Posted on 12/22/2006 4:33:05 AM PST by SJackson
Reflections on the treatment of non-believers by the three great monotheistic religions on their holy days.
But quite unlike the Jewish and Christian religious celebrations of Hanukkah and Christmas, if you are a non-Muslim, don’t plan on investigating the mysteries of Islam by joining your Muslim friends on their trip to Saudi Arabia for the Hajj – you’re not invited.
Perhaps no better contrast between Judaism, Christianity and Islam exists than the treatment of non-believers on the respective holy days of each religion. I recall fondly the many times that I have participated in the Passover seder at the invitation of Jewish friends and have each time been awed at the profound meaning attached to every element of the seder which is designed to illustrate the fascinating historical narrative of the Jewish people over the millennia that is the foundation of both the Christian and Islamic faiths.
I also remember the occasion several years ago when a Chinese friend of mine who was finishing his PhD at Ohio State joined my family and I for our Christmas Eve celebrations. After joining us for worship, he told us with tears in his eyes how that was the first time that he had ever heard the gospel message that Jesus Christ had come into the world to save sinners – a message that had been branded as counter-revolutionary and been outlawed in his own country. Needless to say, we were delighted when he joined us again the following year for Christmas Eve, where he was anxious to tell anyone at church who would listen how he had embraced the free offer of the gospel and become a Christian the previous year. Having returned home to China, my friend is now a leader in the underground Church there.
But if I wanted to join my Muslim friends next week on the Hajj, I would have to bear in mind that my reception would not be as friendly. I would be forbidden to bring my Bible or any Christian literature with me on my trip to Saudi Arabia, and be required to remove anything identifiably Christian from my person (crosses, etc.). There are no Christian churches allowed in the “Land of the Two Mosques”, so there would be no opportunity for me to join with fellow Christians there in our weekly celebration of the Lord’s Day, and I would constantly be under watch by the Wahhabi Promotion of Virtue and Prevention of Vice police to ensure that I didn’t share my Christian faith with anyone else.
Even having arrived in Saudi Arabia and complying with the absolute ban of any expression of my faith, as I approached the holy city of Mecca, I would be denied entry. Despite all of the supposed Quranic endorsements of the “People of the Book” (i.e. Jews and Christians), as a kafir, my presence is not welcome at the Hajj. We should remember that the cardinal offense that prompted Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda lackeys to declare war on the “Crusaders and Zionists” in 1996 was the presence of American troops in the Arabian Peninsula, though nowhere near the sacred cities of Mecca or Medina.
For Muslims in the West, they have as much freedom as any other to practice their faith openly and freely without any fear of being molested. The number of mosques popping up all over America is a testament to that freedom.
Such is not the case for Jews and Christians in Islamic lands, however, where people of those faiths are subject to countless acts of intimidation and violence on a daily basis. Even in their synagogues and sanctuaries, believers are not immune from attack. In fact, many are prevented from approaching their own holy sites. In the Holy Land, Muslims occupy the Temple Mount – the historic location of the ancient Jewish Temple – and Jewish worshippers are subject to regular assaults by stone-throwing Muslim crowds at the nearby Wailing Wall and other sacred sites. And it was the mere presence of a Jew – Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon – near the Temple Mount in September 2000 that sparked the second intifada that has claimed the lives of hundreds of Jews, Christians and Muslims in recent years. Jews have also been forbidden from visiting the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron – Judaism’s second-most holy site – since it was converted to a mosque in 1266.
And earlier this month Turkish authorities feared that Pope Benedict might take the opportunity while touring the Hagia Sophia in Istanbul – one of the greatest churches in the world that was seized by Muslims after 1,000 years of constant use by Christians – that he might actually try to pray there.
It isn’t just the Hagia Sophia that has suffered the inglorious fate of being converted from its original use as a Christian church to be taken over by invading Islamic forces and made into a mosque. In her book, The Decline of Eastern Christianity under Islam. From Jihad to Dhimmitude, Bat Ye’or chronicles how innumerable Christian and Jewish holy sites, such as the Church of St. John in Damascus that was demolished by the Islamic Caliph Abd al-Malik in 705 and had the Umayyad Mosque built over it, were taken over for the exclusive use for Islamic worship during the constant waves of Islamic conquest. It is worth noting that even the Kabaa, the central location of worship in Mecca, was seized by Mohammad from non-Muslims.
Getting back to my original point – one of the constant complaints of Muslim apologists is that Westerners just don’t understand Islam. Fair enough; but is that entirely the fault of non-Muslims who are shut out of Islam’s most important rituals? And might it be the case that those of us, Christians and Jews alike, who are angered at the treatment of our brethren in Islamic lands do so not because of our alleged “Islamophobia”, but rather on the basis of real grievances?
As former President Jimmy Carter travels the country promoting his book identifying Israel as an apartheid state because they refuse to capitulate to Palestinian terrorism, perhaps he might take some time and try to join his Wahhabi patrons during the Hajj this year and see what religious apartheid is really all about. While believers and non-believers alike will enjoy the Hanukkah and Christmas holidays, the invitation for Jews and Christians to join their Muslim friends and neighbors for the Hajj this year didn’t get lost in the holiday mail. It was never sent.
Target rich environment big time...
With nobody wearing uniforms, following a flag, following a recognized command structure, or representing a state or government.
The flag is the crescent, the uniform for the slaves is the habib...
Seems to me their wishes have been granted.
And of course, they can put together a pageful of their perverted scriptures in support of this filthy vision.
I'm not certain you really understand just how fervently they believe in that book. And it's not just a pageful. It's their entire book. Read it. I have.
However, not all Muslims go along with this
True but not relevant. Enough of them do. Not every Japanese was a true Shinto believer and not every German was a Nazi.
You yourself know that a substantial majority of those killed, injured, made homeless and forced into exile over the past 20 years by Muslim jihad groups, have been other Muslims.
Yea, yea ,yea. Hitler killed lots of Germans, Mao murdered millions of Chinese, Pol Pot killed millions of Cambodians....yada yada yada. It sucks to be them.
Sectarian violence and ethnic/regional mayhem seem to account for the lion's share of violent deaths.
Wrong. They kill each other because their god tells them to kill anyone who doesn't believe exactly like they do.
With nobody wearing uniforms, following a flag, following a recognized command structure, or representing a state or government. it is exceedingly difficult to sort out who is a combatant and who isn't
Here you're partially correct. They don't follow a flag, they follow a murderous madman. That fact relieves us both legally and morally from having to distinguish among them.
In such situations, you can't expect our troops to be clairvoyant or exercise infallible judgment as to targets
Correct. I expect them to do whatever it takes to come home alive. Better to err on the side of caution. Or, as my Platoon Sgt told me "When in doubt, empty the magazine."
But they still have to target the thugs.
Pick a spot. There'll be thugs.
For that reason, it's still important to rule out notions like "Let's drop a Big One on Mecca at the height of the Hajj."
Why? There'll be tens of thousands of thugs all in one spot.
It puts you on the same moral level as Mohamed Atta al-Sayed.
Here's your most serious logical mistake. You see al-Sayed won't stop killing until every one who doesn't believe exactly like him is dead. He won't stop killing until every single Jew, Christian, Buddhist, Zorastoran, B'Hai, etc on the planet is either 'converted' or dead.
I have no such desire.
I merely want the most deadly threat to human freedom since Nazism ruled nations eliminated utterly. Oh I'd let the odd goat herder slam his head into a mat 5 times a day towards a radioactive crater in Saudi Arabia if he so desired. That's 'religious freedom'.
What I wouldn't allow is literally tens of millions of them running modern nation-states using the collective lunatic ravings of a syphilitic pedophile as a system of government.
Sadly there's only one way to remove those 'people' from positions of power and to disabuse the benighted followers of mohamed of the notion that somehow they're going to rule the entire world.
That's by utterly destroying their holy places and their 'governments'. It's both logically correct and utterly moral.
After all, moral people don't let mad dogs wander their streets.
L
So do you agree then that the US is a war criminal state for bombing cities in WW2?
Do you even understand strategic warfare? The concept of breaking an enemy's will to fight? That's what we use (or are supposed to if you want to win) in a war.
I dunno what childish version of war you think reality has, but it's not your fantasies.
""Then why wasn't Curtis LeMay tried as a war criminal after WWII? Why wasn't Sherman tried as a war criminal after the Civil War?"
Because they were on the winning side?
"
There we go, Mrs. Don-o considers the USA a war criminal state.
The main purpose of a just war is to get the other side to stop fighting, by destroying their material, political, physical or psychological ability to continue fighting. If we believed that the Kaaba provided the psychological will for the mad Muslims to carry out jihad, I think a good case could be built for blowing it to smithereens and thus demonstrating that Allah-FUBAR is without the power to defend his sanctuaries, or them.
BTW, I've got two copies of the Koran, different translations, and have tried, sincerely tried to read them. I just can't keep myself on-task. They seem to be gibberish. The Koran doesn't seem to me to be even grammatically coherent, in the sense of individual sentences making sense. And overall, it has no moral, thematic or narrative unity. Strange.
Not every Japanese was a true Shinto believer and not every German was a Nazi...Hitler killed lots of Germans, Mao murdered millions of Chinese, Pol Pot killed millions of Cambodians....yada yada yada.
Yes, and those are the reasons why it's not justifiable to set out to simply indiscriminately kill millions of Japanese, Germans, Chinese, etc. etc.
No matter how brainwashed the populace, and how totalitarian the state, still most people are not intrinsically your enemy. The farmer farms. The mother mothers. Here's the true warrior ethic: Crush the oppressor. Free the slaves.
Ahh the tolerance, the love, the acceptance. Ahh, the cutting off of heads if you won't convert!
This is our fault, or at least that of our leaders. Islam is the enemy but our leaders are constantly saying that islam is a ROP. Hell yes they are confused. We are the ones confusing them.
We should be shouting from the rooftops the truth about this death cult. We should be educating the ignorant masses about the nature of their 'pedophile prophet' and his evil god.
Most importantly though, we should be telling them that if they freely choose to adhere to the commands of this demonic duo then they, unequivocally, are to be considered enemy combatants, both here and abroad.
Not for bombing military targets. But the indiscriminate slaughter of civilians is a war crime, and should be condemned no matter who does it.
I know the debate goes on. For instance, you read this, from Truman's Diary:
Truman Diary, July 25, 1945 –
President Truman told his diary that he had ordered the bomb dropped on a "purely military" target, so that "military objectives and soldiers and sailors are the target and not women and children. Even if the Japs are savages, ruthless, merciless and fanatic, we as the leader of the world for the common welfare cannot drop that terrible bomb on the old capital or the new. The target will be a purely military one!
Official Bombing Order, July 25, 1945 –
The bombing order issued to General Spaatz made no mention of targeting military objectives or sparing civilians. The cities themselves were the targets.
I dunno what childish version of war you think reality has, but it's not your fantasies.
It appears my childish view would be Truman's view as of July 25, 1945.
Your analogy is a poor one.
It seems to me that bombing the Kaaba per se is distinguishable from bombing a million hajiis, and worth talking about
It's worth doing.
They seem to be gibberish.
They are gibberish.
And overall, it has no moral, thematic or narrative unity.
Its moral unity is that mohamet wants you dead.
L
No, I don't think Curtis LeMay and William Tecumseh Sherman = "the USA" or "the state."
I do, however, believe in objective morality. If a man is a butcher, then Don Juan of Austria, Jan Sobieski, King Louis IX of France, George Washington, Robert E. Lee, Alvin York and all the good soldiers in history will rise up to condemn him. Remember, there is a God who judges men and nations; and this God's justice is impartial, and will prevail.
Personally, I say we should do whatever we need to do to ensure our own safety and freedom.
Unfortunately, it will never happen.
Regards
The religious goofiness that you go by has no bearing on a logical argument. Don't try to backpedal now. You consider US approved tactics as war crimes, even if they were the only way to win the war.
Therefore, you'd obviously rather lose the war and not anger your diety (I assume) than to fight it and win. No thanks. You can go be a saint on whatever island you want, in the real world we actually have to win the wars.
Truman understood that cities themselves are military targets. Strategic ones. What you pasted only reinforced that.
This is not a religion, it's a cult...period.
"The number of mosques popping up all over America is a testament to
our stupidity!"
And we learn nothing from history
(reposts from previous threads)
More Muslims moving to U.S.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1699992/posts
US schools compete for Saudi students -not yet able do effective
background checks on applicants
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1699252/posts
Victor Davis Hanson: Those Saudi Students. It’s not irrational to
be wary of this deal
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1701943/posts
and here's a story of how one Muslim student learned tolerance and
embraced diversity after visiting America (/sarc):
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1686655/posts
I also agree that "if they freely choose to adhere to the commands of this demonic duo then they, unequivocally, are to be considered enemy combatants, both here and abroad" --- if by "adhere to the commands," you mean, engage in violent jihad or the support of jihad (e.g. the fake Muslim "charities" used to bankroll Hezbollah etc.) That's already defined as treason in the U.S. Constitution, and ought to be seriously enforced.
For that matter, I think all financial transfers from the US to Islamic lands, and from the US to Mexico, should be halted until the jihad and the invasion stop. But you won't find a majority even of FReepers supporting that.
Which is why all this bellicose talk is just hot air. Because practically nobody seriously proposes that we stop the infusion of billions of OUR DOLLARS into the war-chests of our enemies.
No analogy is perfect, but this one is good as far as it goes. As I said, even in the dar-al-islam, the farmer farms, the mother mothers. And the just man, as Hopkins says, justices. You can and must distinguish between the Muslim who can be an ally, and the Muslim who cannot. Maybe the first is, in the eyes of other Muslims, a heretic. OK then: free the heretics.
"bombing the Kaaba is... worth doing."
We may live to see.
OK, fine, then. Your stated position does have this in common with that of the Muslim jihadis: no willingness to distinguish combatants from noncombatants, and an enormous appetite for indiscriminate carnage.
Same morals, same god?
I'll stick with the true God, thank you. (Lord have mercy.) I wouldn't want to burn here, and hereafter, too.
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.