# Why Muslims cannot be good americans



## kuntawguro (Sep 7, 2007)

Interesting questions for the Muslim Community to discuss & for research
on our part also.

Can a good Muslim be a good American? I forwarded that question to a
friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years     The following is his
forwarded reply:

Theologically - no.  Because his allegiance is to Allah, the moon God of
Arabia.  Religiously - no. Because no other religion is accepted by his
Allah except Islam (Quran, 2:256)


Scripturally - no.  Because his allegiance is to the five pillars of
Islam and the Quran (Koran).  Geographically - no.  Because his 
allegiance is to Mecca, to which he turns in prayer five times a day.

Socially - no.  Because his allegiance to Islam forbids him to make
friends with Christians or Jews.  Politically - no.  Because he  must
submit to the mullah (spiritual leaders), who teach annihilation of
Israel and Destruction of America, the great Satan.

Domestically - no.  Because he is instructed to marry four women and
beat and scourge his wife when she disobeys him (Quran 4:34 ).

Intellectually - no.  Because he cannot accept the American Constitution
since it is based on Biblical principles and he believes the Bible to be
corrupt.

Philosophically - no.  Because Islam, Muhammad, and the Quran do not 
allow freedom of religion and expression.  Democracy and Islam cannot
co-exist.  Every Muslim government is either dictatorial or autocratic.

Spiritually - no.  Because when we declare "one nation under God," the 
Christians God is loving and kind, while Allah is NEVER referred to as 
heavenly father, nor is he ever called love in The Qurans 99 excellent
names.

Therefore after much study  and deliberation.... Perhaps we should be
very suspicious of ALL MUSLIMS in this country.  They obviously cannot
be both "good" Muslims and good Americans.

Call it what you wish, its still the truth.  You had better believe it!
If you find yourself intellectually in agreement with the above
statements, perhaps you will share this with your friends. The more who 
understand this, the better it will be for our country and our future. 
Pass it on Fellow Americans.  The religious war is bigger than we know
or understand.

And Braack Hussein Obama, a Muslim, wants to be our President...


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 7, 2007)

kuntawguro said:


> And Braack Hussein Obama, a Muslim, wants to be our President...


 
Senator Obama does not practice Islam.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 7, 2007)

Whilst there is a background of doctrinaire fact in the bare statements above, they pay no credence to the fact that everyone is human, no matter where they are from or what religion they practise.

So whilst a Borg-Muslim (or those whose real aims are political rather than spiritual) may indeed tick all those boxes as noted, the majority (I hope) would seek an accomodation that allowed everyone to get along as best they can.

For myself, I fear that the machinations of the so-called 'leaders' on both sides of this equation have been orchestrated so as to make a religious war inevitable.  

It's ludicrous in the 21st Century that we're recommitting the mistakes of the 12th - perhaps that's why my opinion keeps swinging between "There's no hope for mankind whilst he persists in believing in invisible, all-powerful, beings that created the universe for our benefit" and "Humanity will eventually come to his collective senses and realise the genetic truth that we are all one family".

EDIT: Not being racist here but I forgot with the last statement that it's actually not conclusively true - the Australian Aboriginies are, I think, a slightly different genus.  Can anyone correct or elaborate on that?


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 7, 2007)

The hilarious thing about this line of argumentation is that I could interject the word "Christian" for "Muslim" here and the same arguments could apply almost 100%.

Of course, the arguments are rooted in ignorance and ethnocentrism anyway, so its hardly even worth concerning one's attention with....


----------



## Monadnock (Sep 7, 2007)

I think that's a stretch, if you're going to leave the original post word for word.

Also, I thought the Bible mentions that we should support and follow the rules of our government and leaders...


----------



## kuntawguro (Sep 7, 2007)

I received this Muslim thing in my e mail and thought I would pass it on- I do not subscribe to ignorance. Just making  things available to discuss and dissect.


----------



## Kacey (Sep 7, 2007)

This is an email that has been kicking around the 'net for years.  The same argument about many religions can be made using the religion's own sacramental text.  

Are there Muslims who cannot be good Americans?  I have no doubt.  Does that mean that _no_ Muslims can be good Americans?  I have plenty of doubts.  Religion is the means that many cultures use to teach morality, and, often, ideology - but that does not mean that all Muslims, or members of any other religion - cannot be good Americans, just because some members of a particular religion follow an ideology that is anti-American, any more than no members of religion "A" can get along with members of religion "B", just because the ideology of religion "A" causes _some _members of religion "A" to persecute members of religion "B".


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 7, 2007)

Monadnock said:


> I think that's a stretch, if you're going to leave the original post word for word.



Obviously not word for word, but there are Christian (and Jewish) equivalents for virtually everything argued in the OP. Hell, I could probably find Hindu and Buddhist equivalents, too, if I looked hard enough.

In any event, its a silly argument without merit. Ideological assumptions aside, I'm sure we all know Muslims that are "Good Americans" (whatever that's supposed to mean).



Monadnock said:


> Also, I thought the Bible mentions that we should support and follow the rules of our government and leaders...



It also tacitly accepts both slavery and the subjugation of women, social ostracization and/or violence against "non-believers", chastises the value of public education, and endorses a theocratic rule.

Of course, the vast majority of people of *any* faith cherry-pick their holy scriptures anyway (or at the very least, re-interpret them as reflecting the values of their time and culture), so this really shouldn't be cause for alarm.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 7, 2007)

Monadnock said:


> Also, I thought the Bible mentions that we should support and follow the rules of our government and leaders...


 
Not quite.  The intent for the usual quote on this runs something like "Leave Caeser's things to Caesar and God's things to God", meaning that a good christian follows the laws of the land he is in except in those cases where mans law conflicts with Gods, in which case ...

Standard infiltration dogma :lol:.

Bottom line for all 'this' (as in murder and destruction in the name of some unproven super-being) is that the day we leave religion behind is the day we have the right to call ourselves an evolved and moral species.


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 7, 2007)

kuntawguro said:


> I received this Muslim thing in my e mail and thought I would pass it on- I do not subscribe to ignorance. Just making  things available to discuss and dissect.



Kuntawguro, I am not saying you subscribe to what was written in your OP. It was obviously one of those mass-produced, pass-to-your-buddy emails that you clearly did not write yourself.

However, the fact remains that the actual contents of the original email reflects ignorance and cultural elitism. I am not accusing you of these things, but direct them at the author of the original email (who I am sure did not have the guts to sign his work).


----------



## Monadnock (Sep 7, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> Not quite. The intent for the usual quote on this runs something like "Leave Caeser's things to Caesar and God's things to God", meaning that a good christian follows the laws of the land he is in except in those cases where mans law conflicts with Gods, in which case ...
> 
> Standard infiltration dogma :lol:.
> 
> Bottom line for all 'this' (as in murder and destruction in the name of some unproven super-being) is that the day we leave religion behind is the day we have the right to call ourselves an evolved and moral species.


 
Maybe that's another interpretation. Here is another reference:

Hebrews

16And do not forget to do good and to share with others, for with such sacrifices God is pleased. 17Obey your leaders and submit to their authority. They keep watch over you as men who must give an account. Obey them so that their work will be a joy, not a burden, for that would be of no advantage to you.  18Pray for us. We are sure that we have a clear conscience and desire to live honorably in every way.

Perhaps Government leaders are not to whom are referred, and I am sure there are instances where someone might live in a country with laws that conflict, so obviously you can't follow them 100%. But that wouldn't constitute being a "bad" <relgion name> follower.

All in all, the original email is quite rediculous, I agree there.


----------



## grydth (Sep 7, 2007)

I believe the thread originator need not be shot as the messenger, nor held to believe in one side or the other of the item he posted. People should be able to put up highly controversial topics.

That said, the item offered up reeks of ignorance and prejudice. I've known quite a number of American Muslims whose lives illustrate what nonsense that email is. 

I genuinely hate the Islamoloonies that attacked our country on 9/11, and those sneak killers who are murdering our troops by the day. I wish bad and early deathes on them. But tar an *entire major religion* as all being that?  Well, by that (ir)rationale all us white male Army veterans with Middle East service must be as nutty and homicidal as McVeigh and Nichols!


----------



## kuntawguro (Sep 7, 2007)

I've been shot already- bad rep points for  posting the email
 so, I am just going to keep my mouth shut from now on.


----------



## alfyed11 (Sep 7, 2007)

Islam is not a "religion" in the way we understand religions to be. It is a system of government as well. And, as much as people want to make comparisons, no, sorry, we can't compare the Koran with the Bible or any other religious texts. 

If you've read the Koran (and I'm guessing most of the people who complain about the "ignorance" of earlier postings haven't), you'll see some bare facts:

The "prophet" Mohammed was a slave-keeper, murderer, rapist, warlord, and pedophile. He invented this "religion" in order to justify the destruction and subjication of any other culture he came into contact with. If you don't understand this right from the beginning, you don't understand Islam. It isn't ignorant to bring up some facts here, but I suggest anyone trying to make a comparison between religions should consider how Jesus or Budha would be regarded if they had sex with a 9 year old girl, or kept slaves, or personally murdered and raped hundreds if not thousands of people, or told his followers the proper way to rape women in front of their captive husbands. Mohammed did all these things, and he started a "religion" to justify it, made forced conversion or death the way to spread his power, and happily made the penalty for leaving his invented religion death.

"But all religions have this sort of thing."

You've got to be kidding me. 

I've seen time after time someone stating that it is "ignorant" to describe Islam as exactly what it is. The product of a drunken deranged murderer, who invented "revelations" every time he wanted to kill someone or sleep with their wife. Here's a little quote from the "prophet" of the "Religion of Peace." There are many, many, MANY, like this in the Koran and Hadith. 

_"Fight those who do not believe in Allah, ... nor follow 
the religion of truth... until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection." 
_ Qur'an, Sura 9:29​Read some of the Koran, and Hadith, please, before you presume that the guy from Saudi Arabia was wrong. Islam is spread by the sword, and is still being spread violently. I'm leaving a link at the bottom of this for anyone who would like to read up about this. And, I apologize for how frank I'm being, but I'm a little close to the subject matter, and, I'm afraid. Islam is a cancer, and it's spreading. 

Learn more:  www.TheReligionOfPeace.com


----------



## Gordon Nore (Sep 7, 2007)

kuntawguro said:


> I've been shot already- bad rep points for  posting the email
> so, I am just going to keep my mouth shut from now on.



That's unfortunate. Perhaps now would be a good time for a Mod edit -- perhaps the text in a blockquote to clarify Kuntawgruo intentions.

As for the content itself -- any perceived problem with beliefs described is self-correcting. Someone who subscribes to that interpretation of Islam probably wouldn't want to live in the USA or Canada or many other places. 

As a teacher I am in contact with many Muslim families, and so far I've not run into anything quite so extreme. I'm sure such examples exist. Just as I know of Christian families who disown their gay children and hang out at abortion clinic scaring women. 

Bruce Springsteen put it really well: There's nice guys and *******s on every block.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 7, 2007)

I left a negative reputation mark. 

The original post was not listed as a third-party notation. The original poster placed it here under his/her own name. It is reasonable to assume that the thoughts are his/her own. 

The language is hateful and denigrating. And I believe it is becoming far too common, under claims of "I personally don't believe this, but ... ". 

Hateful language is hateful language. One can not spread peace and understanding by disseminating hate. 



And, if I am not mistaken, with my reputation disabled, negative reputation given out has no impact on the reputation of the recipient.


----------



## Kacey (Sep 7, 2007)

kuntawguro said:


> I've been shot already- bad rep points for  posting the email
> so, I am just going to keep my mouth shut from now on.



I've seen this particular email previously, so I knew what it was... but still, posting it as you did, without identifying your source, made it appear as if you were condoning the views expressed within it.

I don't think you need to refrain from giving your opinion - but you might want to differentiate between things you are passing on for comment, and those you actually believe yourself.

Going back to the discussion at hand, there are plenty of similar emails floating around, the majority which lump all members of a particular group - religion, race, nationality, etc. - into the most negative light possible, and I find that to be despicable; it serves only to accentuate the differences between groups instead of the similarities, and to give those inclined toward prejudice more ammunition for their biased thinking.  

In this particular email, _all_ members of religion are lumped together based on the scripture of the religion - but how many people do you know who believe in, and follow, their religious text implicitly and to the letter?  Some examples from the Old Testament (being Jewish, I'll stick with the best-known scripture of my religion) to point out that even the most religious, observant practitioners of my religion do not follow their scripture completely... their protestations to the contrary notwithstanding:

Exod 22:  Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live
    When was the last time _you_ allowed a known witch to live?  But this one is problematic today... what makes a person a witch?  Moving on...

Leviticus 1:2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, If any man of you bring an offering unto the LORD, ye shall bring your offering of the cattle, even of the herd, and of the flock.
     Hmm... burnt any offerings lately?  I know I haven't... but still... sacrifices of this nature haven't occurred (in theory, at least) since the Temple was last destroyed... moving on.

Leviticus 11:4 Nevertheless these shall ye not eat of them that chew the cud, or of them that divide the hoof: as the camel, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you.
    Now, I know some Orthodox Jews who keep the food laws... but not many - and quite a few of those that claim to have an amazing ability to obey the letter of the law while ignoring its spirit - one even asked me if the fake crab meat tastes like real crab meat; since crab is not kosher, she was eating the fake stuff, and wanted to know how it compared.

Deuteronomy 5:18 Neither shalt thou commit adultery.
    I have to say that, even in the Orthodox community (I have quite a few Orthodox Jewish friends) this one happens a lot - laws notwithstanding.

Leviticus 18:23 Neither shalt thou lie with any beast to defile thyself therewith: neither shall any woman stand before a beast to lie down thereto: it is confusion.
    No personal knowledge here... but I will say most communities don't make laws against things that don't happen - why give people ideas?

Leviticus  19:11 Ye shall not steal, neither deal falsely, neither lie one to another.
    Do I really need to say anything about this one?  I mean... honestly?  

[FONT=trebuchet ms,arial,helvetica]*Genesis 9:25-27:* "_Cursed be Canaan! The lowest of slaves will     he be to his brothers. He also said, 'Blessed be the Lord, the God of Shem! May Canaan be     the slave of Shem. May God extend the territory of Japheth; may Japeth live in the tents     of Shem and may Canaan be his slave._' "
Now.... slavery is almost universally abhorred (if, disturbingly, still present in too many places) - nonetheless, the Bible contains many passages condoning the owning of slaves - even describing how they are to be treated.  But how many people in first world countries today would condone such actions... religious scripture notwithstanding?
[/FONT]​I could go on... but my point is that no members of any religion follow their scripture to the letter - they pick and choose those parts that they consider important, and use them to bolster their opinion.


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 7, 2007)

alfyed11 said:


> "But all religions have this sort of thing."



Well, yeah, because they do.... at least the Big Three do, that is.

Seriously, you should actually read the Bible sometime. Its loaded with murder, rape, slavery, subjugation of women, the deliberate hatred and violence against the "non-believer", and so on. As I said before, pretty much *everything* that has been said about Islam can be turned around on the Bible, as well.

As for your own position.... well, sorry, ignorance is as ignorance does. You characterize millions of human beings on the basis of some passages in a religious text. This is absurd. Human beings are individuals, they are not encapsulated by their holy writs. This is just irrational ethnocentrism and bigotry.

As I said before, most people of any faith cherry-pick the parts of their scriptures that appeal to them. This goes for Jews, Christians, Muslims, or whoever. Just as you have cherry-picked the parts of the Koran that make a convenient Enemy for you to sling bile at.

Tch, please.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 7, 2007)

Monadnock said:


> Also, I thought the Bible mentions that we should support and follow the rules of our government and leaders...


 
Heh.  I bet it does!  You don't happen to have a citation for that?  I'd like to show that to a friend of mine...


----------



## kuntawguro (Sep 7, 2007)

That is why it started out with......
Interesting questions for the Muslim Community to discuss & for research
 on our part also.

 Can a good Muslim be a good American? I forwarded that question to a
 friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years     *The following is his
 forwarded reply:


 I just posted  to get insights and peoples opinions.  *I have Muslim and Arabic students. They don't have that  attitude- but, they agreed that they were not supposd to  have Christian friends and they were not  to  acknowledge any other faith.


----------



## Monadnock (Sep 7, 2007)

upnorthkyosa said:


> Heh. I bet it does! You don't happen to have a citation for that? I'd like to show that to a friend of mine...


 

A couple of posts back was the closest I found. You're not going to tell people to pay taxes because the Bible tells them so are you?


----------



## qi-tah (Sep 8, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> It's ludicrous in the 21st Century that we're recommitting the mistakes of the 12th - perhaps that's why my opinion keeps swinging between "There's no hope for mankind whilst he persists in believing in invisible, all-powerful, beings that created the universe for our benefit" and "Humanity will eventually come to his collective senses and realise the genetic truth that we are all one family".
> 
> EDIT: Not being racist here but I forgot with the last statement that it's actually not conclusively true - *the Australian Aboriginies are, I think, a slightly different genus. Can anyone correct or elaborate on that?*


 
Nope, all people living share the same genus, species and sub-species too - Homo sapiens sapiens. There is an interesting article here about current research investigating the "Out-of Africa" theory of a common genetic ancestery: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070509161829.htm


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 8, 2007)

Thanks *qi*.  

I think I was faultily remembering a program on genetics I saw years ago, which talked of how certain skull formations indicated that the Aboriginies descended down a unique line.  I only remember it dimly but the crucial point I seized on is that because of the isolation of Australia they missed the genetic mixing (with the Neanderthal for one) that occurred elsewhere.

I'll do a bit of research tonight to see what it was I was misinterpreting(unless someone would care to assist my 'lazy' gene and do it for me ).


----------



## grydth (Sep 8, 2007)

kuntawguro said:


> I've been shot already- bad rep points for  posting the email
> so, I am just going to keep my mouth shut from now on.



Sad to see that happen to you - isn't it amazing that most of the negatiive reputation givers don't have the stones to enter the debate or often even sign their name? Are you going to let people of that ilk decide whether you can debate and discuss controversial issues?

On reflection, though, the title of the thread really bothers me. Who exactly decides and defines what a "good American" is? What agenda do *they *have? Upon research, one might find it even more questionable than that of the target group...

 The times I have seen "good American" it has been either from right wing nuts who sound like they are defining "good German" in 1943, or from loony left wingers trying to impose the zombie lockstep of Politikal Korrectness upon us.

Framing our thoughts and discussions in the "good American" type molds is one reason why the USA as a society is falling apart. Whole groups being defamed and falsely grouped together as having general sinister beliefs. Once we could respectfully discuss and disagree about issues - now if you don't see it my way, you are not just wrong.... you're not even a good American...... and, maybe... you're even 'one of them'...


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 8, 2007)

Well said, *Grydth* - I think its time we put "1984" back on the school reading lists.

That might also have the beneficial side-effect that the creeping totalitarianism that seems to be seizing the world will be seen for what it is (whatever political 'sheet' it's hiding under).


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 8, 2007)

Monadnock said:


> A couple of posts back was the closest I found. You're not going to tell people to pay taxes because the Bible tells them so are you?


 
No, but that would really make a funny shirt!


----------



## heretic888 (Sep 8, 2007)

grydth said:


> On reflection, though, the title of the thread really bothers me. Who exactly decides and defines what a "good American" is? What agenda do *they *have? Upon research, one might find it even more questionable than that of the target group...
> 
> The times I have seen "good American" it has been either from right wing nuts who sound like they are defining "good German" in 1943, or from loony left wingers trying to impose the zombie lockstep of Politikal Korrectness upon us.
> 
> Framing our thoughts and discussions in the "good American" type molds is one reason why the USA as a society is falling apart. Whole groups being defamed and falsely grouped together as having general sinister beliefs. Once we could respectfully discuss and disagree about issues - now if you don't see it my way, you are not just wrong.... you're not even a good American...... and, maybe... you're even 'one of them'...



Quoted. For. Truth.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 8, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> I left a negative reputation mark.
> 
> ....
> 
> And, if I am not mistaken, with my reputation disabled, negative reputation given out has no impact on the reputation of the recipient.


 
A negative Reputation left for me says:



> That is not true and I think you know it.




So, although I qualified my statement, and I signed the original negative Reputation, and I publically stated that I left the negative reputation here; I get scolded and zapped by someone who a) did not sign their negative rep, b) claims to know the extent of my knowlege and understanding, essentially calling me a liar. 


My understanding, while self-acknowledged as limited, is based from this post. (And perhaps others)

http://www.martialtalk.com/forum/showpost.php?p=725769&postcount=180




> Plus a person's rep comment may show up as gray for reasons other than having less than 50 points...such as* their reputation being disabled*,


 

It seems to me that this board has been becoming less friendly of late.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 8, 2007)

Mike - the Study is good at ramping up emotions on all sides.  This is a direct result of the divided country we live in.  Eventually, I think these opinions will stretch our society to the breaking point and we'll have an all out culture war.  

Meanwhile, the manipulators will keep on manipulating and manipulating and manipulating...

Take a break, grab a cup of coffee and think about that.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 8, 2007)

The original post spreads a lie: that Senator Obama is Muslem. The original poster claims that he does not subscribe to the language, but continues to spread the lie. The negative rep that I left stated simply that the facts are wrong. Regardless of the original posters belief, it is not possible to un-ring a bell. 

I tried, as best I could, without emotion, in post 2 of this thread, to correct the mistaken fact. There has been no apology, nor retraction of erroneous fact by the original poster. 

To add insult to injury, someone accuses me of being a liar in the reputation area. 



And, John, I don't think the "country" is divided. It is People, who hold prejudices. And people who try to enflame those prejudices. It is People who are trying to divide the world, between themselves and the 'Other'. Fifty years ago, the people who used these types of stories were blocking nine young Americans from attending school in Arkansas. That the subject of the story is now a Muslem instead of a dark-skinned American does not change how repugnant the propagation of the prejudice is.


And grydth - it has been my habit of late, when leaving negative reputation marks - which I continue to believe, do not impact negatively on recipients reputations (Mods, if you would like to correct my belief, I await) to sign them with my name.


----------



## Makalakumu (Sep 8, 2007)

michaeledward said:


> And, John, I don't think the "country" is divided. It is People, who hold prejudices. And people who try to enflame those prejudices. It is People who are trying to divide the world, between themselves and the 'Other'. Fifty years ago, the people who used these types of stories were blocking nine young Americans from attending school in Arkansas. That the subject of the story is now a Muslem instead of a dark-skinned American does not change how repugnant the propagation of the prejudice is.


 
Everyone has prejudices.  They are taught to us like anything else.  And I think that these can be manipulated like anything else.  They are emotional responses that preclude any attempt at reason.  So, when certain buttons are "pushed" people react.  

Make no mistake, outright racism is being used to advance policy in this country.  These "chain letters" are not the random ramblings of a bunch of uneducated country boys pounding on the keys like a bunch of apes.  They are carefully crafted peices of propaganda.

And I have to wonder if the negative response and emotional reaction that people like you and I have for such things isn't part of this scheme also?  These bi-polar emotional reactions certainly make it hard for people on both sides to share ideas and form any consensus...


----------



## Gordon Nore (Sep 8, 2007)

upnorthkyosa said:


> Make no mistake, outright racism is being used to advance policy in this country. These "chain letters" are not the random ramblings of a bunch of uneducated country boys pounding on the keys like a bunch of apes. They are carefully crafted peices of propaganda.
> 
> And I have to wonder if the negative response and emotional reaction that people like you and I have for such things isn't part of this scheme also? These bi-polar emotional reactions certainly make it hard for people on both sides to share ideas and form any consensus...



Very well said. The proof is in this thread. We see division and a heightened state of emotions over an email that was cooked to created exactly those results. My Grandma, an immigrant with a sixth-grade education, was right -- _Don't believe everything you read_.

Getting back to the OP. My two cents worth on the 'friend who spent twenty years working in Saudi...' So what? I know people who lived their entire lives in any given country with a very limited understanding of its history, complexity, or values.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Sep 8, 2007)

Gordon Nore said:


> Very well said. The proof is in this thread. We see division and a heightened state of emotions over an email that was cooked to created exactly those results. My Grandma, an immigrant with a sixth-grade education, was right -- _Don't believe everything you read_.


 

Definately an important point:* Do not believe everything you read*.  I know several very nice muslim's whom I am proud to also say are fantastic American citizens in my opinion.  The major religion's of the world were written by men during a different time period and in reading them you can probably find a reason or an argument for any position that you may choose.  They certainly are though provoking and yet sometimes incredibly contradictory and confusing.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Sep 8, 2007)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> Definately an important point:* Do not believe everything you read*.  I know several very nice muslim's whom I am proud to also say are fantastic American citizens in my opinion.  The major religion's of the world were written by men during a different time period and in reading them you can probably find a reason or an argument for any position that you may choose.  They certainly are though provoking and yet sometimes incredibly contradictory and confusing.



Thanks, Brian. Any ideology -- be it religious, economic, or political -- looks pretty scary if viewed only from the point of view of its most extreme supporters. These are the views that are most likely to be published, and they are the reason why we don't have actual debates on many issues -- we have screaming matches.


----------



## Logan (Sep 8, 2007)

Given how people in general are easily spooked, propagating propaganda like that would have people witch-hunting eventually, removing rights which people in America are very proud of having for each of its citizens.

There is nothing wrong with religion, just the way nutjobs interpret it. Individual beliefs are individual (*duh*), so blanket statements like this are just wrong on so many levels.

Don't let fear govern your life.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Sep 8, 2007)

Logan said:


> Given how people in general are easily spooked, propagating propaganda like that would have people witch-hunting eventually, removing rights which people in America are very proud of having for each of its citizens.



I feel the same way. On another board where I used to post, the was a member of the US military who used say that he hadn't fought all over the world to see rights taken away at home.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 8, 2007)

Can I take this discusssion ever so slightly sideways, just a bit? the expression 'A Good American' is used a lot, on this forum, in print and in the media and I'm interested in what people think the concept is of being a good American? The title of this thread indicates that people think there can be 'good' and 'bad' Americans. Over in the UK I've never heard people use the expression a bad or good Briton, we may say unpatriotic or that's not British (we do have a bad tendency to say nothing), is that the same thing or is there a deeper meaning for Americans if so why?

Perhaps we can find out why Muslims or anyone else could be good Americans?

I think a lot of the time over here we, as I said, tend not to speak up when we should, we do tend to have a sort of 'suffer in silence' attitude and we've had all sorts of problems when people have tried to fly Union flags or even just English flags on their houses. I think Americans are more overtly patriotic than we are.They are more willingly to speak of love for their country, we just sort of humph and puff a bit before conceding any affection for 'the old girl'.


----------



## grydth (Sep 8, 2007)

With all of our Commonwealth colleagues chiming in, we may have to reverse our Revolution - and next debate, " Can the British Be Good Americans" ?  :angel:


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 8, 2007)

grydth said:


> With all of our Commonwealth colleagues chiming in, we may have to reverse our Revolution - and next debate, " Can the British Be Good Americans" ? :angel:


 
I asked a perfectly reasonable question, a question that wasn't rascist or nasty and I get a flip reply? I suppose I could remind you that our troops are dying too in Iraq and Afghanistan where they went to support the American president's iniative but that would be a cheap shot. I'll just keep my nose out of your business then.


----------



## grydth (Sep 8, 2007)

Tez, it in no way was directed at you personally or in serious response anyone's contributions. I believe that's obvious. I was trying to add some levity concerning folks outside the USA debating what it takes to be an American.

Please don't ever attempt to lecture me on the military or how you feel you were press ganged into Afganistan.... it's insulting, condescending and completely off topic, and that's only for starters.

Parting advice - those who take themselves too seriously may, in the end, find others do not take them seriously at all.

Let's exchange "ignore list" entries and let the Forum move on. The actual topic here is too important to sidetrack with a personal spat.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 8, 2007)

Tez3, I think that the phrase 'Good American' is used to self-identify. "We" are good Americans, and "They" are not.

The speaker gets to decide who is inclusive, and who is exclusive. And, in an appropriate context, the language would only be used in a completely inclusive group. Those speaking and those hearing, would understand who was inclusive, and who was intended to be excluded. 

In the case of the original post, 'Good Americans' are Christian, and the not good Americans are anyone of a different faith; although the post calls out followers of Islam specifically. 

I am reminded of a popular 'Us/Them' situation. Stephen Colbert, a popular character on the Comedy Central cable television station, was interviewing a United States Congressman. This Congressman favored including the Christian 10 Commandments in the government frame-work (either printing them in the capital or displaying them in courtrooms). Mr. Colbert asked the Congressman to name the 10 Commandments, and as one might expect, the Congressman was unable to do so.

The act of calling for Governmental endorsment of the 10 Commandments was intended to put the Congressman in the "Us" group who believe this; most probably evangelical Christians. 

Now, personally, I think people who want a governmental endorsement of the Ten Commandments are not good Americans. They do not understand that our country was founded with religious liberty as a fundamental ideal. An endorsement of a religion, is unAmerican. And that includes the phrases "One Nation, Under God", and "In God We Trust", in my opinion.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 8, 2007)

grydth said:


> Tez, it in no way was directed at you personally or in serious response anyone's contributions. I believe that's obvious. I was trying to add some levity concerning folks outside the USA debating what it takes to be an American.
> 
> Please don't ever attempt to lecture me on the military or how you feel you were press ganged into Afganistan.... it's insulting, condescending and completely off topic, and that's only for starters.
> 
> ...


 

Personal spat? Taking ourselves too seriousl Ah I see a joke?

I wasn't debating what it takes to be an American. I don't know what it's like to be an American that's why I was asking! I seriously wanted to know what Americans think being an good American is. I wasn't putting up for debate by me, I was asking a very simple question which I suspect may not have a simple answer. 

Lecturing you about Afghanistan? Where did you get that idea from? Your country and mine are involved in a war, we are linked in this, what one does affects the other. So far I have lost 27 colleagues, people I actually worked with and knew along with 40 injuried so don't you ever tell me I am talking about being press ganged into Afghanistan. 

To everyone else I apologise, all I wanted to do was understand the feelings and thoughts of people of a country I admire. I didn't realise asking a simple question about something I know nothing about in an attempt to understand people would be so offensive.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 8, 2007)

Theodore Roosevelt Advocates Americanism, 1915



> ... There is no room in this country for hyphenated Americanism. When I refer to hyphenated Americans, I do not refer to naturalized Americans. Some of the very best Americans I have ever known were naturalized Americans, Americans born abroad. But a hyphenated American is not an American at all. This is just as true of the man who puts "native" before the hyphen as of the man who puts German or Irish or English or French before the hyphen. Americanism is a matter of the spirit and of the soul. Our allegiance must be purely to the United States. We must unsparingly condemn any man who holds any other allegiance. But if he is heartily and singly loyal to this Republic, then no matter where he was born, he is just as good an American as any one else.
> 
> The one absolutely certain way of bringing this nation to ruin, of preventing all possibility of its continuing to be a nation at all, would be to permit it to become a tangle of squabbling nationalities, an intricate knot of German-Americans, Irish-Americans, English-Americans, French-Americans, Scandinavian-Americans or Italian-Americans, each preserving its separate nationality, each at heart feeling more sympathy with Europeans of that nationality, than with the other citizens of the American Republic. The men who do not become Americans and nothing else are hyphenated Americans; and there ought to be no room for them in this country. The man who calls himself an American citizen and who yet shows by his actions that he is primarily the citizen of a foreign land, plays a thoroughly mischievous part in the life of our body politic. He has no place here; and the sooner he returns to the land to which he feels his real heart-allegiance, the better it will be for every good American. There is no such thing as a hyphenated American who is a good American. The only man who is a good American is the man who is an American and nothing else.
> 
> ...


----------



## Karatedrifter7 (Sep 8, 2007)

Nah, thats not true. It depends on the person, plenty of good American Muslims out there. A sociopath is a sociopath no matter what color, creed, or belief system. Osama bin Laden is a bad man, but so is Dick Cheney! 
Thats my two cents..


----------



## Mr. E (Sep 8, 2007)

kuntawguro said:


> Can a good Muslim be a good American? I forwarded that question to a
> friend who worked in Saudi Arabia for 20 years     *The following is his
> forwarded reply:
> 
> ...



The point I think you raise is that there is a war within Islam to define what a "good Muslim" is. I see there are people arguing that the title "good American" is somehow being used to create an "us  vs them" attitude. Well, the same seems to be going on in Islam to a greater extent.

It is a very common tactic to accuse people of racism. You don't have to listen to the arguments of a racist.

But it is not a form of bigotery to point out that there are voices in Islam that echo what you originally posted. And their voices seem to be standing out more now.

Al sent me some PMs to let me know how he felt about certain things. He told me that his family left the old country to get away from the type of things Islam is now infamous for- things like honor killings, hatred against jews and christians and stuff that you expect from people living in a middle eastern dictatorship. But he left the religion when that version of Islam made its way to America and started becoming more of the norm than the exception.

So, there are Muslims that feel the way the OP's original message does. Since they feel they are doing the work of God, they are very keen on getting the truth as they know it out. The Muslims that just want to be left alone are not as driven as those that think they are doing God's work, so the message of the radicals is rising.

Have you seen the riots and violence in Europe that centers around young Muslims raised to think of themselves as not being European- but Muslim? The causes are varied, but they find a common cause through their religion. And the people calling the shots in the name of religion are not the typical, peaceful Muslims like most of us know.

What do you do about that? Instead of trying to play down and ignore the threat, ask yourself what is going to happen as these folks from other cultures with their own version of Islam take over the religion from within.


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 8, 2007)

That's a well posited extrapolation, *Mr. E*.  

I agree in so far as ignoring a threat is a sure-fire of ensuring that it grows.  

Sadly, most of the fuel for the Islamic fire has been provided externally.  It's true that the extremist 'coal' was always there buried within the more peaceful whole but it's been fanned into conflagration by what has been done to the nations where this religion holds sway.

Anyhow, I re-iterate the sentiment of my previous comment that I can't believe that the populations of many countries are being hoodwinked again into a war that only serves the purposes of a few.

If there is a God, then he must be very disappointed in his creation and may be tempted to do something about it.

But as there most probably isn't, so ... KABOOM!  

Welcome to the New Crusade/Jihad in the extra-bonus-damage Technological Era.  You may have thought that the Enlightenment had brought us Rationalism at long last but it looks like taking personal responsibility for your morality is too much like hard work, so we'll revert to tribal primativism backed up by modern firepower.

If it sounds like I'm angry (not with anyone here personally I hasten to add) then that's because I am.  In a rare case for me, I make no apology for it, as I feel quite justified in being miffed by the combined rulers of the world sacrificing our hard won advances on the altar's of their self-serving beliefs.


----------



## Mr. E (Sep 8, 2007)

Sukerkin said:


> Sadly, most of the fuel for the Islamic fire has been provided externally.  It's true that the extremist 'coal' was always there buried within the more peaceful whole but it's been fanned into conflagration by what has been done to the nations where this religion holds sway.



I have to disagree. It seems more like the external threat has been used as an excuse.

It is a matter of fact that many of the governments in the middle east take a lesson from Orwell when they seek to keep their populace in line with an external enemy to frighten them with. By wrapping themselves in the cloth of Islam and teaching _in the schools_ that traditional jewish pasteries require the blood of a Muslim and that the _Protocals of Zion_ are actual texts, they sowed a huge amount of resentment in their populaces.

This has been going on for decades. Most folks now living in that part of the world have been conditioned from the cradle to think that jews control the world through the puppet government of the US and UK.

It does not help that to insure support from the clerics, the House of Saud made a deal with one of the most rabid schools of thought in Islam- the Wahabists. If the Imams would leave them alone, the House of Saud would turn a blind eye to what they were saying about and doing to other faiths.

It is one thing to deal with _real_ affronts against the religion. We can take steps to make up for past sins that really happened. But how can we right the wrong caused by all those Muslims killed to provide pastries for the jews?

And it is people from this area that are now moving out to other parts of the world and taking the lead in Islam. That is what frightens some of us. It is not the religion as a whole, but that the peaceful Muslims some of us know will be led by those that have nothing but hate for anything outside thier view of the world.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 8, 2007)

Just a thought, but doesn't the Bible and Torah agree with what is listed as being neigtive about Islam? Come to think of it, the points Alfy brought up aren't even relivent. He said that Muhammad created Islam to justify rape and pedifial. I think he has never read the Bible. If he did, he would have noticed that neither book says either practice is a no-no. Kinda refutes his claims.

But, what does the stupid pagan know, right?


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Sep 8, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> Personal spat? Taking ourselves too seriousl Ah I see a joke?
> 
> I wasn't debating what it takes to be an American. I don't know what it's like to be an American that's why I was asking! I seriously wanted to know what Americans think being an good American is. I wasn't putting up for debate by me, I was asking a very simple question which I suspect may not have a simple answer.
> 
> ...


 
I've had a couple hours running errands to think about this so I'll take a stab at it:

The topic of Americans' pride in their country had me flashing back to a scene in the Mel Gibson film "The Patriot"( I know what some think of both Mel and the film, and in large part I agree, but bear with me) :

In this scene, the son sees an unkempt, hopeless-looking militiaman with a prototypical American flag, dirty, full of holes, unrepaired, touching the ground and the guy doesn't give a ****. When the son picks it up and gives him a disapproving, questioning look, the old soldier just looks up and says: "It's a lost cause". 

And that's part of it: from the time America as we know it was first conceptualized, we have *ALWAYS* been a lost cause, yet we've always come through. America was( and to an extent remains) an experimentwhere the balance of power as it exists( or is, on paper, supposed to exist) with the the government "of the people, by the people, for the people" with the power in the *people's* hands had never, within recent memory, if ever, been tried before. Such things as religious freedom, a free press or the right to bear arms were radical ideas at the time.we were untested, tiny, and STILL we grew to where we are now, and did it in, by comparison to other nations' histories, a blink of an eye. We had the revolution, we had a Civil War threaten to tear us apart and whose wounds have STILL never fully healed, we had a Great Depression, two World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, which once again sorely tested us when we were divided and looked to tear us apart, but didn't, and here we are now, at our latest "away match" and only just a couple years ago even *I* was at a point where I was wondering if this was "it"--if this was finally gonna be the situation America went into where it wouldn't come out the other end--on the one hand you had the Late Unpleasantness in the mideast, you had the extremely overpolarized lefties and righties too busy with the "us vs. Them" game to have anything useful to say, and basically too busy fighting amongst ourselves to pay ****in' attention to whatever else might be brewing.

 But even THIS is subsiding, however gradually--we have a new general and a new strategy which is at long last giving us the results we should have had years ago,there is increasing talk even within the military of being able in the near future to begin drawing down troops. The writing is on the wall: America will soon be gone from there, and could likely even get to leave from a position of success and not of failure.

The point is here *I* was almost sure this 'd be what broke us, but it hasn't yet.

Even after 9/11, when we were stunned, hurt and didn't know up from down, black from white--we did what I never would have expected us to do --put *everything* aside and piulled together, there were flags all over every available space, people helped each other out for no other reason than it was the right thing to do. It lasted for six, seven good weeks( that was all the New York Times could take).

So on the outside looking in, other nations have laughed at us for what they see as "chest-thumping", excessive patriotism, but remember, it's that same quality we share that has helped us to stand when others might fall, stay together where others might break and run, keep going when any sane person would have given up (very overrated, this business of sanity).

We( or at least *I*) don't look on people of other countries as "less" for no better reason than being born in a different land; I feel truly blessed by my birthright--yes, we can be a proud people at times, but do we not have just cause? And yes, America is in a cycle of turbulence right now, and yes it has problems. But if you can't root for your home team every once in awhile maybe it's time you found another stadium, y'know?

That second question of what Americans think makes a "Good American", well, that's a fair bit tougher now......but what the hell, I've spent this much time in front of my keyboard, I'll take a stab at this too.

Between our cultural diversity and spirit of independence there really idsn't such a thing as a "typical American" we're just too big.

All I can give you is, based on my beliefs and by my attempt to live by them, what *I*, Andy Moynihan and nobody else, considers a "Good American": 

*Someone who does not embrace political stances which run counter to the principles of the US Constitution--People who support interfering with freedom of speech, freesom of religion or the right to bear arms, for the three big examples, are people I cannot in good conscience ever refer to as "Good Americans".

*People who like to piss and whine about their "civil liberties" or how important their rights are, but who would never lift a finger or don a uniform to earn them, are not people who I could in good conscience ever refer to as "Good Americans".

*People who, when faced with a choice of what feels good, or what is right, consistently fail to choose what is right, are not people who I could in good conscience ever refer to as "Good Americans."

That's about it for me.


And yes, that I will be attacked about this is probably about as predictable as nightfall. That's OK. I been attacked all my life and I'm still standing.


----------



## qi-tah (Sep 9, 2007)

Andy Moynihan said:


> So on the outside looking in, other nations have laughed at us for what they see as "chest-thumping", excessive patriotism, but remember, it's that same quality we share that has helped us to stand when others might fall, stay together where others might break and run, keep going when any sane person would have given up (very overrated, this business of sanity).
> 
> We( or at least *I*) don't look on people of other countries as "less" for no better reason than being born in a different land; I feel truly blessed by my birthright--yes, we can be a proud people at times, but do we not have just cause? And yes, America is in a cycle of turbulence right now, and yes it has problems. *But if you can't root for your home team every once in awhile maybe it's time you found another stadium, y'know?*


 
Umm... this talk of equating war and sport ("away matches" and "home team" etc) is something that i find quite disturbing. I'm guessing that you mean "stadium" to mean the USA, but in the context of yr previous comments it could be taken to mean the various theatres of war the US has been involved in. It certainly brought Iraq's current 2million+ war refugees (around 3.7 million if you count those forced to move to safer areas within Iraq - numbers from the UN High Comissioner for Refugees) uncomfortably to mind. At least in sport we leave the stadiums still standing at the cessation of play.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Sep 9, 2007)

qi-tah said:


> Umm... this talk of equating war and sport ("away matches" and "home team" etc) is something that i find quite disturbing. I'm guessing that you mean "stadium" to mean the USA, but in the context of yr previous comments it could be taken to mean the various theatres of war the US has been involved in.


 

It could be meant that way, but it wasn't. We'll have to chalk that up to my dry, clinical sense of humor rubbing someone not used to it the wrong way.( I'm a soldier. I know **** happens. And knowing that **** happens, I tend to use a more dry means of expression concerning violence as many professionals in the field have before me, which to an outside observer could be viewed as callousness but is more in the same vein as ambulance drivers getting by on black humor and so on. I do this same thing when discussing firearms training with students( "If after 2 rounds to the center mass the threat is still not interested in going down, more center mass shots will not convince them"....".....if your accuracy is lacking, any round, of any caliber will not do well in stopping the argument...") I find it gets the point across without terrifying or putting off those new to the business, but still alerts them to the serious nature of the business, and this is probably what ruffled you.


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 9, 2007)

Everybody hates the "popular kid" in school. He/she is labled as arrogant, spoiled, stuck up etc, without anybody really getting to know him/her. Hes flashing around his money with his fancy new car that mommy and daddy got him, when in reality hes been saving and working for for years. She "thnks shes better than everybody else" when shes doing more charitable work than her detractors. Its easier to boost your self-esteem and make yourself feel better to go along with the stereotype because thats what everybody wants to believe then fit is to find out who the real person is. While everybody has their faults and its wrong to believe yourself "perfect", its also human nature to dislike those whom you feel inferior too. I believe there is a mix of that going on with Americans and those who seem to enjoy criticizing them at every turn.


----------



## michaeledward (Sep 9, 2007)

Attempting to personify the American government, and its policies,  into the actions, attitudes and beliefs of a single person is an extremely tortured analogy. It further reduces anyone who has thoughtful, but contrary opinions to the inclusive group, as petty and small.

This argument is similar to that made in the original post. It attempts to separate the world into two groups: ME and THEM. In this argument, the "THEM" in question are bickering, disgruntled and jealous.

Lastly to attempt to psychoanalyze all persons with statements and sentiments such as "it's also Human Nature to dislike ... " is wrapped in fallacy. 

Such broad brush strokes may be effective in painting a house, but they are grossly inadequate in gaining understanding to the human dynamic.


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Sep 9, 2007)

You'll recall that's exactly why I went to such pains to make clear that my thoughts represented only my views and could not be considered the American "average", because there isn't one. Tez asked for opinions, I gave mine. That was it.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 9, 2007)

Andy, I understand your humour perfectly, it's what we call squaddie humour and civilians do find it a bit odd lol!

The reason I asked for opinions was to find out what *real *people thought. The Americans we see most of in Europe are the politicians, actors/celebrities and that sort of people. We watch American films and tv programmes, my favourites are CSI, Law and Order, West Wing, Simpsons, nearly everything Sci Fi and you'll agree these aren't things that make a country typical! The Americans I speak to a lot are MMA fighters who are intent on fighting, training while they're here so we don't have in-depth conversations about politics.

The above, I'm positive, is true in reverse. We aren't a country of David and Victoria Beckhams, many of us can't stand drinking tea and only a few speak with Cockney accents.

We get buzz words and sound bites from politicians ( who I firmly believe come from the same tribe located in a fantasy land!) I hear phrases like Middle America, the Bible belt and American middle classes and I have no idea what they mean. do I want to know? Yes! Not just because our two countries are linked in so many ways but because I care about people.

Do we in Britain hate Americans. NO! NO! AND NO! Ask ordinary people here, what is printed in the media isn't what people actually feel, it's what the media want us to feel. The majority of people are against the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and we place the blame for us being there firmly where it belongs, on Tony Blair. We didn't have to follow America into the war, France didn't but Blair took us in despite many misgivings. We blame our government.Our concerns and fears are for ALL troops out there because when push comes to shove we are are to paraphrase Kipling brothers and sisters under the skin. 

America had a very nasty shock with 9/11 and it's people responded magnificently, they did the right thing that while paying homage to the dead they carried on their normal lives. It is this that makes the terrorists bombs futile, their campaigns pointless because the people will not be moved, they will stand firm against tyranny and they will not cower in fear. The British people learned this in the dark days of the Blitz when emerging from the Underground stations after night after night of heavy bombing, they raised their fists to Hitler and said it would take more than him to make them change their ways. they were right, and we carried this on for thirty odd years from 1969 when the IRA and the Provos tried to bomb us into agreeing with them until the recent peace agreements. Now we have the suicide bombers, it's business as usual.

Okay, we moan about Macdonalds, Paris Hilton, endless repeats of Friends, Dick Van Dykes 'cockney' accent in Mary Poppins and your big teams in the Olympics but and this is a huge but, you are a part of us,family. For the Scots and Irish you were the life saver in the Clearances and the Potato Famine. You joined us in two world wars, we may moan the old chesnuts about being 'over here, overpaid and oversexed' but ask your veterans and they will tell you the people welcomed them, the niggles then as now are minor, squabbling in the family, what matter is that deep down we know that hurt one you hurt all.

On 9/11 we cried with you, we felt as if we'd been attacked too, people raised money not because we felt you needed it so much as it was a way of showing we cared. The Muslim communities in Britain joined in with this, they didn't rejoice. Ignore our foolish politicians, our cynical press and tv media, they don't speak for us. We have quite a few tabloids here that love to sensationalise things, I will give you an example of how they 'bend' the truth:- in May a little English girl went missing in Portugal while on holiday with her family,after weeks of looking she hasn't been found. Now it seems as if there is forensic evidence that implicates the parents in the disappearance, this evidence was tested in the best forensic lab in _Britain._ The tabloid newspapers are screaming abuse at the Portugese police because they say the mother was offered a 'plea bargain' if she confesssed she killed her daughter and is being framed. There is real vitriol being printed against the Portugese, all of them! Yet only one English editor of an English language newspaper has pointed out that in Portugal, they have fixed sentences for crimes, a judge cannot change the sentence let along the police therefore plea bargains are unknown. A total distortion of the truth and a rather nasty anti Portugese campaign, complete with offensive cartoons and comments. If however you hear the people talking in the shops, on the buses outside schools etc you'll find that people are actually far more open minded and will wait for proper evidence before deciding what they think has gone on.


Now as I've been accused of taking myself too seriously I feel I should tell a joke or something but I can't think of any! Well none clean enough for here!


----------



## Blotan Hunka (Sep 9, 2007)

Great post Tez. And I agree 100%, most of the impressions we all have about other cultures and nations is based on what we see in movies and the news. When all you see on the tube is how other european nations (for whom many of our relatives worked, fought and died to liberate) now enjoy bashing us, well its natural to take a "screw them" attitude.

My parents have a couple of friends who live in the outskirts of Manchester. They started out as pen pals and they now visit each other on a yearly/bi-yearly basis. Besides some small differences in accent and personality, we (US/Brit at least) seem much more alike then different in our daily routines, our beliefs and our hopes for the future. One difference I have noticed is that while we Americans may like to bad mouth our politicians, many of us do get touchy when other nations badmouth us. I was in the service (Army) as well, its similiar to when you may not like a squadmate personally, you will still jump to his defence if a Marine takes a poke at him in a bar.  Perhaps part of it is that European nations have thousands of years of politics behind them, so much so that there is a bit less "Patriotism". We Americans only have a couple hundred years under our belts. Nobody really seems to care too much about the Brits treatment of the French during the 100 years war, but we still seem to have to answer for American treatment of the Native Americans, Slavery etc.

Just some rambling.


----------



## Ray (Sep 9, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> ... He said that Muhammad created Islam to justify rape and pedifial. I think he has never read the Bible. If he did, he would have noticed that neither book says either practice is a no-no.


The Bible says the rape is a no-no.


----------



## Big Don (Sep 9, 2007)

The plain and simple fact is: No one can tell what a bad person looks like, trying to do so only lets everyone see what a stupid person looks like.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 9, 2007)

Ray said:


> The Bible says the rape is a no-no.


 
Really? Were? (Not flase curousity)


----------



## Big Don (Sep 9, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> Really? Were? (Not flase curousity)


*Deuteronomy 22 verse 26, for one:25 But if out in the country a man happens to meet a girl pledged to be married and rapes her, only the man who has done this shall die. 26 Do nothing to the girl; she has committed no sin deserving death.*


----------



## Phoenix44 (Sep 14, 2007)

I'm still wondering where in the Quran it calls America "The Great Satan"


----------



## Ray (Sep 14, 2007)

Phoenix44 said:


> I'm still wondering where in the Quran it calls America "The Great Satan"


Of course the Koran doesn't.  The United States, as a country did not exist at the time during which the prophet Mohammed (spelling?) received the recitation from the angel.  At least it is not mentioned in the English translation that I own (as I understand it, a translation is not on equal footing with the Arabic original - it is an "interpretation."  But I could be wrong.)


----------



## Bigshadow (Sep 14, 2007)

qi-tah said:


> Nope, all people living share the same genus, species and sub-species too - Homo sapiens sapiens. There is an interesting article here about current research investigating the "Out-of Africa" theory of a common genetic ancestery: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2007/05/070509161829.htm



Hmmm.... I thought there were 3 different sub species.  Maybe someone in forensics can shed some light on identification (a reflection of sub-species) based on skulls and bones.  So I have heard anyway. Of course I could be wrong.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 14, 2007)

If America is the *Great* satan that implies there's other satans out there, who would they be then? Can I be an imp, you know those ones will the little pitchfork things?


----------



## thardey (Sep 14, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> Andy, I understand your humour perfectly, it's what we call squaddie humour and civilians do find it a bit odd lol!
> 
> The reason I asked for opinions was to find out what *real *people thought.
> . . . .
> ...



Well, I'll be glad to describe what the every day life of my culture is. 

Please keep in mind, that the only British people I've ever really talked to about my culture was either in the Cayman Islands, (British West Indies, for those who may be curious), or on our honeymoon in Malta, where the most common question we got was, "Aren't you Americans? What are you doing here? Americans never come here! So, since the only really effective way to describe my culture is in reference to what I know of your culture, I will try to take a stab at it, and my apologies if I really screw it up. (Also, next spring we will be visiting Ireland and England, so maybe I'll get a better perspective on your culture then.)

So then, I live on the west coast, in a cultural region that describes itself as "The State of Jefferson". Don't look on a map, you won't find it. It's a combination of Southern Oregon, and Northern California. It's our way of separating ourselves from the larger cities, and the more politically liberal areas to the north and south of us. We also identify closely with Idaho and Montana, and probably secretly wish we could be more like them.

The age of the lumberjack and traders that settled this region is still fresh in our minds, and most people are here because they wanted to get out of wherever they were from. As a result we are an extremely individual people, proud of being able to take care of ourselves, (most people know the basics of how to fix their own plumbing, fix up their own house, and until computers took over, to fix their own cars.) We're really proud of that, and it shapes a lot of our political views. 

As a result, typically our area doesn't like the U.N., doesn't like government interference, and we just want to be left alone. Because of that, sometimes we deliberately try to appear old-fashioned and dense. "Us dumb old country folk", is an image that we have, and we kinda like it that way. It gets people to leave us alone. We make fun of the French - not so much that they're wimpy or anything, it's that they work sooo hard to be sophisticated, but look down on our simple enjoyment of life.

Sometimes we'll even tell stories about bears in town, and Indians out hunting and such, just to make people think we're still stuck in the pioneer days. I mean, that stuff is true, we just leave out the "modern" details.

We wear jeans and t-shirts to work, in the winter we'll wear our "farm" coats (Carharts, if anyone else knows what those are.) to work, even if it's in a cubicle. I work in a restored Dairy barn, which has been remodeled and converted into an engineering office, and we're the envy of the other engineering companies in our town.

We're also pretty good with computers, love our triple-shot-mocha-lattes-with half-and-half espressos, (and that's a simple one) host our Shakespeare festivals, and 4th of July parades. We hunt, fish, hike, snowboard, golf, play football, etc.

But the thing is, that this is a small, small representation of America. There are really so many subcultures here that there's no way to really understand them all. Northern Oregon is totally different, and Oregon is different than Washington, and the Pacific Northwest (Oregon, Washington, Idaho) is different than the "West". And Southern California, well, there's some people who consider that it's own country, it's so different from all the rest. A "Good Californian" (whatever that means, I agree with Michael that it's mostly a way to define "Us" or "them".) Won't survive as a "Real Oregonian" (See comment about a "Good Californian".)

To take all of these subcultures and lump them into a category of "Good Americans" is way too simple. We have such a large cross-section of cultures here, I once actually had to be a translator between a lady from New York, and a gentleman from Texas! They literally couldn't understand each other's accents! What's polite in one state is considered extremely rude in another. In Oregon, we show respect by disagreeing with someone to their face. In some "American" cultures, that is extremely disrespectful.

There are cultures here that Muslims would fit quite comfortably in, there are cultures where they would be very uncomfortable. Also, which branch of Islam are we talking about?


Edited to add:
I understand that there are a ton of different sub-cultures in the U.K. (at least three different "nations" united). It's no different in the U.S., we just have a lot more geographical areas to fit even more sub-cultures into!


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 14, 2007)

Nice stab at a thumbnail sketch, *Thardey* :tup:.  

I can heavily identify with the 'accent translation' problem .  

Until the TV really took hold here in the 70's and 80's, accents in the UK were very diverse indeed.  When I first flew the family nest and struck off on my own to the city of Stoke-on-Trent, as we were moving in a neighbour came out to say hello and generally have a nose at the disreputable looking bikers moving in to the area.  We couldn't understand a word he said :lol:.  Same thing for me with the Scottish caretaker at my first university.

Anyhow, we all got to understand each other and get along in the end, despite our differences.  A small scale lesson for the larger issue perhaps.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 14, 2007)

Bigshadow said:


> Hmmm.... I thought there were 3 different sub species. Maybe someone in forensics can shed some light on identification (a reflection of sub-species) based on skulls and bones. So I have heard anyway. Of course I could be wrong.


 
Not subspecies, just slight genetic differnces. "negroid" (IE, black) have a slopped mandable. There are some others, I just cann't remember what all.
The same principle is seen in all animals that have wide ranges. If you have a bunny in where-ever you live, and it is beneficial  to be white, your bunnies babies will be white, after a few generations. If I have one from the exact same species, and it is beneficial to be brown, they will be brown after a few generations. 
Now, if they are kept isolated for long enough (like a few hundred years) these differnces will slowly grow greater. But, it will take thousands of years for them to be differnit species. It will also require very big differnces in what they encounter (such as climate and predators), or selective breeding. 

Is that a good basic guide?


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 14, 2007)

Thardey what a brilliant description of where you live! Thank you! I agree totally with what you said about people. In the UK there are loads of subcultures too, the way you live sounds very like the way things are where I live in the Yorkshire Dales. Cities of course are always different but even they are different from each other. Newcastle is very different from liverpool and both are defferent from Manchester. I know France very well too and the same can be said for them, people from Provence prefer to be called Provencal rather than French they also have their own language. The people around Strasberg also speak their own language and are more Germanic than French. Everyone dislikes Parisians though lol!

The phrase 'knowledge dispels fear' comes to mind here, the more we know about each other the more we find we have things in common and the morewe realise that the easier it is to accept and even enjoy the differences between us. I tend to think our first loyalties after that to our families, are with our local area rather than a country. I think we can be patriotic to that country but it's the place we live in, where our hearts are that comes first. In a time of war I think it's that and the people close to us we fight for rather than America or Great Britain or France. We fight for our freedom and our way of life. 

We have a lot of Muslims here and through the Empire have had a long exposure to Islam. I think that it's extremists we need to worry about, not just Muslim ones, all extremists. They have an agenda that they follow regardless of who suffers. The Troubles in Northern Ireland are well known to many but would it surprise you to know little of it was about religion and freedom and a lot to do with gangs, drugs and criminal activity? I'm afraid that's the hard truth about it and there was nothing romantic or heroic about many of the 'freedom fighters'.

Can we carry on exploring our different cultures and differences please? It's fascinating and hopefully we'll understand each other that bit better!


----------



## FieldDiscipline (Sep 15, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> Newcastle is very *different from liverpool and both are defferent from Manchester*.



Thank goodness! 



Tez3 said:


> In a time of war I think it's that and the* people close to us we fight for* rather than America or Great Britain or France. We fight for our freedom and our way of life.



I think this is certainly true in battle.  I know you know people who will confirm this.  Its the ideals that you get you there, and loyalty to your friends that gets you to do the impossible and the incredible.



> I think that it's extremists we need to worry about, not just Muslim ones, all extremists.



Cracking post Tez, cant rep you again yet...

P.S. the french fight?


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 15, 2007)

FieldDiscipline said:


> Thank goodness!
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
LOL! Well the Provencals do! France is like the Uk in that it has different countires in it that were forcibly joined together, the people in the south of the country were treated appallingly by the northerners, there were massacres such as the one where they killed all the Cathars. Incidentally France has a high population of Muslims dating back from their colonial days. The French Muslims have a lot to feel aggrieved about as they were treated very badly and are still classed as second rate citizens. A few years back my daughter and her friend came with us on holiday to Provence where we have a caravan in Port Grimaud, they were both about 17 and they made friends with the young people in the caravan next to us, as young people do, there were some lads and some girls who had a separate caravan. They'd go off to the beach together, come back listen to music and eat then go out for the night. They were polite and respectful to us, they were nice to the girls and they had fun together but oh the looks and comments from our other French neighbours! The group were Tunisians who now lived in Lyon. One evening the lads were messing around with each other, bit noisy but they were funny then security guards turned up and started getting heavy with them, they said they'd had a complaint they were fighting. I had to get in there and persuade them it was alright, it got a bit physical at one point. They lads said it was a common occurance for them. Another time we were at a fun fair and there were some ladies dressed in Muslim clothes but not veiled who were spat at by a man walking by who called them filthy Arabs. Being a Muslim in France is hard. I don't believe Germany treats them much better, when I lived there there wre a great many Turks who were welcomed to do all the dirty jobs but not welcomed into society as such.

In the UK we have had a greater and longer exposure to Islam, in the days of the Raj the Muslim leaders were preferred to the others by the British as people they could deal with and understand.The British were fighting in the now Afghanistan in the 19th century, lost then too.

Much if not all of the problems in the Middle East date back to when it was carved up by non Muslim non locals (not all in the Middle East are Arabs, the Iranians aren't for example) making unnatural borders and making royal families to sit on new thrones and rule new countries.We are reaping what we sowed in the days of colonialism.


----------



## FieldDiscipline (Sep 15, 2007)

Definately.  Iraq is THE case in point.  What a miss match that is.


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 15, 2007)

FieldDiscipline said:


> P.S. the french fight?


 
Actually, France nearly took over the world about three times. Under Charlemenge (sp), Napleon, and during the Colonial era. Granted they never took over as much as Britian, but they were still one of the big ones. France has also fought in Korea, Vietnam (not when we were though), and they have sent troops during both Gulf Wars. Which means they fight, but not very well.


----------



## Tez3 (Sep 15, 2007)

CuongNhuka said:


> Actually, France nearly took over the world about three times. Under Charlemenge (sp), Napleon, and during the Colonial era. Granted they never took over as much as Britian, but they were still one of the big ones. France has also fought in Korea, Vietnam (not when we were though), and they have sent troops during both Gulf Wars. Which means they fight, but not very well.


 
Vietnam was France's fault but they had the sense not get into a war. As I said France is the collective word for the country but there's actually a few countries in there, I think many would be independant if they could. I know the Basques ( Basques aren't just in Spain), Provencals, Bretons would. When the French want soldiering done they send the Legion D'Etranger in, they fight like devils. France had many colonies in the Far East and also in North Africa, after the first World War the Middle East was carved up and it's this that is causing the problems now. Incidentally Ethiopia was an Italian colony and suffered badly under Mussolini enduring massacres and poverty from which they haven't recovered.

Someone mentioned before that they felt America was still answering for slavery and the treatment of the Native Americans. I think it's not so much that as that things our forefathers have done have come back to haunt us. In Scotland the Highland Clearances still cause anger and they were in the 18th century *but* they changed the face of Scotland and changed the way people thought of Scotland making it a subserviant culture to England for a long time. The same with Wales, it's only relatively recently that Welsh has been allowed to been spoken and children aren't beaten for speaking it in school.These things burn deeply into people. 

In Europe the Second War War has left deep scars, even today the Dutch have little love for the Germans. France can still tear itself apart by reminders of it's Occupation. The Germans themselves carry the guilt and don't know how to deal with it now even after all these years. Are we surprised then that Muslims are disaffected? In 1919 The Balfour Declaration gave Jews a home but reneged on it, in Palestine then just liberated from Turkish rule (The Turks were hated by all for their cruelty as the rulers, this is echoed in the Balkans), countries were made up and given rulers from different tribes as rewards from the Allies. Borders were made regardless of tribal borders and affiliations. This was storing up trouble for the future...us.

The situation in the Middle East is far more complicated than the Muslims wanting to convert everyone and take over the world. To condemn every Muslim is foolish and pointless. It overlooks the fact there like Christianity and Judaism there are different 'types', different beliefs under the banner of Islam. It's also complicated by the West's need for oil, if there was no oil in the Middle East or we didn't need it so much can anyone honestly say we'd be in the situation we are now?


----------



## CuongNhuka (Sep 15, 2007)

Tez3 said:


> It's also complicated by the West's need for oil, if there was no oil in the Middle East or we didn't need it so much can anyone honestly say we'd be in the situation we are now?


 
Good hypothetical. If it wasn't for the West's invasion of the Middle East, I have a feeling the two regions would indiffernit to each other.


----------



## meth18au (Sep 15, 2007)

The west's invasion of the middle east?  Are you referring to the current conflict spanning since 9/11?  I think the roots of the current problem between extreme Islamism and the 'West' are much deeper than this.  And stem many decades back, it is no recent conflict.  Correct me if I'm wrong...


A people need a state, otherwise it is in conflict.  The state makes the nation, and it will work for the common good of the people.  The people will fight for the state, and live by its laws and regulations.  A 'good' citizen believes in the sovereignty of the state and lives to advance the interests of their country.  For me, I live my life, in my country, and try to add value to my country.  I am proud to be Australian.  It is love for my country and my way of life- over any other- that makes me a 'good' Australian.


Now I DON'T believe that one has to be born Australian to be a good Australian.  My grandparents immigrated from Italy after WW2.  They came here, adapted to life, worked hard, and lived by the laws of this country.  They were also 'good Australians'.  I have known Muslims in Australia, and have an Iranian born friend.  A very good friend.  He is a good Australian too.  Still proud of his roots, but he has adapted well.  


I am not stupid- I do see there being a problem in many Western countries- where some percentage (it is hard to quantify) of the muslim community will not adapt.  They go as far as to wish harm upon their adopted countries.  This to me is a 'bad' Australian- or whatever country they have adopted.  However- it is not all.  It is a percentage.  Can muslims be good Australians?  By my standards, that I have layed out in this post, YES.    Now I don't know if Muslims can be good Americans?  But I presume that a good American can be defined the same way a good Australian, or a good Briton can be defined?  Correct me if I'm wrong?


I have met a lot of expat Brits living over here in Australia, that actually call themselves Aussie.  On numerous occasions, I have heard an accent that is oh so English (Tez- I reckon the English accent is bloody awesome).  I will proceed to ask them which part of England they are from- only to be told that they are Aussie now.  If this is their stance, and they live, work, socialize, and become one of us- then they are Aussie.  So long as their intentions lay in the wellbeing of the members of my beautiful country and our way of life.


The risk of alienating the whole of Islam through racism and bigotry, only serves to give the extreme Islamists what they want.  To create an incompatibility between 'us' and 'them'- forcing all of Islam under an extreme banner.   The same applies to ourselves.  There are forces within our own countries that aim to drive an image of incompatibility between 'us' and 'them'.   


My 2 cents....


----------



## Sukerkin (Sep 15, 2007)

The Rep Gnomes forbid me from giving Tez a little buffing (ooh err, nurse !) for her marvellous post above, so it's the embarassment of public accolade for you, madam :rei: .

To further elaborate a little on the general point of how 'blood feuds' get going and how everyone plays their part in them in one way or another, I'd like to turn the spotlight away from the Muslims to put aside the present day emotional baggage of the central issue.

To misquote a line from the Last Samurai, nations (or religions) , like men, sometimes have a bad reputation they do not deserve.  The French had the misfortune to have appalling leadership at a crucial turning point in the 20th Century and compounded this with active collaberation with the invaders when all was not yet lost.  Since then, how everything they do is viewed is tinted by the filter of those events.  

I am not immune to this prejudice.  In large part I learned it at my grandfathers knee as he told me how French people at Dunkirk were abusing the BEF soldiers and waving in and cheering the German fighters as they straffed the beaches.  Now this may be an apocryphal story but he was there and something forever condemned the French in his eyes and this passed on to me who was not there and who had never met a French person.  Okay, this example is not perfect as many of we Britons have a centuries deep dislike of the French (Remember Agincourt! Trafalgar forever! ) but the drier history I learned from books did not have the same impact on me as the words of my grandfather.

The principle I'm driving at is that I had never met a French person and had certainly never been wronged by one and yet even now one of those spiteful, racist, Francophobe jokes makes me laugh ("For sale, unused French rifle ... only dropped once!"), primarily because of something I was _told_ happened.  If I can pick up a prejudice like that so easily, how much easier is it for someone to tar a whole nation or a whole religion with the same brush if they *have* suffered some personal harm because of a member of that nation or religion?

It's in our nature to do it, it seems, but it is something we must fight if we ever want to have a peaceful world to live in.

Of course, it does work the other way too.  My other grandfather fought in Italy (amongst many other places) and wouldn't hear a bad word said about Indians, regailing me with stories of their bravery at Monte Cassino.  From that, despite incidents of racially based rudeness and hostility to me from Indian youths, I've managed to avoid being prejudiced against our Indian/Pakistani residents because my grandafathers tales of courage impressed me so.

As ever, I'm blundering about trying to get to my final point - that is that prejudice that causes bad decisions is something we can do something about at an individual level but generally only if the 'message' is gotten across when someone is young. So, in my case, no matter what I learn and how much I try, I have an automatic anti-French and pro-Indian reaction that I'm stuck with.  Of course, when you actually meet someone, then it's a whole different ballgame as you then start to judge someone on who they are rather than what they are.


----------



## FieldDiscipline (Sep 15, 2007)

I've made a right mess of this here post.

Sorry!


----------

