The Arab Conspiracy?
-
Peace
There is a difference between a "difference of opinion in order to promote active thinking on various topics" and choosing articles that specifically intend to demonize and humiliate a group of peoples characterized by the region in which they live in, color of their skin, heritage or otherwise. With freedom of speech comes an ample amount of duty and responsibility. You can't run around taunting freedom of speech while clearly not exercising the responsibility that comes along with it. Where your rights end are where my rights begin. It is a basic human right for one to live in dignity and respect. The systematic characterization of a person as a shaytan in a website that is supposed to promote the tolerant nature of Islam is unbecoming. Instead of screaming freedom of speech, like those immature cartoonists in Denmark, try to react with a level of maturity and responsibility we demand from the moderators of this site. Such blatantly racist articles should not only be banned, they should be put as an example of how Islam is NOT supposed to be discussed. Even if you don't care about human rights, if you claim to uphold the tenets of the quran, you should know that there is a way of approaching a subject, especially about deen, and then there is the wrong way. Regardless of the general message of the article, if it is tainted with racism and other intolerant unIslamic nonsense, it should be put in the trash where it belongs and not given the airtime and attention that it does not deserve. By placing an article on this website, you as moderators are sending a message to those who read them. Although this message is not necessarily that you agreee with every article, it certainly is that it's ok to discuss matters in such a disrespectful manner, all in the name of "freedom". This is a very amatuer understanding of what freedom really is. Please revise your understanding so that you don't become branded as just as wacky and extremist as other "Islamic" websites.
-
Yes, it's present on the site along with many other articles for their thought provoking content as is mentioned on the articles page. One can agree or disagree to it's content. That is primarily the purpose to make one think. One does not need to agree to an article or only have articles reflecting their beliefs on one's site, there might be other reasons.
Garbage
Peace
I wonder if you have read the work in its entirety?
Do not think it is put on the site to promote racism. It is there because it is one among many perspectives about the message.
Not all of the articles on the site even agree in their conclusions. I also believe the translated verses are Aidid's own or taken from another translation. Perhaps you should not like for free-minds to have links to translations which you don't particularly agree with, or even articles you do not particularly agree with? So, what about the next person?
Joe
Absolute Garbage
Peace
There is a difference between a "difference of opinion in order to promote active thinking on various topics" and choosing articles that specifically intend to demonize and humiliate a group of peoples characterized by the region in which they live in, color of their skin, heritage or otherwise. With freedom of speech comes an ample amount of duty and responsibility. You can't run around taunting freedom of speech while clearly not exercising the responsibility that comes along with it. Where your rights end are where my rights begin. It is a basic human right for one to live in dignity and respect. The systematic characterization of a person as a shaytan in a website that is supposed to promote the tolerant nature of Islam is unbecoming. Instead of screaming freedom of speech, like those immature cartoonists in Denmark, try to react with a level of maturity and responsibility we demand from the moderators of this site. Such blatantly racist articles should not only be banned, they should be put as an example of how Islam is NOT supposed to be discussed. Even if you don't care about human rights, if you claim to uphold the tenets of the quran, you should know that there is a way of approaching a subject, especially about deen, and then there is the wrong way. Regardless of the general message of the article, if it is tainted with racism and other intolerant unIslamic nonsense, it should be put in the trash where it belongs and not given the airtime and attention that it does not deserve. By placing an article on this website, you as moderators are sending a message to those who read them. Although this message is not necessarily that you agreee with every article, it certainly is that it's ok to discuss matters in such a disrespectful manner, all in the name of "freedom". This is a very amatuer understanding of what freedom really is. Please revise your understanding so that you don't become branded as just as wacky and extremist as other "Islamic" websites.
Well said akhi
I'll put this plainly to you as a very concerned attempt to advise you to the right course of action, take it down, it is wrong, it is racist and it is openly being promoted by Free Minds.
-
Peace
When call my opinion garbage and then complain about the misuse of the freedom of speech, you are not helping your cause in the least bit. It is the understanding of the author that the verse is speaking about Arabs. I doubt he has an aim to denounce a race of his own accord.
Wakas provided a link to another thread about this book http//www.free-minds.org/forum1/viewtopic.php?t=2267
Some people may not agree with your understanding of those verses.
Perhaps you should care to mention what these verses really say and that they are in fact not referring to a 'race' but dwellers of the countryside and city.
You can show the people why you think you are right.
Joe
-
Yes, it's present on the site along with many other articles for their thought provoking content as is mentioned on the articles page. One can agree or disagree to it's content. That is primarily the purpose to make one think. One does not need to agree to an article or only have articles reflecting their beliefs on one's site, there might be other reasons.
Garbage
I'll put this plainly to you as a very concerned attempt to advise you to the right course of action, take it down, it is wrong, it is racist and it is openly being promoted by Free Minds.
Garbage? Ok.
I would advise you to not read sites that have articles you disagree with. In case you choose to persist in this course of action, please post a thread if said site has a forum or write an email to the site explaining why you think it's incorrect. With all that said and done, if there is a forum such as this connected to the main site, then people will have a thread which will give them an alternate understanding and/or rebuttal. If there is no such forum on a site then the people concerned may choose to put a disclaimer like articles might not be not our work but are posted here for their thought provoking content. (Some would consider this to mean We don't really agree or disagree to it but it's here for those who might consider it worthwhile to study and ponder upon while reaching their own conclusions). As an aside, good libraries should have books with all kinds of perspectives. Those that would burn books that they would consider 'not worth reading' and an 'affront to the senses' should think about when the tables are turned and their perspectives might be considered 'not worth reading' and an 'affront to the senses'.
This, additionally, has nothing to do with disrespect. It's about making studies done by people available for a wider perspective and to have a more solid understanding. Sometimes criticism and reading an opposing point of view sharpens our own faculties and understanding.
-
When call my opinion garbage and then complain about the misuse of the freedom of speech, you are not helping your cause in the least bit. It is the understanding of the author that the verse is speaking about Arabs. I doubt he has an aim to denounce a race of his own accord.
You ever heard of something called self-loathing?
Some people may not agree with your understanding of those verses.
They might not, but those people either have little or no understanding of Arabic or they are purposefully misinterpreting those verses.
The actual grouping of the first two with the third together with the title says alot, and you will not explain yourselves out of this one this time.
I will continue to persist along these lines until the offensive material is taken down or until my Freedom of Speech is taken away by Free Minds like it was with Brother Beghat.
Garbage? Ok.
Yes, complete and utter garbage, and I will stand by that description because it is the stuff which the both of you are spouting.
I would advise you to not read sites that have articles you disagree with. In case you choose to persist in this course of action, please post a thread if said site has a forum or write an email to the site explaining why you think it's incorrect. With all that said and done, if there is a forum such as this connected to the main site, then people will have a thread which will give them an alternate understanding and/or rebuttal.
I take it you find me quite offensive? Perhaps it will make you understand how language, words and the way an argument is presented can be completely ad utterly offensive, suffice to say, my attempts are weak next to the power of this particular article.
This, additionally, has nothing to do with disrespect. It's about making studies done by people available for a wider perspective and to have a more solid understanding. Sometimes criticism and reading an opposing point of view sharpens our own faculties and understanding.
No it is not. It seems to becoming more of a notice board of twisted interpretations, mistruths, irrationality and general nonsense.
Perhaps you're wondering why I bother sticking around then? Maybe the same question can be asked of others around here but for me, it is to highlight the many wrongs and doing exactly what you have mentioned, does it get heated? Yes at times, but only in retaliation to the injustices hurled at by many users of this forum, especially members of its administration.
For heavens sake take some criticism if you are so enlightened, stop being so hypocritical, and if you can't take offence then perhaps you should tackle it on a universal level instead of only chastising those who you wish.
-
Peace Quraishi,
Did you read the work
Arab Conspiracies?From your post I get the impression that you did not get past the first few pages?
Had you read the entire work, you would have found there were some treasures of information such as the issue of Hajj and the misunderstandings relating to the word
hurum.As for the obvious error of mistaking the word
Aaraabwith `Arabs', that is an unfortunate error which has been pointed out to the author yet he has kept his work as is.Finally, with regards to your comment on brother Ahmed and the
censorship, I take it you would prefer an environment where people attack and swear and curse each other rather than one of harmony based on laws and rules?Is that the way of Islam or is that the way of desires?
"Have you not seen how God cites the example of a good word is like a good tree, whose root is firm and its branches in the sky. It bears its fruit every so often by its Lord?s leave. And God cites the examples for the people, perhaps they will remember. And the example of a bad word is like a tree which has been uprooted from the surface of the Earth, it has nowhere to settle. God makes firm those who believe with firm sayings in the worldly life, and in the Hereafter. And God misguides the wicked, and God does what He wishes." (1424-27)
-
Yes, complete and utter garbage, and I will stand by that description because it is the stuff which the both of you are spouting.
It would be helpful to rebut rather than call something garbage yes?
I take it you find me quite offensive? Perhaps it will make you understand how language, words and the way an argument is presented can be completely ad utterly offensive, suffice to say, my attempts are weak next to the power of this particular article.
How you got from my statement which this quote is in response to is quite arbitrary. My statement is quite clear and unambiguous.
No it is not. It seems to becoming more of a notice board of twisted interpretations, mistruths, irrationality and general nonsense.
Perhaps you're wondering why I bother sticking around then? Maybe the same question can be asked of others around here but for me, it is to highlight the many wrongs and doing exactly what you have mentioned, does it get heated? Yes at times, but only in retaliation to the injustices hurled at by many users of this forum, especially members of its administration.
For heavens sake take some criticism if you are so enlightened, stop being so hypocritical, and if you can't take offence then perhaps you should tackle it on a universal level instead of only chastising those who you wish.
So basically this is a long standing issue with you and Aidid Safar's article was just another issue that could be used to rant about the admin et al. It seems you're the one who can't take criticism because if we really wanted to shut out voices and not hear criticism, you really wouldn't have a place to rant and call others to be spouting garbage and hypocrites, would you?
-
Peace
You ever heard of something called self-loathing?
Have you read the book in it's entirety?
Joe
Pathetic, very pathetic...
-
Peace
Again, you all tout the ever-familiar "difference of opinion and freedom of speech" deal. In a scholarly or academic setting, there certainly are works that are considered trash and would never be placed on a bookshelf. You cannot simply brush over clear violations of the human right to dignity just because he does have a point about other issues. The correct form of action would be to deny his article airtime until he decides to re-evaluate his approach. This is the basics of academia. You don't get a bum off the street to spit out his garbage and keep it all just because he said one sentence that was "a treasure" (in who's eyes?).
Once again, a difference of opinion is a beautiful thing but defamation of character is very ugly, immature behavior, and unacceptable by every standard. You cannot possibly expect people to brush over half of the article just because there are a few sentences that sound good or "different". This is ludacris. The better approach, if you really love his tidbits of "good information" would be to verify his work, cite him and create an article free of insults and blatant racism.
You as moderators have a duty not only in front of us but especially in front of God. Do not abuse the power God bestowed onto you to create mischief and further anamosity between races. It is not acceptable if it were about Jews, it is not acceptable if it were about Blacks, it is not acceptable if it were about Pakistanis. Why should it be ok if it were about Arabs?
Be strong enough to see your mistakes and wise enough to learn from them, instead of continuing to fight a futile battle. Twisting the quran in order to insult a whole race is plain wrong no matter how hard you try to squint your eyes.
-
Peace,
Although the Quran can be subjected to and contested towards derogation and mortification, whether implied or explicit, I personally believe and viably conclude that Aidid Safar's interpretation is THE BEST I've ever come across, with all due respect.
-
Again, you all tout the ever-familiar "difference of opinion and freedom of speech" deal.
You say that like it's a bad thing.
In a scholarly or academic setting, there certainly are works that are considered trash and would never be placed on a bookshelf. You cannot simply brush over clear violations of the human right to dignity just because he does have a point about other issues. The correct form of action would be to deny his article airtime until he decides to re-evaluate his approach. This is the basics of academia. You don't get a bum off the street to spit out his garbage and keep it all just because he said one sentence that was "a treasure" (in who's eyes?).
I'm sure there are many fine works of art that some might consider trash (in who's eyes i.e. in someone's opinion) and call the author a bum off the street who spat out his garbage. I have come across this scenario many times in many different forms of media. Normally when posting articles 'in a scholarly or acadamic (aren't these synonyms?) setting' we tend to respect the author and not cut and paste without his explicit consent. There is a reason why most authors do not agree and even if they do agree, this reason still stands. A study most of the times can taken out of context or might not be understood fully when just one part is read (i.e. for example the basic underlying motivations of an author or where he got his conclusions from that might be quite important when trying to study the work and understanding the points in their entirety). With that said, as has been mentioned in this thread, prepare a rebuttal and that can be linked.
Once again, a difference of opinion is a beautiful thing but defamation of character is very ugly, immature behavior, and unacceptable by every standard. You cannot possibly expect people to brush over half of the article just because there are a few sentences that sound good or "different". This is ludacris. The better approach, if you really love his tidbits of "good information" would be to verify his work, cite him and create an article free of insults and blatant racism.
There aren't just a 'few sentences that sound good' or 'different' or 'tidbits of good information'. This is an entire study we are talking about. One needs to read the study to get a handle on where he's coming from and where he's going with it. Prepare a rebuttal and that might get linked.
You as moderators have a duty not only in front of us but especially in front of God. Do not abuse the power God bestowed onto you to create mischief and further anamosity between races. It is not acceptable if it were about Jews, it is not acceptable if it were about Blacks, it is not acceptable if it were about Pakistanis. Why should it be ok if it were about Arabs?
Power God bestowed on moderator's? Alright.
Be strong enough to see your mistakes and wise enough to learn from them, instead of continuing to fight a futile battle. Twisting the quran in order to insult a whole race is plain wrong no matter how hard you try to squint your eyes.
Alright.
May I take this opportunity to ask people when suggesting or complaining about something to keep it logical, rational and sensible with workable suggestions and to the point. Temper tantrums and posts chockful of emo ranting will only serve to cloud one's own points and show immaturity of thought. This is not targeted towards any particular posters.
-
See the explanations of the author, http//www.aididsafar.com/Hijacking_Of_Islam.pdf , page 13.
-
why dont people prepare a rebuttal, im sure it can be referenced in the article, or a link to the thread if people feel so strongly about it.
I did, it didn't take long to write one, it wasn't enough to fill a post let alone an entire article, this particular article and I'm sorry I cannot find words to explain it apart from ones such as 'wrong', 'stupid' and 'garbage' and I'm not going to dignify it with a rebuttal without firstly trying to get it down.
Do you know what, I am going to stop pressing this with you people, because one day it's going to haunt you and help to destroy your legitimacy, your entire legitimacy will be destroyed with the addition of more and more of these articles.
Both myself and BOOST have expressed these issues to you and none of you have been able to challenge our claims and astaghfirullah I fear it is someone's arrogance that prevents this going down rather than a lack of understanding as to why it is wrong.
Go ahead, keep it up, but I tell you this; so long as these kind of articles are kept up in such a defiance then Free Minds will be touted as an inflammatory website and that is not a threat, it is a fact, the more conscientious people who view that the more opposition you will have to whatever you're collectively trying to achieve here.
I urge you one last time - take it down...
-
peace all,
Those somehow implying free-minds endorses such views may want to read the following thread in which errors in aidid safar's content were discussed
http//www.free-minds.org/forum1/viewtopic.php?t=840You will probably find more if one did a search on the forum.
Wakas
-
Thankyou for this Wakas...
-
This post will be directed towards savage_carrot.
In response to your idea that some artwork could be considered garbage, you're mixing apples with oranges, dear. Artwork has a much more subjective message which can be interpreted in numerous ways, arguably all being correct (or only the author's perspective being the "right way" of viewing the artwork; depending on what theory you ascribe). Articles on the internet however are totally different. They must meet a totally different standard if they are to be up to par with scholarly work*. Scholarly work is free of childish mockeries and insults. It meets a level of dignity and respect and does not speak in a condescending tone to the reader. It has to have evidence and appropriate citations. A bum off the street spewing his garbage would be equal to a person who disregards such refined forms of writing in order to send his "rough around the edges" "article"... You will certainly never find such work being analyzed and studied in any university that has even a shred of credibility. Why? Because it is offensive, inappropriate and completely unacceptable to have a characterization of a group of people as the evil creatures of the world whose soul purpose in life is to ruin Islam.
It appears also that you misunderstand the use of citations. Citing an article takes more than a cut and paste job. You need to come up with a viable thesis in order to create an article, then you cite other articles as reference. This needs no "author's consent" as you have fully given credit where credit is due. This is taught in elementary school if you need further explanation. When I mentioned citing his article, I assumed (perhaps wrongly) that people would understand what citation is and isn't.
As far as your idea of a rebuttal, a rebuttal would be a refutation of his basic premise in his "article". However, (and correct me if I'm wrong Al-Quraishi) the thread is not discussing his main issue, but the utter lack of integrity his main issues is shrouded with. It wreaks of racism plain and simple. Writing that I or Al-Quraishi have a problem with his intentional twisting of the quran in order to lead the reader into understanding the God believes Arabs are the scum of the earth, would not be considered a rebuttal at all.
As far as your understanding of "your power as moderators" yes you're right for the sarcasm because it really isn't much. But what little power you do own as moderators of a website that could be accessed by virtually anyone in the world who has internet services, you have a duty to ensure that you do not spread further anamosity towards races and to promote a tolerant version of Islam, true Islam.
Of course, if you believe that his article in its entirety and not just tidbits of information is remarkable, then you have a deeper problem than just lack of knowledge about what constitutes scholarly work and what doesn't. This would mean that you condone and thereby support the author and his claims against Arabs, which goes right back to Al-Quraishi's point of this whole thread and your hiding behind a silly disclaimer doesn't do much for you.
As for your idea that somehow I'm emotional, you really do read alot into posts, don't you... I have too much going on in my life to be so consumed by a forum that I actually get emotional over it. When or if I start insulting or demonizing others, degrading or defaming them, then you can call my post an emotional rant ... much like that "article".
*And yes scholarly and academic are synonyms ... your point was?
