Ex-Muslims' response to "The Innocence of Muslims"

[TG123]

This article was posted on Answering Islam, A Christian-Muslim Dialog and Apologetic, a Christian site that debates Islam. I don't endorse everything on it, but they do have quite a few good articles.

Khaled, the author of this article, is a former Muslim who posts often on this website. He disagrees with a lot of what the Quran teaches and is outspoken about his views. At the same time, he makes it very clear there is a difference between debating someone's beliefs and exposing them as wrong (as I believe many things that Islam teaches are wrong), and doing what this movie did... using insults, slander and falsehood to mock a religion.

I highly recommend reading this. Curious to hear what people think.

What Just Happened?
A Former Muslim’s Thoughts on the “Muhammad Video”

By Khaled
Muslims around the world are angry to the extent that they besieged and attacked the US Embassy in Egypt, the US Consulate in Libya and the US Embassy in Yemen, and even caused the death of an Ambassador and three other diplomatic workers because they felt hurt and insulted by a YouTube video insulting Muhammad, the prophet of Islam.
I am an Arab, a former Muslim, and a follower of Jesus Christ. I have been a Christian for over 20 years now. If you read my testimony, you will see that I have my own critique of Islam, Muhammad and the Quran. That critique is based on my personal experience and conviction regarding my former religion, Islam. It is based on what I personally think to be true. So, there is no question that I reject Islam, Muhammad and the Quran.
On the other hand, living in the Arab world for the greater part of my life and later also in the West exposed me to many that reject Islam. I have observed two kinds or groups among these rejectionists which I strongly disagree with.
The first of these groups consists of former Muslims who take their rejection to an extreme. This includes a willingness to twist the truth and mix facts with fiction, in order to taunt Islam and make it appear as evil and as ridiculous as possible.
The second group consists of some extreme Christians from the Middle East who lived under oppression, discrimination or even outright and cruel persecution (either direct or indirect) in their predominantly-Muslim native countries.
These groups feed on each other. The extreme former Muslims (who claim to be Christians) are now placed on a high pedestal by some of those extreme Middle Eastern Christians who invite these former Muslims to their gatherings to tell them “how bad Islam is” (or was) as a psychological reaffirmation for those extreme Christians on why they should “hate” Islam.
I have observed those extreme former Muslims become crusaders against Islam without caring very much whether what they are “crusading” about is true. As long as it can be used to hurt the image of Islam, Muslims, Muhammad or the Quran, then it is good.1
There is no question that this website, Answering-Islam.org, contains strong critique of Islam, but we publish our criticism of Islam with our eyes focused on what is true and can be proven. We try not to exaggerate and are willing to be corrected. Since we started, we have edited and removed several mistakes and unproven ideas from the site. In fact, a number of times I have found myself serving on the site’s inner circles where we review and filter material submitted for publication and sometimes even already published materials, even to the extent of defending the position of Muhammad or Islam against exaggerations or false accusations. We are committed to truth not expedience.
What I have learned from dialoguing online with Muslims in the past 17 years is that we really need to love truth and share it with compassion; we really have to love Muslims and desire them to be saved. A truthful, compassionate dialogue with Muslims regarding their faith, and ours, is what we need. We don’t need smear tactics and hateful anti-Muslim propaganda. And, with regret, I must admit to having naively participated in such things in the past, either because I was not spiritually mature enough or because I had more anger at Islam than I had love for Muslims.
The insulting video about Muhammad titled “The Innocence of Muslims” contains unproven theories and historical errors about the life of Muhammad. I personally think that the makers of this movie, didn’t produce it because they love the truth or love Muslims, but because they are carrying out a personal vendetta by trashing its prophet.
A true Christian is commanded not to hate anyone; we have to love Muslims. If you do not love them, please leave them alone. Do not shout truth with the breath of hate. If you cannot avoid the breath of hate, please sit down and let those who can tell Muslims the truth with the breath of compassionate love stand up and share it with them. As Ephesians 4:15 reminds us, “Instead, speaking the truth in love, we will grow to become in every respect the mature body of him who is the head, that is, Christ.”
Finally, I personally sympathize with all Muslims (since you remain my people and my family) for the hurt feelings and the insult they suffered. I reject this movie and I testify that it does not truly represent the real Muhammad, the prophet of Islam. In the same time I condemn the violence carried against the US diplomatic missions because violence is a choice among a wide array of possible responses. May God lead us all to genuine repentance over our wrong actions.
My heart’s desire for all Muslims is for them to be saved, “for I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness that comes from God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. Christ is the end of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.” Romans 10:2-4
You are welcome to contact me with your comments.

[First published: 13 September 2012]​

[Last updated: 14 September 2012]​

Footnotes
1 The same observation can be made about many Muslims who write about the Bible or Christianity, but that is not the topic or concern of this article.



What Just Happened? A Former Muslim’s Thoughts on the “Muhammad Video”

 

[Blessedj01]

I agree that the videomaker probably doesn't have noble intentions to lead people to Christ, but I don't agree with he hype - even from answeringislam. I just don't see that the video is in any way more insulting or misleading than say, The Life of Brian, or those Red Bull adverts with "Jesus" walking on water. I think answeringislam is saying the right thing by telling people to speak the truth with a spirit of love, but I also think it's an untenable position. How do you criticise Islam? Why does there have to be so much protocol?

It's not actually the video's fault, or the videomaker's fault that some Muslims have reacted the way they did. AI imo is being naive in buying into the myth that all this outrage comes from the video itself. I believe there are strong ties to these reactions in "undercover" al qaeda operations and other militant groups. The Libyan government says these attacks were planned for months, for instance. I don't think it all has to do with people's religious outrage anyway, I think we're just seeing the results of a ideological violent society coming to bear fruit.

Not sure why everyone else has to pay the price for radical Islam's outbursts. You don't see embassies being stormed over all the pictures on the net concerning Jesus. I just think the video was not that bad from what I saw in the trailer - it mostly was a literal interpretation of the koran (ie. stuff like muhammed's suicide attempt/allegedly speaking to devils/having an underage wife). The only thing I noticed was some silly extra dialogue. But how else do you parody?

Why are people so scared of parodying something that's patantly false anyway? Are we so, so afraid now? Are we going to let ourselves be blackmailed?

 

[RickardoHolmes]

It's all funny (parody) until someone gets hurt, or until someone insults YOUR religion or MY religion right?

Remember the protests regarding the film in the late 80's Last Temptation of Christ ? I remember going to see the film, and there were thousands and thousands of angry Christians around the theater, holding signs, shouting at everyone, screaming, basically acting like fools, because for one, they had never seen the film, and two, what they were protesting in the film, NEVER ACTUALLY HAPPENED IN THE FILM!!! Perhaps we forget the riots in Europe where Christians threw bombs at a theater that was showing the fim ?
My, my how Christians will point the finger at Muslims for their reaction to a film that insults their prophet, but when a film is made showing how their messiah was tempted to leave His ministry and walk away (even though, int the film, He did not succomb to this temptation) They show up in droves chanting, screaming, threatening those who are going to the theater. I know, I was there. The difference being there were a number of police officers in and around the theater, and in America we had the infrastructure to prevent most violent outbreaks from our religious fanatics.

BUT that is not to see we do not have a problem.
Two things come to light. One the vengeful nature of the Islamic protesters and Two American intolerance for other religions.

First off, I am beginning to think that most Muslims are as bad at not reading the Quran as most Christians are about not reading the Bible. I would like for TG123 to kindly weigh in on this. I don't think the film is the entire problem either, as poverty, political instability and a decrease in social infrastructure in Egypt and Libya do exert an influence on the abilities and means of radicals. And these are radicals. I do not for one minute believe that these are the "Average Muslims"
I think these are more like what in the USA we would see as Westboro Baptist Church, the Churches of Christ and Terry Jones Ministries. They are hate mongers. These radical Muslims are no more interested in loving themselves or thy neighbors anymore than Fred Phelps or Terry Jones are.
Again, the difference being that here in America, if Terry Jones or Fred Phelps were to cross to far over the line of what is legally allowed, well, David Koresh is a great example of what would happen.

The Quran states clearly in Surat Fussilat 41:34
And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend.

And I bring this up again hoping to have further conversation with the OP and asking him to please weigh in on this.

I do not approve of the film Mocking the prophet Muhammed, and I do not approve of others disrespecting him. I am not a Muslim, but I differ from most Christians in that I actually Love everyone and I am bothered by anyone or anything which violates the sanctity of human life or human rights.

Which brings up the second point on intolerance, which remains an issue here in America. I have had many friends who arre Christian, Buddhist, Muslim (very few) atheist, Jewish, pagan, new age etc etc the lost goes on I love them all.
The thing that bothers me is the continued racism and judgementalism we have towards people of other races, nationalities and ssadly, religions.
Caase in point, I frequent a Buddhist study group for reasons I will not dwell upon here. I sometimes get flack from local Christians about my involvement there, to which I respond: "Well if your product was better, then I would not be shopping elsewhere." Usually ends the conversation because they have to go off and ask someone else how to respond to that or think about it and try to figure out what I mean.
The thing is, being a greater, better example is ultimately what will bring about a solution. This should not be an "US vs THEM" Issue, but instead, and Us WITH Them issue. We should be working WITH Them to better their economic and political situation, helping to provide them with the infrastructure they need to put food on their families tables and teach their kids to read and write.
And when someone chooses something other than Christianity, we do not need to over react. What I am suggesting is that what religion works for one, may not work for the next guy. We need to accept and acknowledge this. We also need to know that radicals often commit their actions based on desperation and fear....let us explore then first what is causing this desperation and fear. Is it religion alone, or is it religion AND poverty? Is it because of a lack of infrastructure, education or political instability? If so, then to provide peace for the people there as well as security for us here at home, we need to look first to the underlying problems. And that will require putting asaide racial and religious boundries for a while, to work together for the common good of humanity.

 

[Blessedj01]

It's all funny (parody) until someone gets hurt, or until someone insults YOUR religion or MY religion right?

Remember the protests regarding the film in the late 80's Last Temptation of Christ ? I remember going to see the film, and there were thousands and thousands of angry Christians around the theater, holding signs, shouting at everyone, screaming, basically acting like fools, because for one, they had never seen the film, and two, what they were protesting in the film, NEVER ACTUALLY HAPPENED IN THE FILM!!! Perhaps we forget the riots in Europe where Christians threw bombs at a theater that was showing the fim ?
My, my how Christians will point the finger at Muslims for their reaction to a film that insults their prophet, but when a film is made showing how their messiah was tempted to leave His ministry and walk away (even though, int the film, He did not succomb to this temptation) They show up in droves chanting, screaming, threatening those who are going to the theater. I know, I was there. The difference being there were a number of police officers in and around the theater, and in America we had the infrastructure to prevent most violent outbreaks from our religious fanatics.

BUT that is not to see we do not have a problem.
Two things come to light. One the vengeful nature of the Islamic protesters and Two American intolerance for other religions.

First off, I am beginning to think that most Muslims are as bad at not reading the Quran as most Christians are about not reading the Bible. I would like for TG123 to kindly weigh in on this. I don't think the film is the entire problem either, as poverty, political instability and a decrease in social infrastructure in Egypt and Libya do exert an influence on the abilities and means of radicals. And these are radicals. I do not for one minute believe that these are the "Average Muslims"
I think these are more like what in the USA we would see as Westboro Baptist Church, the Churches of Christ and Terry Jones Ministries. They are hate mongers. These radical Muslims are no more interested in loving themselves or thy neighbors anymore than Fred Phelps or Terry Jones are.
Again, the difference being that here in America, if Terry Jones or Fred Phelps were to cross to far over the line of what is legally allowed, well, David Koresh is a great example of what would happen.

The Quran states clearly in Surat Fussilat 41:34
And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend.

And I bring this up again hoping to have further conversation with the OP and asking him to please weigh in on this.

I do not approve of the film Mocking the prophet Muhammed, and I do not approve of others disrespecting him. I am not a Muslim, but I differ from most Christians in that I actually Love everyone and I am bothered by anyone or anything which violates the sanctity of human life or human rights.

Which brings up the second point on intolerance, which remains an issue here in America. I have had many friends who arre Christian, Buddhist, Muslim (very few) atheist, Jewish, pagan, new age etc etc the lost goes on I love them all.
The thing that bothers me is the continued racism and judgementalism we have towards people of other races, nationalities and ssadly, religions.
Caase in point, I frequent a Buddhist study group for reasons I will not dwell upon here. I sometimes get flack from local Christians about my involvement there, to which I respond: "Well if your product was better, then I would not be shopping elsewhere." Usually ends the conversation because they have to go off and ask someone else how to respond to that or think about it and try to figure out what I mean.
The thing is, being a greater, better example is ultimately what will bring about a solution. This should not be an "US vs THEM" Issue, but instead, and Us WITH Them issue. We should be working WITH Them to better their economic and political situation, helping to provide them with the infrastructure they need to put food on their families tables and teach their kids to read and write.
And when someone chooses something other than Christianity, we do not need to over react. What I am suggesting is that what religion works for one, may not work for the next guy. We need to accept and acknowledge this. We also need to know that radicals often commit their actions based on desperation and fear....let us explore then first what is causing this desperation and fear. Is it religion alone, or is it religion AND poverty? Is it because of a lack of infrastructure, education or political instability? If so, then to provide peace for the people there as well as security for us here at home, we need to look first to the underlying problems. And that will require putting asaide racial and religious boundries for a while, to work together for the common good of humanity.

That attack came from the Catholic far-right and was associated with the National Front. Not saying Christians haven't reacted in similar ways to Muslims in the past, but I do find some of your comparisons pointless. Also, I don't see how your example relates to an incident in which a US diplomat was allegedly raped and murdered. Not only that, but we have arms and real militias, linked with real wars involved. That movie may have stirred up some radicals in the "Christian" community, but it has nothing on the situation between radical Islam and the west.

And it doesn't even begin to compare to the violence that this film has been used as an excuse for. So sorry, I can't take your side completely. I also can't really stomach your use of the term "prophet Mohammed." As far as I'm concerned, there's a way to criticize and way to go about things - but the man himself deserves no more respect or veneration than you or I or any child of God. There's no special status for him in my eyes and he's not above criticism, nor are his followers. Nothing in that movie was deserving of peoples' deaths and no excuses at all should be made.

Also, the movie itself doesn't actually depict anything that's not already in the koran or explained by some apologetics within muslim theology. Some dialogue may be new, but the events are basically the truth about who he was. People jumping to say the movie is vile and horrible, are defending the radicals. It's a barely provocative film that looks like it's filmed on a camcorder. All it does is take away the gloss from islamist propaganda about who he was.

Also you did not really address the fact that the Koran considers all of the rest of us subhuman enemies of God. I realise that's no reason to abandon the principles of Christ, and to love our enemies, but sometimes people understate just how bad it really is. There's no getting around the plain fact that jihad is a concept condoned in the koran and we are seeing it's true life effects.

 

[RickardoHolmes]

Interesting point blessed, especially about the far right catholic origins of the American film in 1988, which was joined in mass by numerous Right wing christians of all denominations and condemned across the board. I saw thousands and thousands of protestors around the mall attached to a theater where I went to see the film. The police had barracades around the theater to keep the protestors away, I understand a few were arrested and/or sent home for harrassing people going into the theater early on, but the presence of numerous police officers made fora safe haven those of us who chose to see the film.

I think we hae to remember here that not only do we love all the Muslim people, we have to remember that GOD loves them too. And that means the least most vile violent radical who has never had anyone love him his whole life, who has never had a family, had a job, money, has had to beg for food, who has absolutely nothing in the world...God loves HIM just as HE love us.
And these are the people That NEED Love the most.
And as Christians, as Non-Muslims, we need to use Love and fellowship to break down the legalsim of the radical muslim thinking, and judgementalism is not going to work. What will work is introducing a win-win and us-us philosophy and allowing it to filter through their society.
I also do not believe that ALL muslims are like the radical protestors,or that all Muslims are inherantly bad, no more than I believe that all Christians are automatically good people.
I do believe that there are cultural and societal based factors which contribute to the problems there in the Middle east, no one is blameless, and credit can go only to those who are willing to work with others, set aside hatred and selfishness and all focus on a humanitarian life . There is no problem there or anywhere that cannot be solved by the great minds of this planet. We have the technology to feed people, travel, cure diseases. We need to focus on solving problems, not arguing and creating strife.
I challenge you to step up and help be part of that solution.

 

[TG123]

It's all funny (parody) until someone gets hurt, or until someone insults YOUR religion or MY religion right?

Remember the protests regarding the film in the late 80's Last Temptation of Christ ? I remember going to see the film, and there were thousands and thousands of angry Christians around the theater, holding signs, shouting at everyone, screaming, basically acting like fools, because for one, they had never seen the film, and two, what they were protesting in the film, NEVER ACTUALLY HAPPENED IN THE FILM!!! Perhaps we forget the riots in Europe where Christians threw bombs at a theater that was showing the fim ?
My, my how Christians will point the finger at Muslims for their reaction to a film that insults their prophet, but when a film is made showing how their messiah was tempted to leave His ministry and walk away (even though, int the film, He did not succomb to this temptation) They show up in droves chanting, screaming, threatening those who are going to the theater. I know, I was there. The difference being there were a number of police officers in and around the theater, and in America we had the infrastructure to prevent most violent outbreaks from our religious fanatics.

BUT that is not to see we do not have a problem.
Two things come to light. One the vengeful nature of the Islamic protesters and Two American intolerance for other religions.

First off, I am beginning to think that most Muslims are as bad at not reading the Quran as most Christians are about not reading the Bible. I would like for TG123 to kindly weigh in on this. I don't think the film is the entire problem either, as poverty, political instability and a decrease in social infrastructure in Egypt and Libya do exert an influence on the abilities and means of radicals. And these are radicals. I do not for one minute believe that these are the "Average Muslims"
I think these are more like what in the USA we would see as Westboro Baptist Church, the Churches of Christ and Terry Jones Ministries. They are hate mongers. These radical Muslims are no more interested in loving themselves or thy neighbors anymore than Fred Phelps or Terry Jones are.
Again, the difference being that here in America, if Terry Jones or Fred Phelps were to cross to far over the line of what is legally allowed, well, David Koresh is a great example of what would happen.

The Quran states clearly in Surat Fussilat 41:34
And not equal are the good deed and the bad. Repel [evil] by that [deed] which is better; and thereupon the one whom between you and him is enmity [will become] as though he was a devoted friend.

And I bring this up again hoping to have further conversation with the OP and asking him to please weigh in on this.

I do not approve of the film Mocking the prophet Muhammed, and I do not approve of others disrespecting him. I am not a Muslim, but I differ from most Christians in that I actually Love everyone and I am bothered by anyone or anything which violates the sanctity of human life or human rights.

Which brings up the second point on intolerance, which remains an issue here in America. I have had many friends who arre Christian, Buddhist, Muslim (very few) atheist, Jewish, pagan, new age etc etc the lost goes on I love them all.
The thing that bothers me is the continued racism and judgementalism we have towards people of other races, nationalities and ssadly, religions.
Caase in point, I frequent a Buddhist study group for reasons I will not dwell upon here. I sometimes get flack from local Christians about my involvement there, to which I respond: "Well if your product was better, then I would not be shopping elsewhere." Usually ends the conversation because they have to go off and ask someone else how to respond to that or think about it and try to figure out what I mean.
The thing is, being a greater, better example is ultimately what will bring about a solution. This should not be an "US vs THEM" Issue, but instead, and Us WITH Them issue. We should be working WITH Them to better their economic and political situation, helping to provide them with the infrastructure they need to put food on their families tables and teach their kids to read and write.
And when someone chooses something other than Christianity, we do not need to over react. What I am suggesting is that what religion works for one, may not work for the next guy. We need to accept and acknowledge this. We also need to know that radicals often commit their actions based on desperation and fear....let us explore then first what is causing this desperation and fear. Is it religion alone, or is it religion AND poverty? Is it because of a lack of infrastructure, education or political instability? If so, then to provide peace for the people there as well as security for us here at home, we need to look first to the underlying problems. And that will require putting asaide racial and religious boundries for a while, to work together for the common good of humanity.

Thanks for the response, RickardoHolmes. I agree that the idiots who are burning embassies and making death threats and killing people are a minority, and most Muslims do not act in this way. I do not believe the Quran promotes or defends their conduct.

 

[simplegifts]

I agree that the videomaker probably doesn't have noble intentions to lead people to Christ, but I don't agree with he hype - even from answeringislam. I just don't see that the video is in any way more insulting or misleading than say, The Life of Brian, or those Red Bull adverts with "Jesus" walking on water. I think answeringislam is saying the right thing by telling people to speak the truth with a spirit of love, but I also think it's an untenable position. How do you criticise Islam? Why does there have to be so much protocol?

It's not actually the video's fault, or the videomaker's fault that some Muslims have reacted the way they did. AI imo is being naive in buying into the myth that all this outrage comes from the video itself. I believe there are strong ties to these reactions in "undercover" al qaeda operations and other militant groups. The Libyan government says these attacks were planned for months, for instance. I don't think it all has to do with people's religious outrage anyway, I think we're just seeing the results of a ideological violent society coming to bear fruit.

Not sure why everyone else has to pay the price for radical Islam's outbursts. You don't see embassies being stormed over all the pictures on the net concerning Jesus. I just think the video was not that bad from what I saw in the trailer - it mostly was a literal interpretation of the koran (ie. stuff like muhammed's suicide attempt/allegedly speaking to devils/having an underage wife). The only thing I noticed was some silly extra dialogue. But how else do you parody?

Why are people so scared of parodying something that's patantly false anyway? Are we so, so afraid now? Are we going to let ourselves be blackmailed?

Yes!!
... I think we're just seeing the results of a ideological violent society coming to bear fruit.

Not sure why everyone else has to pay the price for radical Islam's outbursts.


Guess what Muslims -
The information in that silly film is from the history, hadith and Quran!!

 

[RickardoHolmes]

I am of the belief that if a film parodied Stalin, for example showing him to be a drunk, a half witted mentally ill egotist, well, showing that film in the former USSR may not have sparked a riot but it would buy the presenter an execution. Likewise with Hitler in Germany. these were aspects of a society which ws inherantly violent.
And aspect we have now that differs though, is in the lack of education and the higher poverty rates of these nations, coupled with the political instability. now by lower educational standards, I do not mean illiteracy, which Islamic nations traditionally score on a high level, but the curriculum of what is taught. If the educational foundtation is based in something violent, rreactionary or lacking higher educational standards, then why would we not expect those who are produced by it to try to solve problems through violence?

Now I do not want to single out any group, but as a great example, look at the populace of jails on a Saturday night in any city. It is full of alcoholics, drug users and people who unable to solve conflicts with their brains, try to solve them with fists instead.
Perhaps these reactionaries in Libya are not smart enough to figure out a better way to solve problems?

The question remains, we here in America DO have choices, we DO know better and WHAT should we do about it?

DO we sit back and blame Islam, or do we look at WHY these Islamic radicals feel the necessity to act out with violence and rage?

Consider that there have to be other factors at work, what are these factors and how do we address them ?

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

I am of the belief that if a film parodied Stalin, for example showing him to be a drunk, a half witted mentally ill egotist, well, showing that film in the former USSR may not have sparked a riot but it would buy the presenter an execution. Likewise with Hitler in Germany.

Are you for real? Hitler is pretty much universally reviled in Germany, and a significant chunk of our school education focuses on highlighting the horrors of that dark chapter of history. (We read novels set in that era in German class, spoke about the religious dimension in Religious Education, dealt with WW2 and everything leading up to it at least thrice in History, etc.)
True, Neo-Nazis exist - but you'll find more of them in Poland and Russia than in Germany, which is the ultimate irony of ironies. In Germany, most of them are ill-educated, unemployed members of the lower social strata heralding from the former GDR. They need something to focus their frustration, and xenophobia is always a welcome outlet. "The FOREIGNERS are to blame!!!"

 

[RickardoHolmes]

HERE Jane


I'll write slow so you can understand what I said

IF you made a film mocking Hitler During World War Two and tried to pass it around Germany, You would have been killed either under Hitler's orders or by his fanatical followers

If you make a fim mocking Muhammed and Pass it around the Middle East, somewhere some Muslims will be offended and by their socio-cultural nature will react violently.

IF You make a film Mocking Jesus and release it in America, then you will see anything from scattered death htreats to organized protests, but nothing on the scale of what would be encountered in the two above scenarios.

JUST Kidding JAne (YOU KNOW I LOVE YOU) I should have been more specific, sometimes I try to type as fast as I think and that never works, especially with mild dyslexia

MOVING ON

I recommend looking through this book
The Middle East: A Cultural Psychology - Gary S. Gregg - Google Books
The Middle East: A cultural Psychology. It was written by a psychology professor. I think to understand the problem in the Middle east, weewe need to understand the cultural situations beneath it.

I wish TG123 would weigh in on this issue because I think his insight is so valuable here. Anyone with the background and experiences he has had as a former Muslim and as an individual or arabic descendants would be worth hearing.

IN regards to What Muslims practice/believe I would like to hear more from him on the socio-cultural implications of islam and poverty in places like Libya and Egypt.
Looking at GNP and other factors, including unemployment, education level, etc I can only imainge how bad it must be in Libya right now, most Americans cannot and probably do not want to comprehend what may be ahppening there now.
A comparison though would to be to look at the lower classes of American society, those living at or below the poverty line, those of limited eduation and limited income, and look at the church demographics and membership of those within the Christian movement, I think we would see a clear pattern of more evangelical, fundamentalist, or pentacostal types therein. Not to say that ALL are inclusive, but more liberal/progressive movements such as the episcopal church have always trended more towards the more intellectual/upper class of congregants.
Likewise, there seems to be a clear involvement based on what I can see with the most radical muslims and the poorest muslims, again I would like to hear TG123's assessment of this.
It would follow that those who have less in the world would therefore look more to an afterlife, and hold a view that a positive afterlife awaits them after suffering in this world. This too is part of the problem, as it is socially irresponsible for any religion to emphasize an afterlife over this reality, since truly no one can know what is in an afterlife. And when admission to the afterworld is predicated on destruction and violation of human rights in this life, then it moves from socially irresponsible to destructive. David Koresh and Jim Jones all over again, Only under a green star and moon instead of a cross.
Anyone who is so miserable in this life may have nothing else to look forward to other than the hope for a big reward in the afterlife. This sadly makes death the ultimate goal of living!!!
What should be addressed here is the underlying social concern of life in places like Libya, and what we as educated and caring people can do to help solve these people solve their problems in life. THAT would be socially responsible. It would be socially responsible not jsut for the humanity involved, the human rights aspect, but also for the security and safety. If people spent less time fighting, and more time, gardening, ffor example, maybe we would have fewer people starving in places like, Libya?

 

[Blessedj01]

It was only 7 years ago that 200 people were killed and 800 injured with the muhammed cartoons. Remember that.

Christians shouldn't be judging people and going about criticism in an ungodly manner but that doesn't mean there is no issue here.

 

[muslimsoldier4life]

It was only 7 years ago that 200 people were killed and 800 injured with the muhammed cartoons. Remember that.

It was only 10 years ago that the United States, with the intent of religious freedom for Christian Americans, invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and in the process, killing hundreds of thousands of Muslim men, women and children.

Oh wait, they're still doing it today.

 

[Jane_the_Bane]

It was only 10 years ago that the United States, with the intent of religious freedom for Christian Americans, invaded Iraq and Afghanistan and in the process, killing hundreds of thousands of Muslim men, women and children.

Oh wait, they're still doing it today.

To a certain degree, I agree with the underlying sentiment of your post:

I have long since discarded my childish notions that the USA were somehow the "good guys", realizing that the world does not operate along the lines of a Hollywood action flick. I've also been extremely wary of American imperialist aspirations, and realize that barbarism can wrap itself in the mantle of supposedly civilized conduct.
Or, in other words: just because you use official troops and refer to civilian casualties as "collateral damage" does not absolve you of your guilt. Especially the invasion of Iraq took place under the flimsiest of pretexts, and its consequences are exactly what I predicted ten years ago.


BUT: I cannot see eye to eye with people who'd choose murder in response to a caricature. I can understand that some strong emotions are involved here, I can even grasp how it might feel more personal than an actual personal insult - but the degree of violence involved here simply outweighs any sympathy I might otherwise feel for the outraged muslim community. (And that would even apply if the targets of their violence were actually responsible for the provocation.)

I find the conduct of the protesters here to be barbaric and unacceptable, and they certainly tarnish the reputation of Islam more than that stupid amateur film ever could. I'd certainly like to hear more muslims speak out against the violence, to dispell the atrocious image painted by gibbering savages calling for blood.

 

[muslimsoldier4life]

I'd certainly like to hear more muslims speak out against the violence, to dispell the atrocious image painted by gibbering savages calling for blood.

Muslims do speak out against it, however the media shuts them out. They play out the violence and then allow others who hate Muslims and Islam, to be painted as correct in saying that Islam is a violent religion and that we are barbaric idiots. Several posters on here are included in that xenophobic group.

 

[JJWhite]

To a certain degree, I agree with the underlying sentiment of your post:

I have long since discarded my childish notions that the USA were somehow the "good guys", realizing that the world does not operate along the lines of a Hollywood action flick. I've also been extremely wary of American imperialist aspirations, and realize that barbarism can wrap itself in the mantle of supposedly civilized conduct.
Or, in other words: just because you use official troops and refer to civilian casualties as "collateral damage" does not absolve you of your guilt. Especially the invasion of Iraq took place under the flimsiest of pretexts, and its consequences are exactly what I predicted ten years ago.


BUT: I cannot see eye to eye with people who'd choose murder in response to a caricature. I can understand that some strong emotions are involved here, I can even grasp how it might feel more personal than an actual personal insult - but the degree of violence involved here simply outweighs any sympathy I might otherwise feel for the outraged muslim community. (And that would even apply if the targets of their violence were actually responsible for the provocation.)

I find the conduct of the protesters here to be barbaric and unacceptable, and they certainly tarnish the reputation of Islam more than that stupid amateur film ever could. I'd certainly like to hear more muslims speak out against the violence, to dispell the atrocious image painted by gibbering savages calling for blood.

Peace, Propaganda & the Promised Land

 

[simplegifts]

Markets in Gaza:
markets in gaza - Google Search

The Truth About Israel Transferring Aid to Gaza | United with Israel

Who Started It?



Reviewed by Michael Oren Sunday June 10, 2007


1967 Israel, the War, and the Year That Transformed the Middle East
By Tom Segev

The scenes flashed across the TV screens: tens of thousands of Arab troops massing on Israel's borders, frenzied demonstrations in every Arab capital demanding the demise of the Jewish state, the leaders of the Soviet bloc proclaiming unqualified support for Arab war aims while the French -- Israel's only ally -- abruptly changed sides. "Our objective is the freeing of Palestine and the liquidation of the Zionist existence," declared the Syrian chief of staff, while the Iraqi president proclaimed, "Our goal is clear -- to wipe Israel off the face of the map." Egyptian president Gamal Abdel Nasser, who ousted U.N. peacekeepers from the Egypt-Israel border and blockaded Israeli shipping through the Straits of Tiran, foresaw a "total war . . . aimed at Israel's destruction." Bracing themselves for the onslaught, Israelis called up their army reserve, hoarded gas masks, and dug trenches and thousands of graves. Yet even these preparations seemed insufficient. "We shall destroy Israel and prepare boats to deport the survivors," the Palestine Liberation Organization pledged, "if there are any."

Israel did not wait to see if Arab leaders would fulfill their promises. On June 5, 1967 -- 40 years ago last week -- the Israelis struck. In an attack lasting a little over an hour, the Israeli air force destroyed more than 250 Egyptian planes, and Israeli ground forces broke through Egyptian lines in Sinai. Israel had urged Jordan to stay out of the war, but Jordanian artillery began shelling West Jerusalem and suburban Tel Aviv, and Jordanian warplanes struck Israeli coastal cities. From atop the Golan Heights, Syrian gunners rained thousands of shells onto Israeli farms in Galilee. Though faced with a multi-front war, the Israelis fought vigorously, first driving the Egyptians out of Sinai and Gaza and the Jordanians out of the West Bank and Jerusalem. They then silenced the Syrian guns and captured the Golan Heights. In six extraordinary days, Israel's citizen soldiers had defeated three major Arab armies and captured territories four times the size of pre-1967 Israel.

Hundreds of books have been written about the Six-Day War, as it is known in the West -- the Arabs prefer "the June War" or simply "the Setback" -- and more are appearing still. The newest and lengthiest of these is Tom Segev's 1967. A columnist for Israel's leftwing Ha'aretz newspaper, and a self-styled New Historian who has labored to debunk what he regards as Israel's founding myths, Segev has previously set out to demonstrate Zionist culpability for the deterioration of Arab-Jewish-British relations in the period before Israel's creation and, thereafter, Israel's indifference to the survivors of the Holocaust. 1967, however, aims at overturning what Segev deems the most hallowed of Israeli myths -- namely, that the Six-Day War was a just and existential struggle that Israel, isolated and outgunned, had no choice but to wage.

Though it is never explicitly stated, Segev's thesis is clear. Israeli fears of an Arab attack "had no basis in reality," he argues; "there was indeed no justification for the panic that preceded the war, nor for the euphoria that took hold after it." Rather than responding to an imminent Arab threat, Israelis were reacting out of a deep-seated trauma born of years of Jewish suffering. Referring to the digging of graves in anticipation of mass Israeli casualties, for example, he writes, "Only a society drenched in the memory of the Holocaust could have prepared so meticulously for the next one." Segev also faults the economic crisis of 1966 that sensitized Israelis to perceived perils, and castigates Prime Minister Levi Eshkol for failing to stand up to his warmongering generals. Indeed, the belligerence of military leaders such as Ariel Sharon and Yitzhak Rabin was, for Segev, the primary cause of the war: "They clung to the Israeli culture of youth; they were like adolescent boys or bulls in rut. They believed in force and they wanted war. War was their destiny."

Substantiating these claims requires Segev to engage in rhetorical acrobatics. Fortifying his contention that Israeli malaise created an atmosphere for war, he writes, "Beginning in 1966, more and more Israelis had started to lose faith in themselves and sink into depression." A few pages later, however, to show how an excess of Israeli bravado heightened the war-fever, he asserts, "At the beginning of 1966 . . . Israelis expressed satisfaction and a fundamental faith in their future . . . generating hope and pride." To reconcile these inconsistencies, Segev is forced to divide the war into separate conflicts, each with its own Israel-based cause. "While war with Egypt was the outcome of Israel's demoralization and a sense of helplessness, the fighting with Jordan and Syria expressed a surge of power and messianic passion."

Laboring to prove his point forces Segev not only to contradict himself but also to commit glaring oversights. The book repeatedly asserts that war might have been averted if Israel had accepted an American plan to break the Egyptian blockade by sending an international convoy through the Straits of Tiran. But the American plan, code-named Regatta, was rejected by Congress, as well as by 24 of the 26 nations invited to contribute to the convoy. Segev knows this fact but throughout the book pretends that a diplomatic option remained. Similarly, his need to demonstrate Israel's strength before the war compels him to overlook Soviet support for the Arab war effort and France's last-minute decision to back the Arabs. The French move is mentioned only at the end of the book and then -- bizarrely -- as one of the reasons that Israelis clung to their newly conquered territory.

But the most telling omission relates not to the Israelis or to any foreign power but rather to the Arabs. Segev's book is all but devoid of Arab calls for Israel's destruction and the slaughter of its citizens. There is no mention of pro-war demonstrations, of Egypt's willingness to use poison gas against its enemies, or of the detailed Arab plans for conquering Israel. Segev even ignores the Khartoum resolution after the war, in which the Arab states refused to negotiate with Israel and to grant it peace and recognition. These omissions inflict an injustice on the Arabs by treating them as two-dimensional props in a solipsistic Israeli drama.
1967 presents some engaging portraits of Israel in the mid-1960s, from the high cost of apartments to the subservience of young Israeli wives. Segev has scoured the Israeli and American archives and has shed light on the post-1967 period. But by disregarding the Arab dynamic and twisting his text to meet a revisionist agenda, he undermines his attempt to reach a deeper understanding of the war. Such an understanding is vital if Arabs and Israelis are to avoid similar clashes in the future and peacefully co-exist. ·