Just how many slaves do you think this boat could carry?
Posted on 06/05/2004 7:21:49 PM PDT by nuconvert
Taking Back Islam - Moderate Muslims say their faith is compatible with Freedom.
By Erick Stakelbeck & Nir Boms
June 03, 2004
There's an elephant in the room whenever the current U.S. operation in Iraq is discussed: Is Islam truly compatible with democracy? Or do the U.S.'s troubles in stabilizing Iraq signal that Muslims simply have no desire to live in a free, democratic society?
Right now the answers to these questions are unclear. For every modern Islamic "success story" like Turkey or Malaysia, there are Islamist nightmares like Saudi Arabia and Iran.
In the United States, too, there is reason for uncertainty. American Muslims with moderate views have been either unable or unwilling to engage in public discourse. As a result, militant groups with a moderate veneer have been able to set the tone.
A patriotic group of Arizona Muslims, however, is looking to change all that.
Earlier this spring in Phoenix, the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD) held a "Rally Against Terror" that gave moderate Muslims a platform on which to condemn terrorism and pledge support for the United States.
Identified by the Arizona Republic as "the nation's first Muslim rally against terrorism," the 50-minute event drew, according to various estimates, between 250 and 400 people, most of them non-Muslims.
Considering that the event was actively promoted within Phoenix's 50,000-strong Muslim community, that number is a bit disappointing. Nevertheless, AIFD Chairman Zuhdi Jasser says the rally was a positive first step for the group, which was founded in March 2003 by Muslim professionals in the Phoenix area.
"When the moderates stay silent, the radicals speak for everyone," says Jasser, a physician. "Up until now, moderates have not been articulating a moderate form of Islam which Americans can embrace. We want to take back our faith from the radicals and let them know that we are side-by-side with the U.S."
Listening to Jasser, the son of Syrian immigrants, is a breath of fresh air at a time when anti-American sentiment engulfs a large part of the Arab and Muslim world. A former U.S. Navy Lieutenant Commander who served as a Navy medical officer from 1988 to 1999, Jasser clearly loves his country and his faith, and sees no reason why the two cannot coexist.
"Our inspiration for this is two things," says Jasser. "Number one, at the core of the war on terror is a battle over ideology. World War II had fascism, the Cold War had Communism. Our present war has the targeting and killing of civilians in the name of religion: Islam. There needs to be a Muslim voice that speaks directly against that ideology. Secondly, there is a lack of any American Islamic institution that discusses the synergy of the U.S. Constitution with the Islamic faith. This makes it an obligation for us to be leaders in promoting a form of Islam that is tolerant and secular in nature."
Jasser is quick to clarify his use of the word "secular."
"Secularism as a term is almost associated with a lack of piety," he says. "What I'm trying to say is that in America, there are many devout people who are politically active. But we don't make decisions here based on theocracy or religious views."
The values that Jasser and AIFD are promoting are deeply rooted in the American experience. Jasser is confident that Muslims in the U.S. will eventually embrace his message and realize that, as he says, "Freedom brings you closer to God."
For now, though, Jasser realizes that views like the ones he expressed in a May 25 op-ed for azcentral.com aren't likely to endear him to the al-Jazeera crowd. In the piece, titled "Iraq is Your War," Jasser listed four reasons why the U.S. is currently fighting abroad:
It is impossible to keep America safe by just playing defense.
The Middle East is the epicenter of the terror network.
Despotic governments bring out the worst in religion.
Change the political environment in the Middle East and we change the associated religious pathology.
"Over half of the Muslim immigrants in the U.S. came here in the past 25 years," says Jasser. "And many of them bring with them the baggage that government coercion and autonomy are necessary, just as in their former countries. We want to educate them and let them know that is not the case."
It would help if U.S. government officials and the mainstream media took notice of AIFD's efforts, rather than continuing to promote the agendas of radical Muslims with anti-American views. AIFD is attempting to increase its visibility through its website and by holding future anti-terrorism rallies.
By supporting the endeavors of AIFD and other moderate Muslim organizations, the U.S. may yet be able to avert the clash of civilizations simmering in its own backyard.
— Nir Boms is a fellow at the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies and the Council for Democracy and Tolerance. Erick Stakelbeck is senior writer for the Investigative Project, a Washington, D.C.-based counterterrorism research institute.
176 - "So, do you speak any farsi? (Persian)"
No. Never got to Iran. Almost did though, as I was offered a job in Isphahan (Bell Hellicopter), and just before accepting, I got a better offer from a company going to Saudi.
But, I decided to take a very interesting trip, on finishing my contract, and to drive from Saudi to Singapore, driving through Iran, where I would have learned some Farsi. However, after I put down money and ordered a VW camper bus in which to make the trip, the Iranian revolution happened, and we got some American 'escapee's', who transferred to our job in Saudi. And the stories they told, of their near escapes, and midnight runs across the desert to the ports, and other things, made me decide, that it was not a good idea.
So, I changed my mind, and decided to drive to Cape Town, South Africa, take a boat to Rio De Janero, and drive home to Florida. Well, before I could do that, another revolution erupted in Mosambique or someplace, I would have had to drive through to get to Cape Town. So, I decided to dump the whole thing, lost my deposit, and ended up taking a job in Israel to build an airbase, as part of the implementation of the Camp David peace agreements between Israel and Egypt.
Too bad, I didn't get to make either of those particular trips, they would have been very memorable. But I made a lot of other shorter ones, and covered many of the same areas in shorter trips.
I lead an interesting and exciting life, if I do say so myself.
179 - "To some, it's the struggle within oneself against the forces of evil. The struggle to remain close to God.
To others, it's used as a synonym for 'holy war'. "
Sorry, this is incorrect. Jihad does indeed mean different things, but to the same person. There is the small jihad (personal fight - eg to stop smoking or what ever), and then the big jihad (religious war and forced conversion and teaching/preaching and payment of tax).
And the 'good' muslim is instructed to participate in both, as necessary. Muslims purpousely obfuscate this, to claim one thing to westerners/infadels (who good muslims are instructed to purposely deceive), while actually performing another.
Major part of the Muslim religion - be deceptive.
Oh....that would have been a terrible time to be in Iran. You were fortunate.
Yes, sounds as though you did lead an interesting and exciting life.
Well, I think it's lights out for me. Thanks for the discussion.
181 - good post. good, and correct points about fundamentalists of most all religions.
"We can only hope there are 'moderate' Muslims and should be equally concerned about fundamentalist Christians here in the USA."
However, this can't be among 'good' muslims.
It can be among 'bad' muslims, who are good people.
al salam alikum. (Did I remember right - it's been a long time).
184 - "It is a road to ruin to too closely tie religion and politics and enforce orthodoxy in both."
Unfortunately, you are correct - and unfortunatly our idiot leaders of both parties stumbled and bumbled their way into it, over many years.
The Muslims don't understand "shock and awe", they just understand it as "Allah made you miss me".
We are in a major religious/cultural war that our great grand children will be fighting.
The liberals and the islamists sleep in the same bed and dream the same dreams.
you have mail
Check your knowledge of history. During that time, the entire southern coast of England was unprotected.
http://earlyamerica.com/review/2002_winter_spring/terrorism.htm
"Common piracy by the Barbary States became a sophisticated racket in 1662...when England commenced to pay tribute....'
#192 is for you.
Fred - Britania Ruled the waves for hundreds of years. The British were gaining far flung empire, and the barbary pirates were supressed and kept in place in the Medeteranian, they never got out of the Med as a fighting force, and certainly never raided England in any force - (give me a descent reference please if you have any contrary information). They just found in more convenient to pay minor tribute, and occsionally take war to the barbary coast when the corrupt muslim regimes became too greedy.
Note, the British captured Gibralter, at the straits of Gibralter in 1704, and hold it to this day (or maybe the let it go just recesently in the past few years). But this kept whoever was in the Med bottled up there, as it was a very powerful fortification, and could sink and ship or fleet trying to leave or enter the Mediteranian.
Here is one reference - (note the size of the British fleet), which you are saying allowed 10,000 raids in Southern England - BS:
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/N/NA/NAVY_AND_NAVIES.htm
"With the restoration of Charles II. (1660-1685) the modern period in the history of the navy began. The first steps were taken to form a corps of officers. Lads of gentle birth were sent on board ships in commission with a letter of servicefrom which came their popular name of " king's letter boys "to the captain, instructing him to treat them on the footing of gentlemen and train them to become officers. After the Dutch War of 1664-67 a body of flag-officers were retained by fixed allowances from the crown. .... Special training and a right to permanent payment are the essentials of a state service. The fleet was, at least in the earlier part of the reign, used for the promotion of British interests and the protection of trade in distant seas. [In 1661 ]One squadron was sent to take possession of Bombay, which formed part of the dower of Queen Catherine. Tangier, which was acquired in the same way, was [also part of her dowery and] occupied as a naval station till the cost of maintaining it proved excessive and it was evacuated in 1685. A series of effective attacks was made on the Barbary pirates, and ships were stationed in the West Indies to check piracy and buccaneering. James II. (1685-1688), who kept the admiralship in his own hands and governed largely through his able secretary, the diarist Samuel Pepys, did much to restore its efficiency. The navy he left was estimated to consist of 173 ships of 101,892 tons carrying when in commission 42,003 men and armed with 6930 guns.
The evolution of the navy was completed by the Revolution of 1688. It now, though still called royal, became a purely national force, supported by the yearly votes of parliament, and governed by parliamentary committees, known as the commission for discharging the office of lord high admiral. A lord high admiral has occasionally been appointed, as in the case of Prince George of Denmark, husband of Queen Anne, or the duke of Clarence, afterwards King William IV. But these were formal restorations. As no organic change was made till 1832, it will now be enough to describe the organization as it was during this century and a half."
Yes, it was after the restoration of Charles II that the coast of England began to receive the protection that it previously did not have.
And I did NOT say that 10,000 raids took place. If you care to read the article to which I posted the link, it clearly states that the number of people taken is based upon estimates...church records, local lore etc...your objection is with the source, not with me. Make a complaint to Icon Productions.
Hey, that's the same site I posted a link for, to you! Thanks for all the trouble you went to. Sure a stickler for detail aren't you? Yes, you are correct, they really haven't changed. We can disagree on the numbers but the MO never changes.
196 - "And I did NOT say that 10,000 raids took place. If you care to read the article to which I posted the link, it clearly states that the number of people taken is based upon estimates..."
The story states that from 1 to 1.25 million people were taken from Great Britain, and enslaved.
Now - do some math. How many slaves could a small arab style boat carry? I arbitrarily over estimated, at 100. Considering that general crew size was often under one dozen.
So, if each one, could carry 100, then that would be 10,000 boat loads for 1 million slaves.
Just how many slaves do you think this boat could carry?
197 - "Hey, that's the same site I posted a link for, to you! "
Then you should have learned, that Basically, the Barbary Pirates were powerful, only on the Barbary Coast of North Africa.
However, they did sail the coasts of Africa, and most of the coastal slave traders, from whom black slaves were bought in the middle of the second millenium, were actually bought from Arab Slavers.
And you may also know that Muhammed promoted slavery, and that slavery was not outlawed in Saudi Arabia unil 1964.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.