So says the Imam Samudra, not me. Of course, the learned analysts will say that the Imam Samudra doesn't understand his own religion, which is actually quite easily compatible with democracy. Perhaps that is so, but the learned analysts continue to posit it as an established fact, without ever bothering actually to establish it. Meanwhile, Muslims who agree with the Imam Samudra continue relatively unimpeded to make recruits among peaceful Muslims.
And in the West, the learned analysts don't even allow "Islamic" to be used in conjunction with "terrorism" or "Fascism," as if it is non-Muslim Westerners who have made the equation, when actually it is Muslims who have done so. Watch Steve Emerson shredding Alan Colmes on this very point here.
"Bombers ready to die," from the Sydney Morning Herald (thanks to David):
The three death row Bali bombers say they are ready to die and won't be asking for a presidential pardon.They also expressed delight at the recent controversy surrounding their impending executions, saying the more pain they cause the greater their reward in heaven.
"I'm very happy especially after hearing that John Howard is very regretful, very angry with us," the so-called smiling assassin, Amrozi bin Nurhasyim said today at the island prison where he is held.
"The more he is angry, the more I will get rewards from god, right?
"The more I make infidels angry, the more I will get my reward, so I'm more relaxed."
Islamic militants Amrozi, his elder brother Ali Ghufron (alias Mukhlas) and Imam Samudra were today briefly let out of their isolation cells at Batu Prison, on the island of Nusakambangan in Central Java, to pray for the holy Islamic day Idul Fitri.
They walked the 100 metres to the prison mosque, At-Taubah, unshackled, in their best robes, to pray with other inmates - murderers, terrorists and drug dealers - for today's holiday which marks the end of the fasting month Ramadan.
But as the one-hour ceremony wound up, the three began shouting "god is great", rallying support from other prisoners, before they were told to stop by the guards.
The trio could face execution within weeks for their roles in the October 2002 Bali nightclub bombings, which killed 202 people including 88 Australians.
[...]
The three key players in the bombings remain unrepentant, although they apologised to Muslim victims of the terrorist attacks, to mark the holy day, in which Muslims traditionally apologise for their wrongs.
"We apologise for the victims of the Bali bombings, but the Muslims," Samudra said.
"The infidels will go to hell anyway."
Samudra said the three were not afraid to die, adding he would prefer beheading.
"Absolutely we are not afraid," he said.
"That's what I've been waiting for ... firstly with execution we will go to heaven and then our wish to see God and the angels is far higher than the wish of the infidels for our death.
"Why would we be scared of death? Even now we are not scared to be executed.
"(US President George) Bush and his allies, you all will go to hell but me and all my friends in the world will go to heaven."
"No, no, no there won't be any clemency because its not Islamic law - that is part of democracy and the law of democracy, and we are totally against democracy."
"We apologise for the victims of the Bali bombings, but the Muslims," Samudra said.
"The infidels will go to hell anyway."
Dear Muslims, if the infidels will go to hell anyway, why are you so quick to send them there?
This is an outrage. This is an act of war. Bali has effectively allowed this vermin to celebrate the murders.
They're sure looking forward to their 72 virgins, aren't they? Or maybe to the young boys, fresh as pearls....
They're going to be so disappointed when they discover it's all a crock.
Yup, the Islamic Golden Rule in action. Trying to call it real gold is just alchemy.
Thx for the Colmes-Emerson debate link. Colmes is a good example of someone who considers Islam irreproachable because it's a religion. As Fjordman pointed out in an essay Ali Sina posted at Faith Freedom International, it's lucky Genghis Khan didn't try and rationalize his conquests by founding a religion or we'd have two Islams to contend with today, and we'd be asked to respect both by all the PC idiots.
One Australian who lost six rugby mates noted this "is hypocrisy running riot." Another noted the timing being on the anniversary of the murders making it doubly appalling. Australian reaction can be found at:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22575321-5001021,00.html
No more aid of any kind to a muslim country!
As one mourner pointed out in the article:
"Australia had donated a million dollars to tsunami relief "and then to see them purchase a billion dollars in military munitions from Russia during APEC, the continual reductions in sentencing and the constant threat of terrorism..."
Mourners are anguishing over the death of their loved ones while the Bali ruling muslims empathize with the muslim murderers for Ramadan. The scars of these Australian infidels and infidels everywhere since the birth of mohammed (may he rot in hell, may he rot in the precise hell he cogitated) demand that every moral person stand up and fight and do something to end islam!
The anniversary reunion of scarred infidels may be found at:
http://www.news.com.au/dailytelegraph/story/0,22049,22575320-5005941,00.html
Alam Colmes is one of two reasons I no longer watch "Hannity and Colmes;" the other reason is Hannity.
If I am wrong and there is a heaven, and everyone else is wrong and it is an Islamic heaven, full of Muslims, I would rather be with my friends.
Lock them with dogs for life, cover cell walls with Muhammad's cartoons and feed them only with pork
"Bush and his allies, you all will go to hell but me(sic) and all my friends in the world will go to heaven."
What a wonderful place the Islamic "heaven" must be, full of murderers and torturers. Here's a question: does a killer have to be a moslem and commit his crimes in the name of islam to be admitted? Surely Allah would welcome Hitler, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot (to name a few) considering all the millions of unbelievers they killed. Is there some authority that could declare them honorary moslems?
These murderers will never be put to death ...for killing infidels.
And, the Muslims who died by their terror were not the target, so they could be declared innocent of attacking them.
I see clemency and release within about 3 years.
Then a suicide bombing to finally get them to their 72 year old virgin.
(Better read that old, classical Arabic more closely next time, fellows.)
Keep those iftar dinners coming. Mr. President.
Keep lighting our buildings green, NYC.
The enemy needs its morale boosted.
Kudos to Emerson for his ever increasingly adamant challenges to Colmes' stupid comments and opinions.
But, although the clip doesn't show it, Hannity again repeated the 'extremists have perverted Islam' and 'their twisted version of Islam' lines.
I hope Emerson and other knowledgeable folks will, sooner rather than later, finally explain to Hannity, Beck, et al, that Islam really hasn't been hijacked by 'a tiny minority of extremists'.
I remember when Greg Davis explained to an ex-CIA guy on FNC that Islamic texts do NOT preclude violent jihad against non-Muslims (or somesuch). The CIA guy was pretty flabbergasted by that.
Here's last nights H&C episode.
It's better than you might imagine (although the quality is pretty sad).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnENSJEWAco
PRCS, your comment about Hannity is precisely the reason I reject Hannity and cannot stomach either Hannity or Colmes.
I have e-mailed Hannity through his radio show link and have never gotten a reply, and it seems based on his repeat of the "extremists have perverted Islam" and "their twisted version of Islam" lines I have had no effect.
They are but deceivers of theirselves,they have chosen to follow a false prophet who chose hate over love for his fellow man.
If this is the true, and just God that they believe in,then he is no God that I would ever follow.
It is as simple as that.
"The three death row Bali bombers say they are ready to die and won't be asking for a presidential pardon."
These three tragic figures deserve to die for their horrendous crimes, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't pray for them. Maybe if there were people around in Mohammad's day to pray for him, he would have recognized the spirit that was talking to him for the unclean thing that it was, and there wouldn't be any Islam today.
Oh, please, please Mr. Nice Muslim, embrace Democracy?
What's that you have for me? Kool-Aid? Thanks! I knew we could get along.
Rational, is your middle name Pollyanna by any chance?
Nice sentiment, I suppose,but it's the victims, and their families and friends who are the tragic figures, NOT the bombers!
They're sure looking forward to their 72 virgins, aren't they? Or maybe to the young boys, fresh as pearls....
Well, those are the virgins they speak of. Homosexuality, although forbidden to the masses, and possibly because it is forbidden, is the reward in islam for notable achievements. Like a sweet dessert, homosexuality, especially pedophilic homosexuality, is forbidden until one has deserved it, until one has proven himself worthy of this sweet, sweet dessert. Only after a great deed, such as giving ones life for allah, can an islamic man be awarded the "boys as pearls".
Well, all that trash talk is proof that muslims, at least these muslims, are full of arrogant, egoistic, Islamic entrenched, supremacy ideas, that led them to do a violent act in the name of 'Allah's cause'.
This means, they are 'good' muslims, the 'best'. They should be released immediately and given an Imamship, their own mosques, and good retirement plan from the Saudis.
I wonder if anyone has actually retired from jihad, or if muslims must fight, in theory or practice, their whole lives. Or until Allahs cause has been fulfilled...but he has so many...
Speaking of disillusioned talk show hosts...
I heard Rush yesterday condemning all the "liberals" in Congress out to get Shoeless George for supporting the Armnenian genocide resolution. According to Rush, the "libs" don't care if we alienate our "good ally" Turkey.
Rush and Hannity are the liberals. They are of course ingorant about the true nature of islam, but not only do they refuse to learn about it, they refuse to allow discussion of it on their shows. I've tried to call Rush. I don't get through because the well coached screener doesn't allow calls that contain any criticism of Islam. I've heard Hannity change the subject when a caller once pointed to violent passages in the Koran. These two spend entire shows dedicated to slamming the politically correct left when it is themselves who denigrate the first amendment by their own self-designed censorship rules.
Hannity was supposed to participate in Islamo-Fascism Awareness week. he backed out - some supposed "scheduling conflict". He committed to this a month ago. I'd bet his bosses at Fox told him to step back a bit.
I think Emerson restrained himself when replying to Colmes suggestions re: "books not bombs". Emerson knows that the jihadists do read books and one such particular book gives them a religious justification for teaching 2 year olds about the glory of martyrdom. But if Emerson where to point out that the Koran is the playbook and jihadists' manual, his invitations to appear at FNC might dry up.
I despise both parties for attempting to force the rest of us to choose sides even when both parties are wrong.
Are they sure?
5:090 PICKTHAL: O ye who believe! Strong drink and games of chance and idols and divining arrows are only an infamy of Satan's handiwork. Leave it aside in order that ye may succeed.
47:015 PICKTHAL: A similitude of the Garden which those who keep their duty (to Allah) are promised: Therein are rivers of water unpolluted, and rivers of milk whereof the flavour changeth not, and rivers of wine delicious to the drinkers, and rivers of clear-run honey; therein for them is every kind of fruit, with pardon from their Lord. (Are those who enjoy all this) like those who are immortal in the Fire and are given boiling water to drink so that it teareth their bowels?
Satan’s handiwork in “paradise”, how did that get there?
Al Aqsa Brigades & Hamas for Hillary 08'
rational:
Those three bombers are not "tragic". Hamlet was tragic. King Lear was tragic.
Those bombers are vicious, cruel and despicable.
Watched the Emerson/Colmes debate and, yes, Emerson annihilated Colmes. But Colmes won't learn. And millions of others in the West won't either, including many influential folks. Two daggers, not one, are pointed at America and the West-----------Islamic terrorism and gross ignorance about Islam by non-Muslims. I think a good case could be made that the latter is even more dangerous than the former. Stunning to me just how being a religion (especially if it's from the third-world) is enough to ward off criticism, irrespective of what that religion teaches and preaches. It's madness.
Greetings:
I guess what occurs to me is what was the thought process involved in the writing and publishing of this information.
Is this hateful propaganda spiel something that could not be resisted journalistically?
"They also expressed delight at the recent controversy surrounding their impending executions, saying the more pain they cause the greater their reward in heaven"....from headline.
More proof that Islam produces rotten fruit. And something tells me that heaven isn't where he's going. What a fool.
Wellington:
I agree with the first part, that the Left are perhaps the larger problem. But I disagree that it's because Islam is a religion that they get a free pass. Christianity is a religion and they NEVER get a free pass.
I think the Left's support of Islamofascism is due to the fact that Muslims are a "minority" group. Doesn't matter to the Left what that minority does or stand for, they will automatically side with them.
Maybe I'm just nitpicking, but I think it's a point.
I oppose the death penalty in such cases. They should be kept alive in harsh yet humane conditions: no Koran, no halal, no clocks for prayer times, no imams coming to visit.
In short, treat them like murderers.
I know, dream on...
ImNoDhimmi,Atheling,
Anyone that falls into the grip of something that evil has to be a tragic figure.
Recognizing that fact in no way takes away from their victims.
I forgot to mention that this is the complete Hannity and Colmes episode with Steven Emerson last night.
Note, as others already have, that Hannity (at the end of the clip) is apparently as clueless as Colmes about Islam.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RnENSJEWAco
rational:
Look up what a "tragic figure" consists of. In the classic Western definition it is someone who is in a high place whose character flaw brings them down.
Those bombers were never in a high position. With Islam, they have always been, and shall ever be in the gutter.
"These three tragic figures deserve to die for their horrendous crimes, but that doesn't mean that we shouldn't pray for them." Posted by: rational
There is a place for pity for such as these. If this moves you to pray for them, then I am glad: this compassion is the heart and soul of all good religions.
I do not feel such pity for them, although I do understand it, because I have felt it for others whom I have known personally. You see a human life, a child with a pure heart and endless potential, and you see how someone has made them cruel and heartless. It is a waste and a tragedy but, of course, criminal decisions were made by adults who must face the consequences of their actions.
Do you remember the movie, "Dead Man Walking"? I cried when the nun showed compassion to the murderer because I knew that, when a member of my family was in prison (not for murder), we all had rightfully turned our backs on him, and I cried to think that someone, somewhere, might have been merciful to him, even when he didn't deserve it, because once he had been a child and we had loved him.
Rational:
Your comment is entirely consistent with what I know of Christianity. I agree with you and commend you for having the courage to express yourself clearly and concisely on such a matter.
Which of course is not to say we shouldn't keep our powder dry.
Q: “What is the islamic understanding about democracy, Is there any place for it in islam.”
A: “The common form of democracy prevalent at the moment is representative democracy, in which the citizens do not exercise their right of legislating and issuing political decrees in person, but rather through representatives chosen by them. The constitution of a democratic country will be largely influenced by the needs and wants of its people. Thus, if its people want casinos, bars, gay marriages, prostitution, etc. then with sufficient public pressure, all these vices can be accommodated for. From this, it becomes simple to understand that there can never be scope for a democratic rule from the Islamic point of view.
and Allah Ta'ala Knows Best
Mufti Ebrahim Desai”
http://www.islam.tc/ask-imam/view.php?q=15522
‘‘You can buy goat a lot of places, but I want to kill it myself.”
Self-service goat slaughterhouse gains Muslim customers
‘‘You Buy - You Kill - You Dress - You Take Home,” and business is booming.
http://sheikyermami.com/2007/10/13/%e2%80%98%e2%80%98you-can-buy-goat-a-lot-of-places-but-i-want-to-kill-it-myself/
"Rational:
Your comment is entirely consistent with what I know of Christianity. I agree with you and commend you for having the courage to express yourself clearly and concisely on such a matter.
Which of course is not to say we shouldn't keep our powder dry."
Chatillon,
You obviously understand what Christianity is all about. In Christian theology, no person deserves to be saved. It was only God's love for man, despite his sinfullness, that brought God into this world to save him from his just punishment.
As a man, I can't fathom that kind of love. I'm inclined to have nothing but contempt for those murderers, but if God loves them, It's because he's God, and not a man.
If I say we should pray for those men, it's because the scriptures say that "it is not God's will that a single person should perish."
If they can find the true God, and repent of the evil things they did before they go to the gallows, why should anyone object to that.
I would recommend that everyone keep their powder dry when dealing with Muslims. I wouldn't be so foolish as not to.
Look up what a "tragic figure" consists of. In the classic Western definition it is someone who is in a high place whose character flaw brings them down.
Those bombers were never in a high position. With Islam, they have always been, and shall ever be in the gutter.
atheling,
Regardless of what the classic definition of the word tragic is, the common usage of the word is applied to anyone, without consideration of their political or social position.
When a mine collapses and kills 20 miners we call it a tragedy. We do not consider whether they held high positions in their community or church.
When a child is abducted and murdered we call it a tragedy, without considering character flaws or social position.
My point is simple, when a child is born into an evil system where religion, family, and community glorify evil and immorality, any goodness he might have been borm with is crushed out of his spirit very early in life, and the result is an adult monster who's convinced he's going to be rewarded in heaven for his evil deeds.
I call that a tragedy for him and the rest of mankind.
Praying for someone like that to be delivered from life-long spiritual darkness is in no way taking away from his victims.
rational:
You're not living up to your moniker.
While I commend your praying for these men, I still hold that the use of the word "tragic" is inapplicable. And it's also flawed in the examples you provided, as its misuse is prevalent in journalism.
I just have a pet peeve about the improper use of words, hence my animosity towards political correctness. Words should convey our thoughts and ideas with accuracy and honesty. The use of "tragic" is not accurate in this case.
Sorry, atheling, but I can't find any dctionary that restricts the use of the word tragedy to a person of high position.I think my definition of tragedy is perfectly accurate according to the dictionary definitions below. The Cambridge dictionary of American English is the best, and most accurately reflects the dfinition as understood and used by most people.
Cambridge Dictionary of American English
tragedy
[Show phonetics]
noun [C/U]
a very sad event or situation, esp. one involving death or suffering
Drinking and driving so often lead to tragedy.
A tragedy is also a regrettable situation or result: It's a tragedy (that) so many children are unable to get a decent education.
In the theater, a tragedy is a serious play that ends with the death or suffering of the main character: Shakespeare's tragedies
Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary
tragedy
• noun (pl. tragedies) 1 an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress. 2 a serious play with an unhappy ending, especially one concerning the downfall of the main character.
— ORIGIN Greek tragoidia, apparently from tragos ‘goat’ (the reason remains unexplained) + oide ‘song, ode’.
Sorry, atheling, but I can't find any dctionary that restricts the use of the word tragedy to a person of high position.I think my definition of tragedy is perfectly accurate according to the dictionary definitions below. The Cambridge dictionary of American English is the best, and most accurately reflects the dfinition as understood and used by most people.
Cambridge Dictionary of American English
tragedy
[Show phonetics]
noun [C/U]
a very sad event or situation, esp. one involving death or suffering
Drinking and driving so often lead to tragedy.
A tragedy is also a regrettable situation or result: It's a tragedy (that) so many children are unable to get a decent education.
In the theater, a tragedy is a serious play that ends with the death or suffering of the main character: Shakespeare's tragedies
Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary
tragedy
• noun (pl. tragedies) 1 an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress. 2 a serious play with an unhappy ending, especially one concerning the downfall of the main character.
— ORIGIN Greek tragoidia, apparently from tragos ‘goat’ (the reason remains unexplained) + oide ‘song, ode’.
Sorry, atheling, but I can't find any dctionary that restricts the use of the word tragedy to a person of high position.I think my definition of tragedy is perfectly accurate according to the dictionary definitions below. The Cambridge dictionary of American English is the best, and most accurately reflects the dfinition as understood and used by most people.
Cambridge Dictionary of American English
tragedy
[Show phonetics]
noun [C/U]
a very sad event or situation, esp. one involving death or suffering
Drinking and driving so often lead to tragedy.
A tragedy is also a regrettable situation or result: It's a tragedy (that) so many children are unable to get a decent education.
In the theater, a tragedy is a serious play that ends with the death or suffering of the main character: Shakespeare's tragedies
Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary
tragedy
• noun (pl. tragedies) 1 an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress. 2 a serious play with an unhappy ending, especially one concerning the downfall of the main character.
— ORIGIN Greek tragoidia, apparently from tragos ‘goat’ (the reason remains unexplained) + oide ‘song, ode’.
Sorry, atheling, but I can't find any dctionary that restricts the use of the word tragedy to a person of high position.I think my definition of tragedy is perfectly accurate according to the dictionary definitions below. The Cambridge dictionary of American English is the best, and most accurately reflects the dfinition as understood and used by most people.
Cambridge Dictionary of American English
tragedy
[Show phonetics]
noun [C/U]
a very sad event or situation, esp. one involving death or suffering
Drinking and driving so often lead to tragedy.
A tragedy is also a regrettable situation or result: It's a tragedy (that) so many children are unable to get a decent education.
In the theater, a tragedy is a serious play that ends with the death or suffering of the main character: Shakespeare's tragedies
Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary
tragedy
• noun (pl. tragedies) 1 an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress. 2 a serious play with an unhappy ending, especially one concerning the downfall of the main character.
— ORIGIN Greek tragoidia, apparently from tragos ‘goat’ (the reason remains unexplained) + oide ‘song, ode’.
Sorry, atheling, but I can't find any dctionary that restricts the use of the word tragedy to a person of high position.I think my definition of tragedy is perfectly accurate according to the dictionary definitions below. The Cambridge dictionary of American English is the best, and most accurately reflects the dfinition as understood and used by most people.
Cambridge Dictionary of American English
tragedy
[Show phonetics]
noun [C/U]
a very sad event or situation, esp. one involving death or suffering
Drinking and driving so often lead to tragedy.
A tragedy is also a regrettable situation or result: It's a tragedy (that) so many children are unable to get a decent education.
In the theater, a tragedy is a serious play that ends with the death or suffering of the main character: Shakespeare's tragedies
Cambridge Advanced Learner's Dictionary
tragedy
• noun (pl. tragedies) 1 an event causing great suffering, destruction, and distress. 2 a serious play with an unhappy ending, especially one concerning the downfall of the main character.
— ORIGIN Greek tragoidia, apparently from tragos ‘goat’ (the reason remains unexplained) + oide ‘song, ode’.
Alan Colmes--of Hannity and Colmes, on the Fox News Channel--
Alan Colmes is such a schmuck. In the full meaning of the word.
He insists that fascism and terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. That--well, you heard it--that we cannot indict an entire religion, even if we go back to its roots and find that Fascism is embedded in there. All the earmarks of the Fascist ideology coincide with the ideology called Islam.
Alan Combs has to play the defender of Islam here; he must be aware that if Islam is victorious in the U.S., he has as much chance surviving as he would have had if he tried to join the ranks of Hitler's SS.
Perhaps--he probably would--accept the role of running-dog dhimmi, although if he and his co-believers go far enough Left, they will run smack-dab into the Islamic jihadists.
If this were to happen, guess who would be top dogs?
And who would be kufar, no matter how they contorted themselves?
atheling: No real disagreement with you here. (I somewhat implied as much by mentioning the importance of Islam being a third-world religion.) Christianity is indeed the one major faith which can be mocked by Hollywood, the media and academia with impunity. It's cheap, hypocritical and stupid because Christianity and Judaism are the two religions which should be most esteemed precisely because they place the greatest emphasis upon the worth and dignity of the individual, thus going hand in hand with democracy most effortlessly. (May I say here that I mean no affront to Hinduism or Buddhism, neither of which pose any real threat to the stability of Western society, though I would note here that Nietzsche's analysis that Hinduism should not be fully exculpated because it endorsed the caste system and that Buddhism represents an ideology of weariness with the world each bear consideration.)
Wellington:
Point well taken. LOL, you are a man of reason. Your mention of Nietzsche regarding Hinduism is interesting... GK Chesterton more or less came to the same conclusion.
rational:
Merriam Webster has this:
Etymology: Middle English tragedie, from Middle French, from Latin tragoedia, from Greek tragōidia, from tragos goat (akin to Greek trōgein to gnaw) + aeidein to sing — more at troglodyte, ode
Date: 14th century
1 a: a medieval narrative poem or tale typically describing the downfall of a great man b: a serious drama typically describing a conflict between the protagonist and a superior force (as destiny) and having a sorrowful or disastrous conclusion that elicits pity or terror c: the literary genre of tragic dramas
2 a: a disastrous event : calamity b: misfortune
3: tragic quality or element
My objection to using the word "tragic" in this case is that there is no "downfall". It is just malicious intent. Meaning 1(b) is Aristotle's definintion. Regarding the secondary meaning, I would venture to say that it seems to imply that of a force of nature, rather than that of human will.
However, I won't continue this debate. We can agree to disagree.
"(May I say here that I mean no affront to Hinduism or Buddhism, neither of which pose any real threat to the stability of Western society, though I would note here that Nietzsche's analysis that Hinduism should not be fully exculpated because it endorsed the caste system and that Buddhism represents an ideology of weariness with the world each bear consideration.)
Posted by: Wellington"
Don't mean to offend you, but is Nietzsche supposed to be a so called "expert" in Hinduism, its caste system, and Buddhism ? Exactly how many years did he spend in India trying to understand Hinduism and Buddhism ? And in which part of India did he choose to "study" and "learn" ?
arjun.sevak
Studying a particular religion and becoming expertly knowledgeable of that religion does not require one to live in any particular culture. I think it is safe to call Spencer and Fitzgerald experts in Islam and say they are qualified to render expert opinions. They do not live in an Islamic culture....yet.
atheling, I agree to disagree.
arjun.sevak: Absolutely no offense taken. In fact, thanks for your comment. Friedrich Nietzsche was not an expert on the Hindu religion, but that doesn't mean that his comments about it are therefore devoid of merit. Often an "amateur" can have a particular analysis or insight into a field of knowledge that even the experts have missed. Besides, who could deny Nietzsche is not a thinker worth taking into account on most anything he cared to comment on, irrespective of whether one ultimatley agrees with him?
rational-
It is a "tragedy" that anyone was -or is- ever a victim of the mind prison that is Islam.
But that does not make the believers "tragic" figures when they grow up and kill innocent people because of this diseased ideology.
Their innocent victims are tragic.
The killers are merely dupes of a "tragic" misunderstanding, not "tragic" themselves, because they are not innocent, having killed other human beings unjustly.
To call them "tragic" dilutes the meaning of the word and downplays their criminality.
Criminals lose the "tragic" description by victimizing others.
They are "pitiful", not tragic.
You can pray for them, but don't give them their victims' "tragic" honor.
(The word "tragedy" originally comes from the "satyr [goat] plays" of ancient Greece, which were religious rituals staged for their bawdy and burlesque joys, that slowly mutated into something more sedate and serious and more familiar to us as straight "drama".)
UsandThem,
I asked because I have read books from "experts" who spent some time in some corner of India and wrote about their vast knowledge of "Hinduism". 99% of these so-called "scholars" were not able to understand that Hinduism is less a religion and more a way of life. Even now most people do not get this.
Wellington,
There have been long debates regarding the merits/demerits of the caste system and how it turned rigid during the islamic invasion on JW. (The system was flexible and people were free to choose their castes). Yes, I know that in some places people were discriminated on the basis of their castes, but this thing has been blown WAY out of proportion, earlier by the Brits in order to justify the colonial rule, and later on by certain people who seek sainthood by converting "heathens". I don't want to go off-track, so I'll end this here. If you want to discuss this, you can mail me at arjun.sevak@rediffmail.com. That way we won't be taking up JW bandwidth.
Regards,
Arjun