What is a jihadist war?sir_daveSeptember 12 2008, 14:15:01 UTC
From Wiki regarding white slavery:
Periodic raiding expeditions were sent from Islamic Iberia to ravage the Christian Iberian kingdoms, bringing back booty and slaves. In a raid against Lisbon in 1189 CE, for example, the Almohad caliph Yaqub al-Mansur took 3,000 female and child captives, while his governor of Córdoba, in a subsequent attack upon Silves in 1191 CE, took 3,000 Christian slaves.
According to Robert Davis between 1 million and 1.25 million Europeans were captured by Barbary pirates, who were vassals of the Ottoman Empire, and sold as slaves between the 16th and 19th centuries. These slaves were captured mainly from seaside villages from Italy, Spain, Portugal and also from more distant places like France or England, the Netherlands, Ireland and even Iceland and North America. The impact of these attacks was devastating - France, England, and Spain each lost thousands of ships, and long stretches of the Spanish and Italian coasts were almost completely abandoned by their inhabitants. Pirate raids discouraged settlement along the coast until the 19th century.
If a non-Muslim population refuses to adopt Islam or pay the Jizzya protection/ subjugation tax, that population is considered to be at war with the Muslim "ummah" and therefore it becomes legal under Islamic law to take slaves from that non-Muslim population. Usage of the terms "Islamic trade" or "Islamic world" has been disputed by some Muslims as it treats Africa as outside of Islam, or a negligible portion of the Islamic world. Propagators of Islam in Africa often revealed a cautious attitude towards proselytizing because of its effect in reducing the potential reservoir of slaves.
An example - at Baltimore, in Ireland, the entire population was seized by Islamic pirates and taken into slavery.
Given the above, it becomes the easier to see why Muslims in Britain are actively cleansing areas of other ethnic groups, and forcing white schoolgirls into prostitution. They think it is their right to take slaves from amongst us, and it is a part of their history to do so. No doubt CAIR don't talk about that a lot --- and won't let anyone else do so, either.
Re: What is a jihadist war?level_headSeptember 12 2008, 15:41:41 UTC
Yes, indeed, I know (in general) about that long history. The very first war that the brand-new United States ever had to fight was against jihadists, who were taking our people for slaves and for ransom.
The United States Marines have this event in their official Marine Corps Hymn: "to the shores of Tripoli".
When Keith Ellison, the United States' first Muslim member of Congress (with the possible-but-unlikely exception of John Randolph of Virgiania) took his oath of office on the Qur'an once owned by Thomas Jefferson, this caused a bit of a stir. Mr. Ellison suggested that President Jefferson "was very impressed by the peaceful nature of Islam."
I haven't read those writings. But I'm aware that it was President Jefferson who was trying to understand why he was having to fight a war against radical adherents of that faith. The answer he got back was grim: because we were non-Muslim.
Both Christianity and Islam have changed in the intervening two centuries. But the Muslim Brotherhood is still thinking centuries in the past when they plan their future.
Re: What is a jihadist war?roseofauroraSeptember 12 2008, 17:30:25 UTC
Your journal is always full of materials which are constantly challenging my perspectives (They may sometimes make me uneasy, but I thank you for stimulating my gray matter in such a way!!).
I find myself feeling defensive because I am romantically involved with an Iranian man. At the same time the facts and logic can not be denied.
My boyfriend is a nice man and a good man, not particularly religious (he drinks and swears like a sailor and eats bacon as happily as anyone I've seen). That doesn't change the fact that his religion is very difficult to understand and accept for me.
Personally I have a healthy respect for the people I know of that faith who have proven to be "normal". But in general, many of the rules and restrictions that Islams presents make me very very uncomfortable.
To cite one example of an every day occurrence in Iran:
My beau's mother was not used to driving the new standard car the family had recently purchased. One day she failed to engage the parking break and the car, being parked facing down a hill, rolled down several yards, and gained enough speed to collide with a tree. The mother was stunned and disoriented. She could not manage to take off her seat belt and in a panic called out to passers by for help.
For whatever reason, no women were present at that time, only male pedestrians.
The men rushed to the scene but were completely unable to assist the woman aside from speaking to her.
It is forbidden in Islam for a man to touch a woman he is not related to by blood or marriage even in a life or death situation!! Thank God the situation was not serious but you can imagine what this implies?!
I was shocked to hear this is something that occurs at all and that it is considered perfectly acceptable.
I've discussed this with a few people (non-Muslims) and the essential stance we've all come to agree upon is this:
Islam is a religion based on rules as opposed to concepts. This is what makes it so difficult to accept and even more difficult (for me at least) to respect!
I can not respect a religion or ideology which preaches as part of it's doctrine that a man can not touch a woman to save her life unless she is his sister or mother or daughter or wife (and likewise a woman can not help a man she does not know if he needs it). I don't care who this may offend but that is the simple fact!
My feelings regarding this are not only directed at Islam. I have the same, if not greater, abhorrence for Jehovah's Witness practitioners who refuse live saving organ transplants and blood transfusions for their children (how can a religion that commands you to sit by and watch your child suffer and die be logical or acceptable to ANYONE?).
I agree that at the extremist level, the Muslim Brotherhood flavor of Islam is terrifying. But it is also disconcerting on many many other levels.
Just as Christians have learned through the ages that the burning of witches is not an acceptable practice, so Islam must somehow find it's enlightenment. But considering the fact that it appears as though powerful forces are dead set on preventing any light from penetrating the dark age mentality many of these people subscribe to. Which begs further investigation of the Geo-political atmosphere that is causing the middle east to remain so firmly lodged in the middle ages.
I apologize for recently crowding your in box with all my lengthy comments but as I am very drawn by the points you make and can't help be share my two cents!
Re: What is a jihadist war?level_headSeptember 12 2008, 17:53:55 UTC
First off, I actively encourage your discussion, and I've enjoyed reading your thoughts: you write and present your arguments well, and even on points where we disagree I can ask for no more than that.
But here, there is little to disagree about. I do not condemn all of Islam for the acts of jihadists -- though I would certainly like to see more outrage and less rationalizing from mainstream Islamic groups.
I have friends who were born in Iran -- and we do indeed talk politics and religion.
Re: What is a jihadist war?rowynSeptember 12 2008, 15:58:44 UTC
Some 1000+ year-old ideas are still good today, and others really need to be buried with the past. O_O (Though it's difficult to see this example as ever a good idea.)
Re: What is a jihadist war?level_headSeptember 12 2008, 17:39:37 UTC
I know you weren't referring to the entire religion of Islam, but a passer-by might not realize that -- especially since at about 1400 years in age it fits into the "1000+ year-old ideas" category.
Slavery, of course, is old indeed, far older than Islam or even Christianity -- and slavery is now widely recognized as abhorrent. It is unfortunate indeed that it still goes on today in places around the world.
I completely agree -- it's tough to rationalize with modern thought, and unpleasant to make the effort.
Periodic raiding expeditions were sent from Islamic Iberia to ravage the Christian Iberian kingdoms, bringing back booty and slaves. In a raid against Lisbon in 1189 CE, for example, the Almohad caliph Yaqub al-Mansur took 3,000 female and child captives, while his governor of Córdoba, in a subsequent attack upon Silves in 1191 CE, took 3,000 Christian slaves.
According to Robert Davis between 1 million and 1.25 million Europeans were captured by Barbary pirates, who were vassals of the Ottoman Empire, and sold as slaves between the 16th and 19th centuries. These slaves were captured mainly from seaside villages from Italy, Spain, Portugal and also from more distant places like France or England, the Netherlands, Ireland and even Iceland and North America. The impact of these attacks was devastating - France, England, and Spain each lost thousands of ships, and long stretches of the Spanish and Italian coasts were almost completely abandoned by their inhabitants. Pirate raids discouraged settlement along the coast until the 19th century.
If a non-Muslim population refuses to adopt Islam or pay the Jizzya protection/ subjugation tax, that population is considered to be at war with the Muslim "ummah" and therefore it becomes legal under Islamic law to take slaves from that non-Muslim population. Usage of the terms "Islamic trade" or "Islamic world" has been disputed by some Muslims as it treats Africa as outside of Islam, or a negligible portion of the Islamic world. Propagators of Islam in Africa often revealed a cautious attitude towards proselytizing because of its effect in reducing the potential reservoir of slaves.
An example - at Baltimore, in Ireland, the entire population was seized by Islamic pirates and taken into slavery.
Given the above, it becomes the easier to see why Muslims in Britain are actively cleansing areas of other ethnic groups, and forcing white schoolgirls into prostitution. They think it is their right to take slaves from amongst us, and it is a part of their history to do so. No doubt CAIR don't talk about that a lot --- and won't let anyone else do so, either.
Reply
The United States Marines have this event in their official Marine Corps Hymn: "to the shores of Tripoli".
When Keith Ellison, the United States' first Muslim member of Congress (with the possible-but-unlikely exception of John Randolph of Virgiania) took his oath of office on the Qur'an once owned by Thomas Jefferson, this caused a bit of a stir. Mr. Ellison suggested that President Jefferson "was very impressed by the peaceful nature of Islam."
I haven't read those writings. But I'm aware that it was President Jefferson who was trying to understand why he was having to fight a war against radical adherents of that faith. The answer he got back was grim: because we were non-Muslim.
Both Christianity and Islam have changed in the intervening two centuries. But the Muslim Brotherhood is still thinking centuries in the past when they plan their future.
===|==============/ Level Head
Reply
I find myself feeling defensive because I am romantically involved with an Iranian man. At the same time the facts and logic can not be denied.
My boyfriend is a nice man and a good man, not particularly religious (he drinks and swears like a sailor and eats bacon as happily as anyone I've seen). That doesn't change the fact that his religion is very difficult to understand and accept for me.
Personally I have a healthy respect for the people I know of that faith who have proven to be "normal". But in general, many of the rules and restrictions that Islams presents make me very very uncomfortable.
To cite one example of an every day occurrence in Iran:
My beau's mother was not used to driving the new standard car the family had recently purchased. One day she failed to engage the parking break and the car, being parked facing down a hill, rolled down several yards, and gained enough speed to collide with a tree. The mother was stunned and disoriented. She could not manage to take off her seat belt and in a panic called out to passers by for help.
For whatever reason, no women were present at that time, only male pedestrians.
The men rushed to the scene but were completely unable to assist the woman aside from speaking to her.
It is forbidden in Islam for a man to touch a woman he is not related to by blood or marriage even in a life or death situation!! Thank God the situation was not serious but you can imagine what this implies?!
I was shocked to hear this is something that occurs at all and that it is considered perfectly acceptable.
I've discussed this with a few people (non-Muslims) and the essential stance we've all come to agree upon is this:
Islam is a religion based on rules as opposed to concepts. This is what makes it so difficult to accept and even more difficult (for me at least) to respect!
I can not respect a religion or ideology which preaches as part of it's doctrine that a man can not touch a woman to save her life unless she is his sister or mother or daughter or wife (and likewise a woman can not help a man she does not know if he needs it). I don't care who this may offend but that is the simple fact!
My feelings regarding this are not only directed at Islam. I have the same, if not greater, abhorrence for Jehovah's Witness practitioners who refuse live saving organ transplants and blood transfusions for their children (how can a religion that commands you to sit by and watch your child suffer and die be logical or acceptable to ANYONE?).
I agree that at the extremist level, the Muslim Brotherhood flavor of Islam is terrifying. But it is also disconcerting on many many other levels.
Just as Christians have learned through the ages that the burning of witches is not an acceptable practice, so Islam must somehow find it's enlightenment. But considering the fact that it appears as though powerful forces are dead set on preventing any light from penetrating the dark age mentality many of these people subscribe to. Which begs further investigation of the Geo-political atmosphere that is causing the middle east to remain so firmly lodged in the middle ages.
I apologize for recently crowding your in box with all my lengthy comments but as I am very drawn by the points you make and can't help be share my two cents!
Reply
But here, there is little to disagree about. I do not condemn all of Islam for the acts of jihadists -- though I would certainly like to see more outrage and less rationalizing from mainstream Islamic groups.
I have friends who were born in Iran -- and we do indeed talk politics and religion.
More in a bit.
===|==============/ Level Head
Reply
Reply
Slavery, of course, is old indeed, far older than Islam or even Christianity -- and slavery is now widely recognized as abhorrent. It is unfortunate indeed that it still goes on today in places around the world.
I completely agree -- it's tough to rationalize with modern thought, and unpleasant to make the effort.
===|==============/ Level Head
Reply
Leave a comment