt the GCC states or the other Muslim states who are allied with the USA. Refer to the US state dept irt how our country views countries such as Saudi Arabia, the very country you seem to be highly critical of.


Thats common sense. There are 48 or so Muslim majority countries, ranging from former communist Albania to more conservative countries such as Saudi Arabia.

Saudi Arabia has plenty of great things going on and in fact, the King of Saudi has promised to provide better laws for the people of Saudi by 2015. There are Saudi men and women who support lifting the driving ban on females in Saudi Arabia. So its true that right now, the laws of Saudi pretty much favor men over women, that should not mean you should automatically condemn Saudi Arabia. You should rather get on board with the many Saudis who want to improve their rights.

You need to check Maher's record. He is anti-religion across the board.

Who gets to represent the atheists here?

You say this with a straight face, don't you? There exists, today in 2014, an actual driving ban on females in a wealthy, industrialized country. And you are willing to applaud the fact that some people support lifting such a ban?

Let's assume you agree a driving ban on females is disgusting and idiotic. If you don't agree, then we can leave this interaction alone. But if you do agree, then please explain how such a ban exists today. Who/ what is to blame for something so ludicrous?

Bull****. You can criticize any faith in the world and not have your life threatened.

I couldn't disagree with anyone more on this point.

They actually are representing the opposite. It's not widely accepted, it's exactly the opposite. Bush said emphatically that we are not at war with Islam, that Islam is a religion of peace. Blair said it also. So did Obama. The mainstream media takes this position constantly. Western media refuses to criticize Islam.

How can you possibly make this assertion? It's absurd.

Once again, total bull****. With almost any group of people, we have the idea that their self-preservation trumps their desire to kill their enemy. That is the very basis of the concept of mutually assured destruction. With religious fanatics, especially Islamist fundamentalists at this point in time, this is not true.

Nonsense. Maher specifically talks about who's joining the coalition against them. He specifically mentioned Turkey.

What is this? How many radical Jews are there in the world? None are news-worthy at all. Once again, the Israelis take extreme care not to kill non-combatants. They could ****ing kill everyone in Gaza tomorrow if they wanted to. They do not. There is a reason for this. Stop spewing your crap because it's totally wrong.


Do I really have to post the link again where 18 people were beheaded in August? What is so great about Saudi Arabia? NAME ONE THING. ONE.

Really, what kind of position is this? Saudi Arabia is very likely the worst place to live on this planet. What type of thinking do you have to have to believe in what you are saying?

Saudi Arabia is a great country to live in. This is evidenced by the fact that there was a whitney houston concert there.