News:

About us: a forum for monotheists, and discussion of Islam based on The Quran

Main Menu
Menu

Show posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Show posts Menu

Topics - Elke

#1
Off-Topic / THe worst quote thread
April 24, 2007, 05:36:12 AM
 :whatever:

i hope this thread wont live long but this one really hits the bottom

Quote from yusha who i sincerely hope will not have daughters unless he gets a little more intelligent

QuoteI agree with the family, girls should not go to school, especially these western public schools. If I have daughters, insha Allah, I will definitely not send them to school, but rather have them home schooled by a tutor or my wife. This is because school is very dangerous for girls, and they are more vulnerable to satanic temptations.

Sometimes a mosque does not have enough space to accomodate both men and women, in which case men should have priority. If there is already an established barrier and separate section for women, then it is not right for a woman to seek to pray in the men's section as long as she has her own section. Jazak Allah Khair.

#2
06 April 2007

Between Good and Evil

By: Gilad Atzmon

The main British editorials happen to agree that Ahmadinejad has won points in this latest naval round. I find it rather disappointing.  With over 650.000 innocents dead in Iraq and a war against Iran on the horizon, it is about time British columnists stop telling us about tactical gains and losses. Instead they should once and for all endorse a humanist and ethical discourse grounded on genuine responsibility.

The battle between Ahmadinejad and Blair is not a political or diplomatic one, it is not about points. It is actually a clash between civilizations, a fight between humanism and cold pragmatism. As it emerges, in this battle, it is Ahmadinejad rather than Blair who reminds us where goodness rests.  Seemingly, a man who has been repeatedly presented by our deluded Western media as a' radical', 'fundamentalist' and  'Islamofascist' has proved beyond doubt that it is actually him who knows what forgiveness and grace are all about, It was Ahmadinejad who has pardoned the enemy, it was Ahmadinejad that evoked some prospects of  a peaceful future.

Brits and Americans should ask themselves whether they can recall Bush or Blair meeting with any of the many illegally detained Guantanamo Bay inmates? Brits may also want to ask themselves when was the last time their Prime Minister was seen chatting with Abu Hamza or alike? My usual Ziocon critics would obviously blame me for equating here 'innocent' naval personnel to 'murderous blood thirsty terrorists'. I would suggest to them to bear in mind that it is 'us' who label others as 'terrorist' as much as it is 'us' who generously entitle ourselves as 'innocent'. I may as well voluntarily suggest to my possible critics that  within this  so called 'cultural clash', it is again 'us' who launched an illegal war, it is 'us' who are legally and morally responsible for the on going genocide in Iraq and Afghanistan, it is 'our' democratically elected  governments that supports the Israelis atrocities in Palestine. It is 'our' leaders who happen to be the terrorists who fail to talk to the so called enemy, it is 'our' leaders who fail to offer any hope for peace. Instead they just prepare us for many more conflicts to come. More importantly, I may suggest to my critics that in the eyes of an Iranian, the captured naval personnel are part of an invasion army that destroys Arab and Muslim states.

I wonder how the majority of British people would feel about a bunch of Iranian naval commandos operating in the English Channel stopping every Western vessel and searching its belly for some potential military goods. I wonder as well how would some Brits may feel about the Iranian democratically elected government interfering with the British Parliament's recent decision to spend dozens of billions on a new Trident, a weapon designed for indiscriminate killing of millions. Obviously there is no need to elaborate on these rhetoric questions, the answers are clear. The vast majority of Brits wouldn't accept anyone interfering neither with British politics nor with the Kingdom's territorial water. Yet, for the majority of Westerners constant intimidation and destruction of Muslim or Arab states seems to be nothing other than business as usual.

I better admit it; I do not know where exactly the fifteen British sailors were captured.  I am far from being qualified to say who tells the truth about this saga, whether the seamen were captured in Iranian sea or was it in an international water. Reading some expert commentators about the subject, I tend to believe that no one has a clear-cut answer to offer.  In fact, most British papers have now adopted the notion of 'caught in disputed water' just to disguise their premature judgment some days ago.

However, the issue here has nothing to do with truth. The question to be asked here is why is it so complicated for us Western people to accept the possibility that the truth of the other may be slightly or even very different to ours. I may admit that I find it rather concerning that the British press willingly and blindly bought the British government account of the naval dispute while dismissing the possibility that the Iranians may have had an adequate argument to offer.

At the end of the day, we may have to face it, Blair and his government's record for telling the truth is not very impressive. In the last five years the British government has managed to lie more or less about everything; whether it was Iraqi WMD, 45 minutes of deployment of those imaginary weapons, whether it was a fantasmic pretext for an illegal war.

It would be fair to comment that as much as Blair can hardly tell the truth, President Ahmadinejad has yet to be caught telling a lie.  Ahmadinejad, though being rather unpopular in Britain, is far from deceiving his listener. Indeed, he has some harsh things to say. Unlike Blair who was generous enough to admit that the Iranian people have some past to be proud of ("we respect Iran as an ancient civilization, as a nation with a proud and dignified history" Tony Blair, 4.4.06), President Ahmadinejad  insists that Iranian people are entitled as well for a present and even for a prospect of some future.

The President whom some of us  call 'Islamofascist', believes actually that the Iranian people are equal human beings. Thus, he genuinely believes that like more or less  every Western country,  his country and his people have the right to benefit from atomic energy and nuclear research. Is it that outrageous?  I may suggest that considering Western governments are becoming increasingly enthusiastic about atomic energy, it is basically impossible to produce any sufficient ethical argument against Ahmadinejad on that matter.  Moreover, bearing in mind the Israeli nuclear might, there is not a single moral argument for preventing any of Israel's neighbors from having at least a similar deadly capacity.

Ahmadinejad doesn't shy off. He says what he believes to be right, He believes for instance that if the Europeans feel guilty for their past crimes against the Jews, it is the Europeans who should face their past and take responsibility for the Jews rather than dumping them in the Middle East on the expense of the Palestinian people. Again, this thought is rational as well as implacably ethically grounded.  Whether we like its implication or not, is a different matter.  Ahmadinejad may be seen by some as a Holocaust denier, yet as far as I can see, he is one of the very few statesmen who manages to internalise the real meaning of the Holocaust. He says No to racism. Accordingly, he believes that Israel, the 'Jews only State', a racially orientated nationalist entity, has no right to exist. Ahmadinejad has never called for the liquidation of the Israeli people but rather for the dismantling of the Zionist apparatus. Again, I see nothing ethically wrong with that.

In the last days, Ahmadinejad proved again that as far as humanism and peace seeking are concerned, he is ahead of his Western rivals. Seemingly, we have a lot to learn from our Muslim brothers. In this cultural clash, it is us, the West who have lost touch with the notions of empathy and ethics.  May I suggest that it is not Blair and Bush who should be blamed, it is us the people who are failing collectively to listen to the cry of the other. Rather than blaming Blair and his shrinking circuit of supporters, it is us, the silent crowed who should launch into a self searching process. If humanism, rationality, analytical thinking and ethics have been  seen as Western cultural assets at a certain stage, it is currently the so called Muslim 'fundamentalists'  who grasp the real meaning of those qualities far better than us.

Ahmadinejad was there to remind us all what grace was all about. Seemingly, it is Ahmadinejad who evokes the feeling of goodness and it is Blair who couldn't match it. It was Blair who couldn't even recruit the minimal dignity and kindness to salute his foe. British columnists should know better. Ahmadinejad didn't win by points, it wasn't about winning a political battle. This was just another chapter in  an ongoing  clash between civilizations, between Good and Evil and as it seems, we are stuck at least momentarily with Bush, Blair and their Ziocon philosophy, not exactly the civilized one and not remotely the carrier of 'goodness' so to say.

* An Israeli born Jew who served in the Israeli army, currently living in London. He is a top professional jazz musician playing saxophone and clarinet.
#3
The crazy thing is
1* the judge is a woman
2* she puts the quran above the german law (no she's not a muslim)
3* and what an interpretation.... but well we know even some of us do like the idea of beating wifes  >:D

Following article from spiegel :


JUSTIFYING MARITAL VIOLENCE
A German Judge Cites Koran in Divorce Case

By Veit Medick and Anna Reimann

He beat her and threatened her with murder. But because husband and wife were both from Morocco, a German divorce court judge saw no cause for alarm. It's a religion thing, she argued.

The Koran seems to have become the basis for a court decision in Frankfurt.
Zoom
AFP

The Koran seems to have become the basis for a court decision in Frankfurt.
The case seems simply too strange to be true. A 26-year-old mother of two wanted to free herself from what had become a miserable and abusive marriage. The police had even been called to their apartment to separate the two -- both of Moroccan origin -- after her husband got violent in May 2006. The husband was forced to move out, but the terror continued: Even after they separated, the spurned husband threatened to kill his wife.

A quick divorce seemed to be the only solution -- the 26-year-old was unwilling to wait the year between separation and divorce mandated by German law. She hoped that as soon as they were no longer married, her husband would leave her alone. Her lawyer, Barbara Becker-Rojczyk agreed and she filed for immediate divorce with a Frankfurt court last October. They both felt that the domestic violence and death threats easily fulfilled the "hardship" criteria necessary for such an accelerated split.

In January, though, a letter arrived from the judge adjudicating the case. The judge rejected the application for a speedy divorce by referring to a passage in the Koran that some have controversially interpreted to mean that a husband can beat his wife. It's a supposed right which is the subject of intense debate among Muslim scholars and clerics alike."The exercise of the right to castigate does not fulfill the hardship criteria as defined by Paragraph 1565 (of German federal law)," the daily Frankfurter Rundschau quoted the judge's letter as saying. It must be taken into account, the judge argued, that both man and wife have Moroccan backgrounds.

"The husband can beat his wife"

"The right to castigate means for me: the husband can beat his wife," Becker-Rojczyk said, interpreting the judge's verdict.

In an interview with SPIEGEL ONLINE, Becker-Rojczyk said the judge indicated to her that it makes no sense to insist on an accelerated divorce. The judge's advice? Wait for the year-long waiting period to elapse.

The fax from the Frankfurt court granting the conflict of interest claim.
Zoom

The fax from the Frankfurt court granting the conflict of interest claim.
The lawyer and her client were shocked. Immediately, they filed a claim alleging that the judge should have recused herself due to a conflict of interest. They felt that, because of the point of view presented by the judge, she was unable to reach an objective verdict. In the reply sent to Becker-Rojczyk, the judge expressly referred to a Koran verse -- or sura -- which indicates that a man's honor is injured when his wife behaves in an unchaste manner. "Apparently the judge deems it unchaste when my client adapts a Western lifestyle," Becker-Rojczyk said.

On Tuesday evening, Becker-Rojczyk expressed amazement that the judge was still on the bench, given that the controversial verdict was handed down weeks ago. Becker-Rojczyk had elected to go public with the case to attract attention to the judge's conduct. It seems to have worked. On Wednesday, after the Tuesday evening publication of the story on SPIEGEL ONLINE, the attorney received a fax from the Frankfurt court granting the conflict of interest claim and excusing the judge from the case.

Still, it is unlikely that the case will be heard again before the mandated year of separation expires in May. But the judge who heard the case may have to face further consequences for her decision. On Wednesday, numerous politicians in Berlin voiced their horror at the verdict -- and demanded disciplinary action against the judge.

Further investigation

NEWSLETTER
Sign up for Spiegel Online's daily newsletter and get the best of Der Spiegel's and Spiegel Online's international coverage in your In- Box everyday.

"In my opinion, this is a case of extreme violation of the rule of law that can't be solved with a mere conflict of interest ruling," Social Democrat parliamentarian Dieter Wiefelsp?tz told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "There have to be further consequences. This is a case for judicial supervision -- this case needs to be further investigated."

The deputy floor leader for the Christian Democrats, Wolfgang Bosbach, agreed. "This is a sad example of how the conception of the law from another legal and cultural environment is taken as the basis for our own notion of law," he said on Wednesday.

This isn't the first time that German courts have used cultural background to inform their verdicts. Christa Stolle of the women's rights organization Terre des Femmes said that in cases of marital violence, there have been a number of cases where the perpetrator's culture of origin has been considered as a mitigating circumstance -- although such verdicts have become seldom in recent years.

But there remains quite a bit of work to do. "In my work educating sexist and short-sighted Muslim men," asked Michaela Sulaika Kaiser of the Network for Muslim Women, "do I now have to convince German courts that women are also people on the same level with men and that they, like any other human, have the right to be protected from physical and psychological violence?"
#4
Off-Topic / Off topic ... but not really
February 22, 2007, 12:13:43 PM
Thema: Why Me??

Enjoy the story and enjoy life without asking a lot of questions....all will be revealed in the right timing...

Why Me?

Arthur Ashe, the legendary Wimbledon player was dying of AIDS which he got due to infected blood he received during a heart surgery in 1983.

From world over, he received letters from his fans, one of which conveyed:

"Why does GOD have to select you for such a bad disease"?

To this Arthur Ashe replied:

The world over -- 50,000,000 children start playing tennis, 5,000,000 learn to play tennis, 500,000 learn professional tennis, 50,000 come to the circuit, 5000 reach the grand slam, 50 reach Wimbledon, 4 to semi final, 2 to the finals, When I was holding a cup I never asked GOD "Why me?". And today in pain I should not be asking GOD "Why me?"

Happiness keeps u Sweet, Trials keep u Strong, Sorrow keeps u Human, Failure Keeps u Humble, Success keeps u Glowing, But only God Keeps u Going.


peace all,
just wanted to share this
lk
#5
Peace all,

yesterday night i was thinking about the salat issue, and as so often, when i opened one of my corans randomely, this verse popped up (22:67 translated by andr? chouraqui) :

Pour toute matrie, nous instituons des rites,
mais ils les ritualisent.
Qu?ils n?en contestent pas les ordres:
implore ton Rabb !
Certes, te voici en guidance ascendante.

The translation in English would be : For each community we give procedures, but they ritualize them...

It is the "but" that hit me . In this translation it sounds like a reproach, but when i looked in my other corans, i didn't meet this understanding. They were more like youssouf alis translation :

"To every People have We appointed rites and ceremonies which they must follow: let them not then dispute with thee on the matter, but do thou invite (them) to thy Lord: for thou art assuredly on the Right Way. "

I then looked up the arabic and found rather the sens of the ali translation as well. Those who have a better grasp of arabic, please help !

Thanks in advance.
Elke




#6
Off-Topic / 4004 : the series
May 12, 2006, 06:03:17 AM
Peace all,

when season one was sent on french tv i got totally addicted...

but then the plot got really boring and so previsiblethat I stopped watching regularly. Pity :'(

And the end was  : little girl Isabel turn into a stunning woman (overnight) - really i expected this when her mother found her bed empty, just as i expected the vanishing of this "jesus" figure when he died  (the centers director, forgot his name) and his later comeback  ::)

Do the following seasons already exist in the US ? If yes, is it getting better ?

lk
#7
Peace all

CAIRO - Ali Gomaa, great mufti of Egypt, pled this weekend for the eradication of the islamist extremists who attack other Moslems. "They must be liquidated physically and fought with the maximum force (...) We should not sympathize with people whose hands are dirtied blood by moslem blood", he stated Sunday evening, during a seminar entitled "Islam: moderation and extremism ".
(translated from a French article in Lib?ration)

That much for moderation... eradication instead of education...
And what if they had killed "only" "non-muslim" tourists ?

elke
#8
Discuss Latest World News / Tommy Hilfiger
November 22, 2005, 01:22:11 PM
Peace all,

question to our american members

is it true that Hilfiger, while with  Oprah Winfrey, stated that he wouldn't have designed his cloths as beautiful if he had imagined other than white people wearing them?

lk
#9
Salaam bros idol and ahmad,all

good to see two guys with so different views that still talk to each other nicely :)

I believe that both things are possible in the same time; meaning that mohamed really existed but that at the same time there always is a symbolic meaning involved. I also have no problem about moses striking/separating the red seas - god can do what he wishes but true if someone told me something like this happening today i would have difficulty believing it.

code 19 - may be it exists but people made an idol of it and sorry to touch another point not really discussed here :

a symbolic interpretation of the "women" (feminin principle) to be confined in their houses until death unless gods shows them a way out is much more acceptable to me than real confinement of women. Even though at the time of the prophet - and in some countries nowadays -  the fact to keep a woman in your house instead of throwing her out in the street could have been a protection for her. But the fact is - injustice is not accceptable to me - why is same law not applied to men - which leads me to believe - god being just - that what is actually talked about is symbolic - each one of us- man or woman - having both the feminin and the masculine principle inside...

LK
#10
Salam All,

I have a question on the recitation of the names of Allah - the famous 99 (or so) names...

Didn't find a thread on this subject. If I missed it, please redirect me.

Thanks in advance,

Elke