Religious persecution in France

Status
Not open for further replies.

QustantinahQuaker

Active Member
Nov 8, 2004
227
18
36
Connecticut USA
Visit site
✟7,943.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Politics
US-Others
The Arab American Institute is a front for Wahabees. It could do a great service to Arab Americans by clearly and frequently denouncing Bin Laden, Arab dictators and Wahabees. It could assert that it opposes shir'ia law being imposed against the will of Nigerians and Sudanese and millions of non-Moslems in Africa and Asia. If it did so, the Arab American Institute would incur the wrath of militant moslems and suffer loss of funding. That is cowardice, and it speaks volumes.
The Arab American Institute has nothing to do with Wuhabbis. It's primary interest is Arab Americans, people like myself. Arabs living in the USA. Most of whom are Christians. Its funding does not come from the Middle East. But instead comes mostly from Arab Americans and the US government. The AAI did condemn the 911 attacks, just like every other major Arab American organization. It's main focus is not national security or foreign affairs. The "silence" of nonmilitant Muslims for the most part is out of fear and out of deliberate silence on the part of the Arab press. If one watched Aljazeera and compared it with the Saudi owned Al-Arabiyya you get two very different prespectives. If you watch the Saudi state broadcasting or the Syrian state chanles you too get very militant ver insiteful stories. I cannot understand why people try to say Aljazeera is so horrible. It's not its far better than the American run Al-Hurra and the state controlled chanels which realy are just Wuhabbi or militant newsspeak. The average Muslim is not like the average American. HE does not have freedom of the press. He cant speak out in the same manner you or I can. That is an unfair judgement in unfair circumstances.
 
Upvote 0

Sharp

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2004
1,075
0
✟1,271.00
Faith
Baptist
Politics
US-Republican
QustantinahQuaker said:
The Arab American Institute has nothing to do with Wuhabbis. It's primary interest is Arab Americans, people like myself. Arabs living in the USA. Most of whom are Christians. Its funding does not come from the Middle East. But instead comes mostly from Arab Americans and the US government. The AAI did condemn the 911 attacks, just like every other major Arab American organization. It's main focus is not national security or foreign affairs. The "silence" of nonmilitant Muslims for the most part is out of fear and out of deliberate silence on the part of the Arab press. If one watched Aljazeera and compared it with the Saudi owned Al-Arabiyya you get two very different prespectives. If you watch the Saudi state broadcasting or the Syrian state chanles you too get very militant ver insiteful stories. I cannot understand why people try to say Aljazeera is so horrible. It's not its far better than the American run Al-Hurra and the state controlled chanels which realy are just Wuhabbi or militant newsspeak. The average Muslim is not like the average American. HE does not have freedom of the press. He can't speak out in the same manner you or I can. That is an unfair judgement in unfair circumstances.
Thank you for the excellent information. I have searched online for more information about the AAI. In its favor the founder, Zogby, reports the AAI supports the war on terrorism and the group participates in the American political process, which is commendable. The group invited Lieberman to speak but booed him. Again this is participatory American electioneering.

On the other hand the AAI's founder is Zogby who has a palpable anti-Bush bias that shows up in his skewed polls. He even had to apologize to the public for his errors. And the AAI donated money to the Democrat National Committee, and it is supported by what I would call peaceniks (surrender to avoid war) people, which I think is another trick of the left to avoid defense of liberty.

But one could say the same of any political party or group in a free country. The issue is what does the AAI do to actively oppose terrorism and to reclaim Islam from the Wahabees? The fact is they do nothing.

I realize Moslems worldwide live in brutal dictatorships and don't have free speech. Yet millions live in free countries like the USA and Canada and even Europe and parts of free Asia and Australia. Surely they cannot all be cowards. Why are not millions in America - or atleast tens of thousands - vocally denouncing the evils of forcing shii'ria law upon the unwilling at the point of a gun? Why are they in America not denouncing the heresies of Wahabeism as anti-Islam and demanding that their mosques refuse to aid moslems who support Wahabeeism? Surely you know Jews and Christians have already done the same for fanatics in our midst. Why not the moslems?

It is not a lack of freedom. There are millions of moslems in the USA alone. Why the silence in the face such evil being done against humanity in the name of Allah? Why do they keep silent when Allah is used as an excuse for rape and murder by the soldiers of extreme Islam? They should be outraged and should be among the first to join the Marines to fight for freedom. What is wrong with modern Islam in America?
 
Upvote 0

QustantinahQuaker

Active Member
Nov 8, 2004
227
18
36
Connecticut USA
Visit site
✟7,943.00
Faith
Eastern Orthodox
Politics
US-Others
Yet millions live in free countries like the USA and Canada and even Europe and parts of free Asia and Australia. Surely they cannot all be cowards. Why are not millions in America - or atleast tens of thousands - vocally denouncing the evils of forcing shii'ria law upon the unwilling at the point of a gun? Why are they in America not denouncing the heresies of Wahabeism as anti-Islam and demanding that their mosques refuse to aid moslems who support Wahabeeism? Surely you know Jews and Christians have already done the same for fanatics in our midst. Why not the moslems
Surely if you payed any sort of attention to them, you would know that they do. For example, the Islamic Supreme Council of America and the American Islamic Conference, Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Muslim Women's League, as well as numerous Arab American organizations have explicitly condemned terrorism and Wuhabbis. Furthermore, if you look at the demographics, most American Muslims are well spread out, not centered anywhere except for a few major areas (LA, New York and michigan) and well dispersed and not well organized like the Christians or Jews.

It is not a lack of freedom. There are millions of moslems in the USA alone. Why the silence in the face such evil being done against humanity in the name of Allah? Why do they keep silent when Allah is used as an excuse for rape and murder by the soldiers of extreme Islam? They should be outraged and should be among the first to join the Marines to fight for freedom. What is wrong with modern Islam in America?
Did you watch how the Iraqi terrorists took hold of the Lebanese American MUSLIM from Utah this past summer? He was a Marine. I don't think that most American Muslims would agree with you about "fighting for freedom" which I am assuming you are referencing Iraq.

On the other hand the AAI's founder is Zogby who has a palpable anti-Bush bias that shows up in his skewed polls. He even had to apologize to the public for his errors. And the AAI donated money to the Democrat National Committee, and it is supported by what I would call peaceniks (surrender to avoid war) people, which I think is another trick of the left to avoid defense of liberty.
On the other hand, the AAI's founder is not John Zogby. It's founer is Dr. James Zogby. http://www.aaiusa.org/zogby/zogby_home.htm This is his bio from the AAI website. The "anti Bush bias" coming from AAI polls is only because if you've been to an Arab country, that's the sentiment there. Very few people there like him. Sorry. That's life. I can tell you as an Arab, George W Bush is seen as one of the worst leaders in recent history because of his foolish policies and foreign policy naivite.

But one could say the same of any political party or group in a free country. The issue is what does the AAI do to actively oppose terrorism and to reclaim Islam from the Wahabees? The fact is they do nothing.
That is not the purpsoe of the AAI. It's not a sectarian organization. In their own words:
Our domestic agenda includes promoting immigrant rights, community-based social services, educational materials and programming that accurately reflect our community and our heritage, and the full benefits of citizenship for our community.
Internationally, we believe that the US should enhance its ties with Arab countries in all fields: cultural, educational, diplomatic, economic, and security. We support a viable Palestinian state, the integrity of Lebanon, US assistance to advance economic and political development in the region, and a balanced US role in promoting regional peace and prosperity.
On the accurate portrail of our community, that means just that; Arab Americans are overwhelimingly Christian, there is a Muslim minority among us and Arabs in america among the minority in the Muslim community. It is not our duty to "reclaim Islam", that is the duty of Muslims. It is our duty to reclaim our identiy from a society that continually equates Arab with Muslim. The "reclaiming of Islam" is the duty of the Muslims. Not the Arabs. And the Institute has done a fine job of denouncing terrorism and the like. It isn't a paramilitary organization and isn't going to storm the office of suspected radical immams. It doesn't have a militia at it's command (many Arab Americans are immigrants and quite weary of such militancy I know my parent are and just about every Lebanese person I know from Lebanon is sick of fighting for "freedom" and such). And it isn't going to go about trying to recruit Arab American youth to join the military. They have a very nice, easy to use website, I suggest that you check it out because it sounds like you have not. You sound like you have gotten a lot of "he said this or that" and nothing direct. The AAI opposed the Iraqi war, just like many other Arab American organizations, for the reason that most Arab American opposed it as well. At the same time, the AAI takes a proLebanon stance on Syrian interfearance there. This reflects the make of the institute, mostly Levantine Arabs. Especially Lebanese Maronites. Ask a Megrhibi Arab like my father what he thinks of that situation and he thinks it is just and good because the Syrians are protecting the Christians and Arabs from Israel. W/e. The "peaceniks" you mentioned include people who are not warhawks I would assume. They would also include people who have no interest in fighting such wars for glory. Invading Iraq brought noone any closer to freedom. This is a fact. Alawi is not any better than the old Ba'athists. He and those who gave the US the fake intellegence are only 'democrats" because they want power. They have been out of Iraq so long they are no longer even Arab. At least some in the diaspora have been back to their countries. These are ivory tower elites who have been appointed by foreigners to run Iraq. It is no wonder they cannot controll Iraq. I would expect the same from an Algerian who lived in France from the past several decades. They took out one despot and have relpaced him with another. It is amazing that once the secular dictator has been tossed from power (after being a tool of those who tossed him) the chaos resulting is not blamed on the ones who opened the Pandora's box. I chanllege you to find one nonBa'athist Arab state in that region who fought Islamists as effectively. You cannot. Because he killed them. He'd have killed al-Sadr if al-Sadr had begun to behave as he is now. That was the realpolik that was destroyed and our freedom endangered by people who did not pay attention to reality as much as they did ideological banter.

Please, sir, do not write "moslems" that is outdated it's like write "negroes".
 
Upvote 0

Sharp

Well-Known Member
Jul 23, 2004
1,075
0
✟1,271.00
Faith
Baptist
Politics
US-Republican
QustantinahQuaker said:
Surely if you payed any sort of attention to them, you would know that they do. For example, the Islamic Supreme Council of America and the American Islamic Conference, Muslim Public Affairs Council, the Muslim Women's League, as well as numerous Arab American organizations have explicitly condemned terrorism and Wuhabbis. Furthermore, if you look at the demographics, most American Muslims are well spread out, not centered anywhere except for a few major areas (LA, New York and michigan) and well dispersed and not well organized like the Christians or Jews.


Did you watch how the Iraqi terrorists took hold of the Lebanese American MUSLIM from Utah this past summer? He was a Marine. I don't think that most American Muslims would agree with you about "fighting for freedom" which I am assuming you are referencing Iraq.

On the other hand, the AAI's founder is not John Zogby. It's founer is Dr. James Zogby. http://www.aaiusa.org/zogby/zogby_home.htm This is his bio from the AAI website. The "anti Bush bias" coming from AAI polls is only because if you've been to an Arab country, that's the sentiment there. Very few people there like him. Sorry. That's life. I can tell you as an Arab, George W Bush is seen as one of the worst leaders in recent history because of his foolish policies and foreign policy naivite.

That is not the purpsoe of the AAI. It's not a sectarian organization. In their own words:

On the accurate portrail of our community, that means just that; Arab Americans are overwhelimingly Christian, there is a Muslim minority among us and Arabs in america among the minority in the Muslim community. It is not our duty to "reclaim Islam", that is the duty of Muslims. It is our duty to reclaim our identiy from a society that continually equates Arab with Muslim. The "reclaiming of Islam" is the duty of the Muslims. Not the Arabs. And the Institute has done a fine job of denouncing terrorism and the like. It isn't a paramilitary organization and isn't going to storm the office of suspected radical immams. It doesn't have a militia at it's command (many Arab Americans are immigrants and quite weary of such militancy I know my parent are and just about every Lebanese person I know from Lebanon is sick of fighting for "freedom" and such). And it isn't going to go about trying to recruit Arab American youth to join the military. They have a very nice, easy to use website, I suggest that you check it out because it sounds like you have not. You sound like you have gotten a lot of "he said this or that" and nothing direct. The AAI opposed the Iraqi war, just like many other Arab American organizations, for the reason that most Arab American opposed it as well. At the same time, the AAI takes a proLebanon stance on Syrian interfearance there. This reflects the make of the institute, mostly Levantine Arabs. Especially Lebanese Maronites. Ask a Megrhibi Arab like my father what he thinks of that situation and he thinks it is just and good because the Syrians are protecting the Christians and Arabs from Israel. W/e. The "peaceniks" you mentioned include people who are not warhawks I would assume. They would also include people who have no interest in fighting such wars for glory. Invading Iraq brought noone any closer to freedom. This is a fact. Alawi is not any better than the old Ba'athists. He and those who gave the US the fake intellegence are only 'democrats" because they want power. They have been out of Iraq so long they are no longer even Arab. At least some in the diaspora have been back to their countries. These are ivory tower elites who have been appointed by foreigners to run Iraq. It is no wonder they cannot controll Iraq. I would expect the same from an Algerian who lived in France from the past several decades. They took out one despot and have relpaced him with another. It is amazing that once the secular dictator has been tossed from power (after being a tool of those who tossed him) the chaos resulting is not blamed on the ones who opened the Pandora's box. I chanllege you to find one nonBa'athist Arab state in that region who fought Islamists as effectively. You cannot. Because he killed them. He'd have killed al-Sadr if al-Sadr had begun to behave as he is now. That was the realpolik that was destroyed and our freedom endangered by people who did not pay attention to reality as much as they did ideological banter.

Please, sir, do not write "moslems" that is outdated it's like write "negroes".
Yes, your points are well taken and numerous. I shall study these subjects more. Perhaps you are quite correct on much of this, and perhaps I have an overly-pessimistic view of the future of Arabs. I sincerely thank you. You have packed a great deal into a very large post. Good food for thought!
 
Upvote 0

StarSapphire

Joyfully we adore Him!
Nov 28, 2004
2,805
195
Northern California
✟11,448.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
LynnMcG said:
I knew about the persecution in China, which has been going on for so long. But it was the new changes in the European Union that seemed like such a step back! It never ceases to amaze me how we as Christians are supposed to be tolerant to everyone's beliefs and yet no one has to be tolerant of ours!

Amen to that!!
 
Upvote 0

LovesTruth

Well-Known Member
May 22, 2006
1,493
81
✟2,092.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Umm... If I'm not mistaken, the new measures taking place in France are not only violating the rights of French Christians, but isn't it true that those measures are destroying the rights of religious expression of ALL religions in France? I heard that even wearing a beard (which is a symbol of wisom according to Islam) would also be outlawed, as well as wearing religious jewelry or clothing that express ANY religious belief.
No, the law applies only to non-traditional Christians. Islam currently enjoys a favored status in France. Acts of violence by Mohammedans often goes unpunished... especially when persecuting Jews and Christians.
 
Upvote 0

Peregrino

Member
Jun 6, 2007
72
10
✟7,753.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
I had a question for EU members on the board concerning religious persecution in France. I saw, on the Believer's Voice of Victory, where Billye Brim (sp?!) was talking about new laws in France that make it illegal to wear a symbol of your faith - cross, skull cap, veil, etc. AND that it was illegal for churches to seek offerings. AND illegal to lay hands on someone for healing. She also mentioned that the French government was seeking to do a census of churches so they could keep an eye on the religious.

Anyone have any first-hand knowledge of this? I was surfing the EU website and just couldn't find anything in all the information on the site. I'm just curious about this loss of freedom.

Thanks for reading...

Lynn

As a recent ex-atheist finding this out brings pain to my heart. I was so "Yeah, France!" and "Boo, U.S. keeping athiests out of the boy scouts and adding the "One Nation Under God" clause to the pledge!". That's nothing compared to what is happening in France, as I've learnt on this thread.

How could I have been so blind! Freedom is the only way! Freedom for everybody. This nformation means France is actually losing its Constitutional "laicité" (translated roughly as "layman-ness").

The Wikipedia article on -x- says:

The conception of laicite is based on the respect of freedom of thought and of freedom of religion. Thus, the absence of a state religion and the subsequent separation of the state and Church is considered a prerequisite of such freedom of thought.

There is no freedom of religion where the State is anti-religion. Sad indeed.

Mea culpa! :(
 
Upvote 0

Peregrino

Member
Jun 6, 2007
72
10
✟7,753.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Actually, the US has it better than France as it has the "free excercise" clause together with the "separation" ("establishment") clause (also from Wiki):

In the United States, the First Amendment to the Constitution contains a similar concept, although the term "laicity" is not used either in the Constitution or elsewhere. That amendment includes clauses prohibiting both governmental interference with the "free exercise" of religion, as well as governmental "establishment" of religion. These clauses have been held by the courts to apply to both the federal and state governments. Together, the "free exercise clause" and "establishment clause" are considered to accomplish a "separation of church and state."
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.