Post Election Iran [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : Post Election Iran


Poodle
06-22-2009, 16:50
I was in Iran last year and it saddens me that the elections were perceived to be fraudulent. Truth to tell, the Iranians I met were really nice. I think though that they are somewhat repressed by a strict and conservative government that doesn't accept any opposition or violation in what it perceives as Islamic precepts. The status quo is complex but Iran is a big factor in the Middle East.

I hope that the young people studying in the Universities may be able to effect some sort of change.

Eye Cutter
06-23-2009, 17:05
father P: what do the imams running iran want for the country and the people?

Poodle
06-23-2009, 17:42
father P: what do the imams running iran want for the country and the people?

[1] They want to hold on to the gains of the Islamic Revolution where State and Religion are one and the same. Their interpretation of Islamic Law becomes State Law.

[2] They are also against the USA, this due to their particular experience with the US where it was perceived that the latter exerted influence on the internal affairs of Iran, especially through the Shah. The Revolution has both patriotic and religious components. Their brand of Islam is on the conservative side.

[3] They want to 'correct' the injustice dealt to the Palestinian people by the creation of the State of Israel by "erasing Israel from the map". As to how this will be done? Let's hope that they limit themselves to erasing the drawing of Israel on cartographic maps.

[4] Lastly, I think that the Mullahs want to hold on to power because they have become rich and powerful and nobody wants to give that up.

ON STATE AND RELIGION
Catholic Theology upheld the unity of Religion and the State until 1965 when the Second Vatican Council declared relligious freedom. This declaration is pretty recent. Now, we have the separation of Church and State akin to the American model (not the European or Mexican model). The State is not supposed to have a favored religion. This means that the Religion cannot impose is views, religious laws and ordinances and influence over the citizens through the police powers of the State. This also means that the religious laws and penal code of one particular religion may be distinct from the laws and penal code of the State. This is a good thing in my opinion, because numerous abuses and atrocities were committed in the past in the name of Christianity through State powers, examples of which are the anti-Jewish pogroms, witch hunts, the Crusades, the Patronage which led to the rampage of the Conquistadors and others. Today, the Church still has some sort of influence over the Philippine government, albeit not like during the time of Cardinal Sin, but that influence does not encompass police powers and the "power of the sword". We may make our voices heard in Congress and in the streets in a more or less democratic manner. If a particular bill perceived to be immoral is passed, we may denounce it as immoral but that's as far as it goes. The Church may still participate in the electoral process and partisan politics through the Catholic laity who may run for office, hoping that the laity are integral and moral persons (unhappily this is not so).

Most Christian countries now have separation of Religion and the State. This is not so in Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran and many others. Turkey is an exception because it is a secular country, meaning that Religion and State are officially separate.

I hope that our moderate muslim brothers would eventually prevail over the more extreme elements of Islam.

Eye Cutter
06-23-2009, 17:51
if i were in their place, i too, would probably not want to give up the perks they are currently enjoying. tsk, tsk, tsk!

nitrox920
06-27-2009, 06:18
I hope that our moderate muslim brothers would eventually prevail over the more extreme elements of Islam.[/QUOTE]

Its history...The moderates can never prevail over the extreme elements of Islam... especially the muslim radicals... Have you ever heard "our moderate muslim " brothers "condemn the atrocities of radical muslim (MNLF,ASG or MILF) on the bombing, beheading , kidnapping , rape and killing of civilians.

silence means consent....

Poodle
06-28-2009, 01:05
I hope that our moderate muslim brothers would eventually prevail over the more extreme elements of Islam.

Its history...The moderates can never prevail over the extreme elements of Islam... especially the muslim radicals... Have you ever heard "our moderate muslim " brothers "condemn the atrocities of radical muslim (MNLF,ASG or MILF) on the bombing, beheading , kidnapping , rape and killing of civilians.

silence means consent....[/QUOTE]

Yes, in fact I heard them condemn atrocities. Sometimes, the media does not cover it. The Grand Mufti of Sulu for instance condemned the Abu Sayyaf bandits who beheaded some workers. And there are many instances of moderate Muslims speaking out against atrocities and terrorism and working for peace.

nitrox920
06-28-2009, 03:11
"Fight and kill the disbeliever wherever you find them, take them captive, harass them , lie in wait and ambush them using the every stratagem of war"( KORAN 9:5)

"So fight them until there is no more Fitnah (disbelief[ non muslim]) and all submit to the religion of Allah alone (in the whole word)." (KORAN 8:39)

even though the majority of muslims are peacful, law abiding citizens who do not want wish to fight or declare jihad on their neighbor and collegues, such as moderates are irrelevant in the war they are fighting.

Most Germans were moderate as well. their moderation did not stop the NAZIs from killing 14 million people in concentration camps and costing the world 60 millions lives. Most russians were peaceful as well. However ,Russian communist cost the world 20 million lives. the same goes for most japanese prior to WWII. Yet, Japan was responsible for the killing of 12 Million Chinese.

The Moderate majority was irrelevant.

Poodle
06-28-2009, 16:20
Well, there are two interpretations of the Koran. A Muslim friend of mine uses hermeneutics akin to Christian interpretation, i.e., he doesn't take a verse from the Koran away from its historical context.

The Christian Bible also has similar texts. Take a look at just one verse from the Hebrew (and therefore Catholic also) Bible.

1 Samuel 15:3 Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

1 Samuel 22:19 Saul also put the priestly city of Nob to the sword, including men and women, children and infants, and oxen, asses and sheep.

Deu 3:2-7 The LORD, however, said to me, 'Do not be afraid of him, for I have delivered him into your hand with all his people and his land. Do to him as you did to Sihon, king of the Amorites, who lived in Heshbon.' And thus the LORD, our God, delivered into our hands Og, king of Bashan, with all his people. We defeated him so completely that we left him no survivor. At that time we captured all his cities, none of them eluding our grasp, the whole region of Argob, the kingdom of Og in Bashan: sixty cities in all, to say nothing of the great number of unwalled towns. All the cities were fortified with high walls and gates and bars. As we had done to Sihon, king of Heshbon, so also here we doomed all the cities, with their men, women and children; but all the livestock and the loot of each city we took as booty for ourselves.

These are pogroms in reverse. Any Christian zealot can use this and promote his brand of Christianity. There is also an intolerant Christianity and this led to anti-semitic Pogroms in the past. The thing is, we must discredit these so called Christians and their brand of Christianity.

It was conceded that there are moderate Muslims who speak out against atrocities (whereas before this was denied), and this admission is already something. Granted that moderate Muslims are 'weak', it is still no reason for us not to engage them in dialogue and support them, with the reason that 'anyway, they will never win'. Rather, given this weakness of theirs, there is more impetus for us to support them BECAUSE of their weakness. We must not default on giving them support just because the fight seems hopeless. We must always do the right thing even if it seems to be an unwinnable situation.

An enlightened mass media can help tremendously because we have to win hearts and minds. One may refer to this article as an example.

http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,1670291,00.html

nitrox920
06-29-2009, 21:41
Most moderate muslim do not know the words of the KORAN and are not religious enough to read the Hadith and the Sira, which have even worse commandments regarding declaring war on the infidels and killing them. whenever moderates and radicals get into a debate about islam, radicals always win because they back their statements with "facts" from the holy book while the non religious muslim cannot.

The frightening thing is that radical islamist who are willing to commit martydom operation may be clothed in professional attire and posses professional degrees, which makes them even more dangerous. In june 2007, eight doctors were discovered plotting to blow up civilians in England using car bombs.

As a warrior, Prophet Mohammed set the example that continues to inspire jihad. He ordered twenty seven military campaigns and LED nine PERSONALLY.

nitrox920
06-29-2009, 21:53
. He ordered twenty seven military campaigns and LED nine PERSONALLY.

Poodle
06-30-2009, 17:44
Most moderate muslim do not know the words of the KORAN and are not religious enough to read the Hadith and the Sira, which have even worse commandments regarding declaring war on the infidels and killing them. whenever moderates and radicals get into a debate about islam, radicals always win because they back their statements with "facts" from the holy book while the non religious muslim cannot.

The frightening thing is that radical islamist who are willing to commit martydom operation may be clothed in professional attire and posses professional degrees, which makes them even more dangerous. In june 2007, eight doctors were discovered plotting to blow up civilians in England using car bombs.

As a warrior, Prophet Mohammed set the example that continues to inspire jihad. He ordered twenty seven military campaigns and LED nine PERSONALLY.

Well, I'm not sure if most moderate muslims are not religious enough to know the Koran. Certainly those moderate imams and scholars I know personally are knowledgeable about the Koran, the Haddith and Sira. The signatories of the "A Common Word" are some of the most respected scholars of Islam. Unfortunately, there are two brands of Islam, a moderate Islam and an intolerant one that is still in the Dark Ages.

There are radical elements and we cannot dialogue with them. We have to defend ourselves against them because self defense is an obligation. We can however, support the moderates. I'm not disagreeing with you when I say that there are moderates because you admit that there are moderate elements of Islam. I'm just saying that we should support them all the more because of the reasons that you have enumerated. I'm sure that you do not find any reason for us not to support the moderate elements of Islam. I have Muslim friends and I discovered that they are also human beings just like me and that they just want to get on with their life living in peace. They are embarassed and ashamed of what the radicals are doing.

It's true that Islam won territories through conquest, in fact 4 patriarchates were lost to Muslims (Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria and Constantinople) but we cannot undo the past. Catholics however, must remember that we also won territories when we repressed Paganism (during the time of Constantine and beyond) using the secular powers of the Roman Empire. We also won territories through conquest during the Patronage and atrocities were committed in the name of the Church and King. Pope John Paul II asked forgiveness for those attrocities (even if we ourselves were not the ones who committed them - some Catholic scholars do not approve of what the Pope did).

The main points are: [1] There are two Islams (some Muslims do not accept this and this in itself is problematic): a Moderate Islam and an Intolerant Islam. [2] We cannot dialogue with the Radicals (because the conditions for dialogue will never be met. We must defend ourselves against terrorism coming from the radical elements (a negative approach). [4] We must support the moderate elements of Islam (a positive approach).

Wp.22
06-30-2009, 19:22
OT; Father P. Saw you last sunday at Villa San Miguel 9:AM mass

vega
07-02-2009, 06:48
OT; Father P. Saw you last sunday at Villa San Miguel 9:AM mass
Ganda ng simbahan.

Poodle
07-02-2009, 19:11
OT; Father P. Saw you last sunday at Villa San Miguel 9:AM mass

I usually celebrate the 6 am mass at the Villa.

nitrox920
07-03-2009, 17:24
We have to understand the history of Islam and how it influence radical islam today is vital to our survival.

It would not take not an army or faith, but the coming of the industrial revolution, to give the west the economic power to defeat ISLAM. By the 18th it gave europe the economic power to expand globally.It gave the armies the power to push the muslim back into Dar AL Islam, Egypt the heart of muslim territory.

By 1905 the west had liberated its territory previously conquered and savaged by islam, and declared an economic and military victory,thus marking the end of 1,400 years of islamic rule and jihad. During the period, muslim had killed 270 million people across the globe: 120 M africans, 60 m chrisitians, 80 M hindus and 10 M buddist.

Islam lost control over massive territories. Muslim experience pain and humiliation perviously unknown to them. they believe that islam had lost its way from the true path of allah revealed to them by the prophet mohammed. therefore allah punished them to teach them a lesson.

Only through a return to the true, authentic islam practice in the days of the prophet will islam return to its glory and reclaim its superiority. Only then will allah again reward muslim throughout the world. However, Islamist today have their eyes set on world conquest --- again! Muslim today are using their OIL wealth and prosperity, the very same thing that allowed the europeans to defeat islam, to finance terrorrism and spread islam throughout the world.

Islam is rising up after 300 years of slumber and decline to avenge its ancient glory, using the historic success formula whereby islam rules by the sword and the teaching of mohammed; whereby religion and state are one and the same; whereby the Ummah is government is governed by islamic rule and all religion are suppressed.

since the iranian revolution in 1979, Islamic fascism and worldwide islamic terrorist act have escalated to a level beyond anyone's imagination.

JBJ16
07-04-2009, 01:29
. ....in conclusion, througout history all sides, christian, jew or muslim, gained power and glory and territory though the use of the sword . . and faith to a lesser extent.

It teaches us, if ever faced with evil here on earth, make sure you bring a bigger pitchfork than the devil. . .win at all cost.

The 24tube Trident ballistic missile submarine of the U.S. easily comes to mind.

That would be a huge pitchfork against any terrorist or nation who would sponsor terrorism.:whistling:

Poodle
07-04-2009, 22:27
We should review a little bit the course of the discussion so far.

1] It was pointed out that Islam has had a history of violence since its founding. I don't dispute this and Muslims must also acknowledge this. In fact, there are moderate Muslims who do acknowledge this, and what comes to mind is my late and dear friend Commissioner Taha Basman of the UNICEF and the Center for Moderate Muslims in Taguig.

2] It seems that Islam now has three schools, [a] a moderate one; [b] a fundamentalist albeit peaceful one; [c] an extremist school of Islam. The existence of a moderate school of Islam was not negated nor denied. There are those who still advocate a "Land of Islam" and consider non-Islamic territory as a "Land of War". We have shun them because their mentality is still Medieval.

3] It was said that the moderate muslims would never prevail against the extremists because this has never happened in history, cited was Nazi Germany. However, I wish to cite the civil rights movement in the USA and its adherence to active non-violence against discrimination in America. They won against the 'extremist' and not only can they vote now, they also have a black American President. We also cite Mahatma Ghandi and his active non-violence. So sometimes, moderates do win against the extremists.

4] It was said that moderate muslims are not well versed in Islamic Scriptures. This is not true. I have spoken to a lot of learned muslims who are well versed in their religion. And the signatories of 'A Common Word' are the foremost Muslim scholars in the world.

5] I said that we must engage the moderate muslims (and even the fundamentalist but non-violent Muslims) in dialogue. We share a common humanity with them. There is nothing wrong in this.

6] I said that we have to obligation to self defense against terrorism perpetrated by extreme elements of Islam. This is covered by the double effect principle in morals. We choose the lesser of two evils. Better carry a bigger pitchfork, it's true. I just hope that the missiles in the Trident submarines stay inside the submarines.

Now, it's true that violence has been perpetrated in the name of God and religion for centuries. This is a scandal. Problem is, sometimes we just have enough religion to make us kill each other, not to love each other. Violence has also been committed by Christians in the name of religion in the past. This is shameful.

Now, it seems that the wars perpetrated by the Muslims in the past (and today) are religious in nature or have religious motivations. Even so, the end result is violence.

The global expansion of the West during the industrial revolution was not religious in nature. It was an imperialist and economic enterprise. They wanted the oil. It is true that some Islamic countries are using their oil to be wealthy and influential but the West has also used Arab oil to be influential, and it is not even theirs. Imperialism must also be considered as shameful. It is bullying. Saying that this is the reality does not negate that fact that it was evil.

I still say that we must engage and support our moderate muslim brothers in their struggle for influence within Islam. I still say that we must learn to live with them in peace even after peace is achieved. Dialogue is sine qua non in this day and age when communications are instantaneous.

A common history written and accepted by Christian and Muslim scholars would help. Problem is, most muslims still do not have the sophistication of their Christian brethren when it comes to hermeneutics. Bible interpretation (and historical hermeneutics) advanced a lot in the 19th century in the Christian mileau. This still has to happen in Islam.

Eye Cutter
07-04-2009, 23:07
this is a very good discussion. keep it up!

Allegra
07-04-2009, 23:32
San kaya nakakakuha ang mga moderate muslims ng orig copy ng Transformers?

Just kidding , ignore me

Poodle
07-05-2009, 01:53
San kaya nakakakuha ang mga moderate muslims ng orig copy ng Transformers?

Just kidding , ignore me

Oo nga. Tanung ko. Pero wala pa yata orig copy.