Israel to demolish Muslim graveyard in Jerusalem to make way for construction

[ComradeR]

Religious leaders in Jerusalem are warning of dangerous consequences after a decision by Israel's Supreme Court to allow the destruction of part of an ancient Muslim cemetery.
The graveyard has not been used for more than 50 years, but contains the bodies of some important Islamic figures.
Many of those bodies will now be disturbed to make way for a new Jewish "Museum of Tolerance".
Earlier this week hundreds of Muslims - young and old - marched through the centre of Jerusalem towards the city's Mamilla cemetery.
Police helicopters flew overhead and security was tight. The focus of the march, and of increasing Muslim anger, was the Israeli Supreme Court decision to sanction a controversial new building on part of the Muslim cemetery.
Outrage
Located just inside West Jerusalem, the cemetery is not used for burials any more but Muslim leaders made clear they still regard it as sacred, as they arrived for a rally reading verses from the Koran.



The Mufti of Jerusalem, Sheikh Mohammad Hussein, led the peaceful but passionate demonstration.
He called the court's decision an "outrage" and "disrespectful of the dead".
The $250m (£160m) complex - designed by Frank Gehry - will be built by the Los Angeles-based Simon Wiesenthal Center and is bold and ambitious.
Its sharp, futuristic lines will dominate the immediate area. In what is already a crowded city, Rabbi Marvin Hier, from the Simon Wiesenthal Center, said the museum was a sensible use of "derelict land".
"Jerusalem is a city built on top of thousands of bones - Jewish and Muslim," he said. "If we declared the whole of Jerusalem one huge cemetery, we'd never be able to build anything."
He pointed out that only part of the graveyard would be demolished to make way for the new centre.



Muslims disagree, and point out that the graveyard is still visited by the families of the dead.
"The cemetery is older than the United States - it's been used for hundreds of years," said Mohammed al-Dejani, whose great-grandfather is buried in the graveyard.
"Some of the warriors of Saladin [Muslim warrior who retook Jerusalem from the Crusaders] are buried there and other great Muslim leaders from many years ago."
Despite the strength of feeling among an increasing number of Muslims, there is no doubt that much of the cemetery is run-down.
Some graves have been vandalised - others are in a poor state of repair. The Simon Wiesenthal Center says that it will deal respectfully with any human remains it uncovers or graves disturbed by the building work.



Ruling in favour of the Simon Wiesenthal Center, the Supreme Court noted that no objections were lodged in 1960 when part of the graveyard was made into a car park. Many of those opposed to the new building say that any proposal to build on top of a Jewish cemetery would never have been allowed.
Construction work has already begun in a corner of the graveyard. Dozens of bones have been dug up and no decision has been taken over what to do with them.
The cemetery is still a relatively quiet, peaceful place - but one which could become another dangerous flashpoint between Jews and Muslims in this divided city.http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7715921.stm
A "Museum of Tolerance"? The irony of this is simply dumbfounding.

[Sankofa]

Tsk, tsk tsk. Israel truly has no shame anymore. :(

[Bilan]

That's pretty disrespectful...

[al8]

To be fair, all cemetaries should be classified as derelict land and put to actual use. Nothing is holy. And you cannot 'disrespect the dead' for they do no longer exist to take insult. And the 'outrage' is that of superstitious fools. They can be insulted all they want.

[Sankofa]

To be fair, all cemetaries should be classified as derelict land and put to actual use. Nothing is holy. And you cannot 'disrespect the dead' for they do no longer exist to take insult. And the 'outrage' is that of superstitious fools. They can be insulted all they want.

Erm, No. This has nothing to do with religion or things being "holy". It showcases the blatant selfishness and disrespect the Israeli government has for Arabs in this area, especially for something as ironic as constructing a tolerance museum.

Zionists think they have the right to simply bulldoze anything that gets in the way of their precious white zionist jewish utopia.

This isn't just a simple cemetery that Muslims use to bury their dead...it is a part of their history, and their culture; their very identity as a people.

It's a landmark that's very symbolic of their civilization that's been in use for centuries, long before this area was colonized by accord of the League of Nations. What right does Israel have to simply plow away part of these peoples' history?

[jake williams]

The destruction of burial grounds is a major part of the process of genocide. "Even your dead do not belong here". It's unsurprising that it's happening in Israel.

[Dean]

To be fair, all cemetaries should be classified as derelict land and put to actual use. Nothing is holy. And you cannot 'disrespect the dead' for they do no longer exist to take insult. And the 'outrage' is that of superstitious fools. They can be insulted all they want.

Bullshit. I would be very sad if my relatives' graves that I visit were demolished. It has nothing to do with religion, and even if it did, it would be a callous, shitty way of trying to enforce a moral standard.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

To be fair, all cemetaries should be classified as derelict land and put to actual use. Nothing is holy. And you cannot 'disrespect the dead' for they do no longer exist to take insult. And the 'outrage' is that of superstitious fools. They can be insulted all they want.

They aren't doing this as part of the secularisation of Isreali society - they're doing this as part of a calculated insult to the Palestinians.

[al8]

Yeah I know. But I still think they are doing my work for me, just that its in half-steps. And it's just part of the semetary. It's a double half-step. But a step in the right direction all the same.

And about this sementary being part of someones culture, I don't think we should be supporting the dead weight of the past if it impedes on the demands of the now. Most use would be to put the remains into museums or for historical and dna analysis.

Hopefully this stupid tolerence museum will be a nice secular looking building that can be apporiated for something more useful later.

[Jazzratt]

Yeah I know. But I still think they are doing my work for me, just that its in half-steps. And it's just part of the semetary. It's a double half-step. But a step in the right direction all the same.

And about this sementary being part of someones culture, I don't think we should be supporting the dead weight of the past if it impedes on the demands of the now. Most use would be to put the remains into museums or for historical and dna analysis.

Hopefully this stupid tolerence museum will be a nice secular looking building that can be apporiated for something more useful later.

I think you're missing the point by miles. Yes knocking down cemetaries because they're not useful is fantastic but that's not really what Israel are doing at all, they are knocking down cemetaries because they are muslim. The action then, is not at all progressive, far from uniting the working class it's a further division between nationalities and religions.

Doing something like this in the right material conditions for the right reasons can be immensly progressive but an imperialist country doing it for nationalistic reasons? No, not really. But thanks for the insight into your black and white world.

[Harrycombs]

This is awful! I hope they find a way to stop this from happening. Don't the Jews in Israel who support this see anything wrong with destroying a place significant to Muslim culture? And the Israeli Zionists wonder why people in the middle east hate them :(

[Faction2008]

I hate Israel, such disrespect, fucking idiots.

[benhur]

This is awful! I hope they find a way to stop this from happening. Don't the Jews in Israel who support this see anything wrong with destroying a place significant to Muslim culture? And the Israeli Zionists wonder why people in the middle east hate them :(

I understand the outrage, but it cuts both ways. One can always ask: can't the Muslims in ME see anything wrong with the Islamic extremists blowing up buildings, buses, and killing innocent people in Israel? And the Islamic extremists wonder why the west hates them.:(

Please note that I am NOT supporting one side over the other. As far as Israel-Palestine conflict is concerned, I am still very confused because both sides seem to be equally right, or equally wrong. It's not all black and white.

[BobKKKindle$]

Please note that I am NOT supporting one side over the other. As far as Israel-Palestine conflict is concerned, I am still very confused because both sides seem to be equally right, or equally wrong.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not equal. Both sides are "guilty" of killing innocent civilians and we should all be able to agree that it would be better if none of these civilians had died, but the fact is that acts of violence committed by the Palestinians are part of a resistance movement which aims to remove an illegal occupation and restore the rights of the Palestinian people, whereas the violence of the Israelis is not only more pervasive (in terms of the number of people who have died from attacks conducted by each side, and the means by which these attacks take place) but is also being used to maintain the occupation and strengthen the military dominance of the Israeli state. There is, in essence, a difference in power between the two sides. Communists always try to support the struggles of the oppressed in the hope of eliminating all forms of oppression, and so even though we criticize some of the tactics adopted by the Palestinian people, we still have a definite position of opposition to Israel.

[benhur]

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not equal. Both sides are "guilty" of killing innocent civilians and we should all be able to agree that it would be better if none of these civilians had died, but the fact is that acts of violence committed by the Palestinians are part of a resistance movement which aims to remove an illegal occupation and restore the rights of the Palestinian people, whereas the violence of the Israelis is not only more pervasive (in terms of the number of people who have died from attacks conducted by each side, and the means by which these attacks take place) but is also being used to maintain the occupation and strengthen the military dominance of the Israeli state. There is, in essence, a difference in power between the two sides. Communists always try to support the struggles of the oppressed in the hope of eliminating all forms of oppression, and so even though we criticize some of the tactics adopted by the Palestinian people, we still have a definite position of opposition to Israel.

All this may be true of Israel-Palestine conflict, but the world doesn't view this conflict in isolation. The world sees Islamic extremists oppressing their own people (and minorities) in many, many countries like Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi etc. etc. Unfortunately, this creates a negative impression in their minds with respect to the Muslim people in general. With all this in mind (stoning/sharia laws/oppression of gay people/women), they view the Israel-Palestine conflict, and conclude that Palestinians, being Muslims, are at the very least, as guilty as the Israeli state.

Mind you, I am not defending Israel's actions or attacking Muslims, just pointing out how people see things. They don't see things for what they are, they always see them by relating to other matters of a similar nature. Hence, if Islamic states in the ME and elsewhere can set a good example by becoming more secular and progressive, that will help the world develop sympathy for the Palestinians, and that sympathy can be used against the zionists to stop their fight against innocent people.

[BobKKKindle$]

The world sees Islamic extremists oppressing their own people (and minorities) in many, many countries like Iran, Afghanistan, Saudi etc. etc.In your last post you were not talking about how "the world" (whatever that's supposed to mean - most countries, especially in the global south, support the Palestinian struggle, which is why the UN general assembly has consistently voted in favor of resolutions which would improve the conditions of the Palestinians and repair the injustices committed by Israel if they were implemented, such as resolution 194 which was passed shortly after the Naqba, and affirms the right of refugees to return to their homes) perceives the conflict, you were giving your personal opinion, which is why you explicitly refused to support one side over the other, preferring instead to assert that both sides are equally wrong. Communists do not adopt this abstract and idealistic position on the conflict, we side with the oppressed and exploited majority, which means we offer unconditional military support to the Palestinians in their struggle against the Zionist state.


Hence, if Islamic states in the ME and elsewhere can set a good example by becoming more secular and progressiveAgain, this is an incredibly idealistic position to take - even if every state in the Middle East became a shining beacon of progressive struggle and democracy, the imperialist bloc would not suddenly change the way they interact with Israel and take the side of the Palestinians, because the current policy of supporting Israel is not based on any kind of misconception, but on the interests of imperialism is a region of strategic importance, as Israel functions as a watchdog for imperialism and has always been loyal to its imperialist backers. The reality is that when Middle Eastern countries have embarked on the road to national economic development, democracy, and secularization, the governments of these countries have often been forcibly removed by the imperialists and replaced with leaders who are willing to let foreign companies dominate and distort the economy as long as they are allowed to continue their luxurious lifestyles, as in the case of President Mossadeq in Iran, who was overthrown and replaced with the Shah in 1953 by the CIA and other intelligence agencies. Also note that Saudi Arabia is by far the most reactionary and anti-democratic state in the whole of the Middle East, and yet is also home to large numbers of US military bases and is a close ally of the US government.

[benhur]

Communists do not adopt this abstract and idealistic position on the conflict, we side with the oppressed and exploited majority, which means we offer unconditional military support to the Palestinians in their struggle against the Zionist state.

The communist position is to offer support to the workers, and are you seriously trying to tell me Palestinians are fighting against the Zionist state to establish a workers state, devoid of exploitation and corruption? If anything, the history of ME suggests otherwise, that every Islamic nation over there has become theocratic. Hence, even if the Palestinians succeed with 'our' support, it's only going to be a defeat for the progressive forces, because a theocracy would be established (which goes against communist principles).


Again, this is an incredibly idealistic position to take -

I was talking about public perception, NOT about how bourgeois western govts. treat nations in the ME and elsewhere. If Islamic states can become progressive, not only do they win public favor in the west (which might force their respective govts. to change their stance vis-a-vis Palestine and other ME nations), but also they'll be better prepared to handle any conflict with Zionists and imperialists, instead of resorting to suicide bombing and terrorism (which, incidentally, only creates a bad image for them in the west).

[Faction2008]

The communist position is to offer support to the workers, and are you seriously trying to tell me Palestinians are fighting against the Zionist state to establish a workers state, devoid of exploitation and corruption? If anything, the history of ME suggests otherwise, that every Islamic nation over there has become theocratic. Hence, even if the Palestinians succeed with 'our' support, it's only going to be a defeat for the progressive forces, because a theocracy would be established (which goes against communist principles).
We don't support theocracy but that doesn't mean we should support Zionist oppression. I hope every Zionists dies slowly, they have the audacity to take something that doesn't belong to them and piss on the people already there, well they can fuck right off.


(stoning/sharia laws/oppression of gay people/women) How's this different to what the ****s of Israel are doing?

[Sasha]

(stoning/sharia laws/oppression of gay people/women)

please bear in mind that these are mostly cultural customs incorperated in to the local religous practise and not islamic by definition and or origin.

we have stumbled on the same misconceptions in this thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/imortal-techneque-why-t93088/index.html?p=1282343#post1282343) about an muslim rap artist (sic)

[Faction2008]

please bear in mind that these are mostly cultural customs incorperated in to the local religous practise and not islamic by definition and or origin.

we have stumbled on the same misconceptions in this thread (http://www.revleft.com/vb/imortal-techneque-why-t93088/index.html?p=1282343#post1282343) about an muslim rap artist (sic)
Islam does encourage such shit read:
Homophobia
“Do you commit indecency with your eyes open, lustfully seeking men instead of women? Surely you are an ignorant people.” – 27:54-55 (http://www.galha.org/briefing/quran.html#sura_27).

“You (women) lust after men instead of women. Truly, you are a degenerate people.” – 7:81 (http://www.galha.org/briefing/quran.html#sura_7).

“If two men among you commit indecency, punish them both.” – 4:16 (http://www.galha.org/briefing/quran.html#sura_4).

Sexism
A woman is worth one-half a man. 2:282 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/2/index.htm#282) ; and males are to inherit twice that of females. 4:11 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/4/index.htm#11)

Men are in charge of women, because Allah made men to be better than women. Refuse to have sex with women from whom you fear rebellion, and scourge them. 4:34 (http://skepticsannotatedbible.com/quran/4/index.htm#34)

Punishment for use of autonomy
24: 2 The woman and the man guilty of adultery or
fornication, -- flog each of them with a hundred stripes; Let not compassion move you in their case, in a matter prescribed by Allah, if ye believe in Allah and the Last Day: And let a party of the Believers witness their punishment.

[Sasha]

yes and like i say in the mentioned tread the same things are in the tora and the bible. but also in all 3 books there are passages who can be explained to promote excactly the oposite. And this is done (see my example of meeting a gay female rabi and in the case of islam the Alevi)
claiming that homophobia is inherent to islam or muslims is nothing more than claiming all leftists are pol-pot lovers. its unfundated slander meant to declasivy them as members of society or debate that you should talk to and deal with.

[Faction2008]

yes and like i say in the mentioned tread the same things are in the tora and the bible. but also in all 3 books there are passages who can be explained to promote excactly the oposite. And this is done (see my example of meeting a gay female rabi and in the case of islam the Alevi)
claiming that homophobia is inherent to islam or muslims is nothing more than claiming all leftists are pol-pot lovers. its unfundated slander meant to declasivy them as members of society or debate that you should talk to and deal with.
Muslims are very homophobic and yes all religions encourage homophobia, when defending Palestine we should defend their rights as human beings not their forsaken religion of Islam.

[Wanted Man]

Muslims are very homophobic and yes all religions encourage homophobia, when defending Palestine we should defend their rights as human beings not their forsaken religion of Islam.
Don't generalise.

[Jazzratt]

Muslims are very homophobic and yes all religions encourage homophobia, when defending Palestine we should defend their rights as human beings not their forsaken religion of Islam.

No. Islam, as general philsophy, supports sexism and homophobia. However followers of any religion come in lots of different flavours ranging from completely fucking nuts (Fred Phelps, Abu Hamza (sp?)) to liberal or moderate. Conflating the savage fuckheads that throw battery acid into women's faces with the atendees at your local mosque is like conflating batshit christians that go "fag bashing" with the congregation at an anglican church.

Religion is false and breeds reactionary tendencies, true but it doesn't mean every single religious person is a complete prick.

[Faction2008]

Don't generalize
Ask Muslims how they feel about gays. I used to be Muslim and Homosexuality was really discouraged among them.


No. Islam, as general philsophy, supports sexism and homophobia. However followers of any religion come in lots of different flavours ranging from completely fucking nuts (Fred Phelps, Abu Hamza (sp?)) to liberal or moderate. Conflating the savage fuckheads that throw battery acid into women's faces with the atendees at your local mosque is like conflating batshit christians that go "fag bashing" with the congregation at an anglican church.

Religion is false and breeds reactionary tendencies, true but it doesn't mean every single religious person is a complete prick. I never said I hated religious people but rather that I hate their bullshit beliefs.

[Jazzratt]

Ask Muslims how they feel about gays.

Don't be stupid. You can't ask "Muslims" anything because they aren't one enormous entity. You really should know this since apparently:


I used to be Muslim and Homosexuality was really discouraged among them.

Extrapolating your personal experiences into a generality is fallacious by the way.


I never said I hated religious people but rather that I hate their bullshit beliefs.

I'm not saying you did. I'm saying that it's stupid to link everyone that identifies as "muslim" into a single mindset by saying something astoundingly sweeping like "Muslims are homophobic". I daresay that many nominal muslims don't really give a shit about or are supportive, similarly for homosexual or liberal muslims. I suppose you could argue that they aren't "real muslims" and I'm sure a lot of the fundamentalist cockends that we should be directing our ire at are going to line up to agree with you.

Also please, for fuck's sake, don't insult either of our intelligences by characterising this as a "defense" of Islam. I am, and always have been, a firm believer that religion is an insidious force in today's society but I'm also fully aware that there is nothing to be gained from making enormous strawman arguments against the followers of any specific belief system.

[Dean]

No. Islam, as general philsophy, supports sexism and homophobia. However followers of any religion come in lots of different flavours ranging from completely fucking nuts (Fred Phelps, Abu Hamza (sp?)) to liberal or moderate. Conflating the savage fuckheads that throw battery acid into women's faces with the atendees at your local mosque is like conflating batshit christians that go "fag bashing" with the congregation at an anglican church.

Religion is false and breeds reactionary tendencies, true but it doesn't mean every single religious person is a complete prick.

I love your way of being tolerant. :lol:

[zimmerwald1915]

The graveyard has not been used for more than 50 years, but contains the bodies of some important Islamic figures.
Many of those bodies will now be disturbed to make way for a new Jewish "Museum of Tolerance".
Irony much?

[KC]

I've read (either in this article or elsewhere) that they are planning on either leaving the first level completely exposed to keep the cemetery intact or putting the cemetery in a courtyard. Both are pretty poor options, but better than just moving the whole damned thing.

[Yehuda Stern]

Whoa, missed this thread.


Israel truly has no shame anymore

Did it use to?


Don't the Jews in Israel who support this see anything wrong with destroying a place significant to Muslim culture?

That's just precious.

Anyway, of course we completely oppose this oppressive move on the side of Israel. Israel being a state whose only reason to exist is to serve imperialism in oppressing the people of the region, has a vested interest in provoking Palestinians into attacking Israel so that it would have an excuse to cut off any negotiations between it and the states of the region. They have done this many times in the past, including the recent past, each time there was some sort of calm between Israel and the Palestinians.

[Faction2008]

Don't be stupid. You can't ask "Muslims" anything because they aren't one enormous entity. You really should know this since apparently:
Well how else would you know whether Muslims are homophobic or not?



Extrapolating your personal experiences into a generality is fallacious by the way.
Every mosque I went to, whether it was in Bosnia or England they discouraged homosexuality.



I'm not saying you did. I'm saying that it's stupid to link everyone that identifies as "muslim" into a single mindset by saying something astoundingly sweeping like "Muslims are homophobic". Of course they are, if they weren't they wouldn't stone you for being gay.


I daresay that many nominal muslims don't really give a shit about or are supportive, similarly for homosexual or liberal muslims.If you are going to refute my point you must back up what you said which proves that a mass actually does this.


I suppose you could argue that they aren't "real muslims" and I'm sure a lot of the fundamentalist cockends that we should be directing our ire at are going to line up to agree with you. What the fuck are you on about? Where did I even imply this? I don't give a shit what classes a 'Muslim' but I know that Islam encourages hate.


Also please, for fuck's sake, don't insult either of our intelligences by characterising this as a "defense" of Islam.What defense?


I am, and always have been, a firm believer that religion is an insidious force in today's society You could say I am generalizing but you could also say that someone who's about the culture and Islam would know that homosexuality is a fact. Look at the past events this year. The attack on the gay pride festival in Sarajevo by Muslims, the banning of homosexuality in Indonesia and the Doctor being fired for making an offensive comment at LGBT people.

but I'm also fully aware that there is nothing to be gained from making enormous strawman arguments against the followers of any specific belief system. Only in hope that they will see the light:laugh:

[BobKKKindle$]

Well how else would you know whether Muslims are homophobic or not?

This is quite a simple concept so please make an effort to understand. If you assert that "Muslims" are homophobic you are implying that the Muslim population is a homogeneous category with no internal variations or differences in opinion. This is wrong, as although there are large numbers of individual Muslims who do hold deeply prejudiced views against homosexuals and may even wish for homosexuals to be put to death, there are also many other Muslims who adopt a liberal interpretation of the Koran and argue that being a Muslim does not require you to be a homophobe, and that it is possible to be a Muslim and a homosexual at the same time. This is true of other religions as well - liberal Christians argue that the references to sodomy in the Bible mean homosexual rape, not having consensual homosexual intercourse. This obviously did not occur to you, but there are Muslim homosexuals, and if you want to learn more about this subject and reduce your shocking level of political ignorance, you should watch this film, which involves Muslim homosexuals talking about how they reconcile their sexuality, and their faith:

Jihad For Love - Parvez Sharma (http://www.ajihadforlove.com/)

[KC]

Jihad for Love really is an incredible documentary about not only homosexual Muslims but Muslims living in the Middle East. I really enjoyed it a lot, considering nobody talks about it ever.

I would recommend it to anyone interested in the subject; Parvez Sharma is a great director.

[benhur]

This is quite a simple concept so please make an effort to understand. If you assert that "Muslims" are homophobic you are implying that the Muslim population is a homogeneous category with no internal variations or differences in opinion.

That's quite condescending. Obviously, you don't expect him to interview billions of Muslims, do you? At some point, you're forced to generalize. There are many good capitalists, those who give to charities and such, but we do come to a general conclusion that capitalists exploit people.

Granted there are a few Muslims who may be ok with homosexuals. Yet, the fact remains that a vast majority is NOT, and it's this fact that really matters. A tiny minority that approves homoxexuals versus a vast majority that doesn't....when confronted with this fact, what else can you do? Complain of generalizations?:rolleyes:

[BobKKKindle$]

That's quite condescending.Not at all, his comments were extremely condescending towards Muslims, and even when his mistakes had already been explained to him, he persisted in asserting that all Muslims are homophobic, in blatant denial of empirical reality. There is never an excuse for making generalizations about such a large and varied group of people, especially when we consider that one of the most prevalent generalizations about Muslims is that they are all committed terrorists who are incapable of living in a western cultural environment without feeling the need to kill innocent people in pursuit of an Islamic state. In other words, once you accept that making generalizations is acceptable, it can quickly lead to people applying negative "labels" to a large group based on how a small minority behaves, and inciting mass prejudice against that group. In an environment of increasing islamophobia, communists have to be the voice of reason and make it clear that the Muslim community is more complex and varied that most people make it out to be.


There are many good capitalists, those who give to charities and such, but we do come to a general conclusion that capitalists exploit people. For Marxists, "exploitation" is not an emotional term - it refers to the accumulation of surplus value by paying workers less than the value of what they produce. It is theoretically possible for a capitalist to not exploit workers, but because exploitation is the only source of profits she would not be able to remain a capitalist for long and would eventually go bankrupt because of the competitive pressures posed by other firms operating in the same industry.


Jihad for Love really is an incredible documentary

It really is - it left me feeling angry and inspired at the same time...

[jake williams]

I think it's reasonable to say that most Muslims are homophobic. I'm aware of a couple of sort of heterodox Muslim academics who aren't, and most of them are in Western countries - so this is tops 10% of the world population of Muslims. Even most of my sort of liberal Western Muslim friends have some pretty anti-gay views. I really think it is just a fact that most Muslims have strong anti-gay views.

It's all irrelevant to the OP though. Destruction of a graveyard, in particular one which must be understood in the context of ethnic cleansing, is its own issue.

[Jazzratt]

Well how else would you know whether Muslims are homophobic or not?

You don't. In the same way you don't know whether or not "Muslims" have any other trait. Why you can't grasp this and yet are able to operate a computer is, frankly, baffling.


Every mosque I went to, whether it was in Bosnia or England they discouraged homosexuality.

Simply fascinating.


Of course they are, if they weren't they wouldn't stone you for being gay.

They don't stone me for being gay, I'm not even gay. Again characterising the entire muslim population as a group that will chuck stones at a gay person until they're dead is just as stupid as characterising them as people that will fly planes into buildings.

Yes. A lot, maybe even a majority, are homophobic bastards who may or may not be all up for stoning gay people. That's "most muslims" or "the muslims I have encounted" but not "muslims". The difference is small but important if you want to be taken seriously.


If you are going to refute my point you must back up what you said which proves that a mass actually does this.

Could you turn down whatever setting it is that's mangling your statements into awkwardly phrased gibberish and try running this by me again?


What the fuck are you on about? Where did I even imply this? I don't give a shit what classes a 'Muslim' but I know that Islam encourages hate.

For fuck's sake. The point you're ignoring a number of muslims, a sizeable minority at the least, in order to make a rhetorical point about muslims as a whole. While descending into the murky world of generalities and sterotypes is fantastic if you're all mouth and trousers as regards your politics, but if you have something oof substance mainting a bit of intellectual honesty is helpful.


What defense?

This is extremely simple. I do not want you to insinuate for a second that I am defending islam or the practices of its fuckhead followers because this would be insulting to my intelligence and yours. Could you follow that or will I be forced to omit the polysyllables?


You could say I am generalizing but you could also say that someone who's about the culture and Islam would know that homosexuality is a fact.

I daresay that nearly anyone regardless of whether they are "about the cultur and Islam" knows that homosexuality is a fact. I'm flumoxed, though, as to the relevance of this.


Look at the past events this year. The attack on the gay pride festival in Sarajevo by Muslims,

A large "communist" party in Russia marched with the fascists against Moscow gay pride and this turned violent...therefore all communists are homophobic?!


the banning of homosexuality in Indonesia

A large proportion of African nations have banned homosexuality...therefore all Africans are homophobic?


and the Doctor being fired for making an offensive comment at LGBT people.

This is obviously because doctors are homophobic.

Aren't stupid extrapolations and enormous strawmen fun.


Only in hope that they will see the light:laugh:

You are making no sense. Are you drunk?

[Devrim]

Of course they are, if they weren't they wouldn't stone you for being gay.

Islam is anti-gay. That is true. This doesn't mean that every Muslim wants to stone gays.


I think it's reasonable to say that most Muslims are homophobic.Quite possibly, I think it would be reasonable to say that most Christian are homophobic, maybe even most people.

However that doesn't mean that all Muslims are rabid homophobes who want to stone gays.

In our country, Turkey, for example, there are openly gay people in public life such as the late Zeki Müren, Turkish art music singer:

http://tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:At_RwPFTZ3REOM:http://www.itusozluk.com/img.php/f60066c69cadb080758a695ed3b95d2e30135/zeki%2Bm%25FCren

He wasn't stoned to death*, and was widely admired through out society.

Also their are even transsexuals in public life such as Bülent Ersoy:
http://kemalistler.files.wordpress.com/2007/01/bulent-ersoy2.JPG?w=365&h=186

In fact, in some ways, there is a more relaxed attitude to homosexuality than in the West.

It doesn't really fit in with the hate campaign though does it.

Devrim

*He died of a heart attack during a live performance on stage in the city of İzmir (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/%C4%B0zmir) on September 24 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_24), 1996 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1996). His death caused the greatest public grief in years and thousands of Turks attended his funeral. Zeki Müren Art Museum, established in Bodrum (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bodrum), where Müren used to live, has been visited by more than 200 thousand people between its opening on June 8 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/June_8), 2000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000) and December 2006

[Pogue]

Although the brutalist leftist approach would be that its land to be used for good purposes, if we become so cold hearted and objective we'll appear inhumane. Thats something we have to avoid. Theres emotions invovled in this and its disrespectful and antagonistic especially within the context.

Having said that I don't give a shit what happens to my carcass once I've snuffed it, although I'd quite like to be used as fertiliser.

[politics student]

I hate Israel, such disrespect, fucking idiots.

Any country which will kill a terrorst suspect (including walking into camps killing women and children) as government policy is degusting.

Assassination policy is important to safe guard Israel's troops. :blink:

I never understood why Israel got 50% of the land when the jews made up 35% of the population. Saying that they have become a serious threat in the middle east due to all the support the USA has given them.m

[Wanted Man]

I see Faction replied, and there has been a lot of discussion already. Anyway, I still think it's ignorant to generalise people on qualifiers. I can think of a few more things:

The Communist Party of Russia opposes homosexuality. Communists (heck, Russians) are homophobic.

The Torah denounces homosexuality. Jews are homophobic (if this was a serious statement, I'd probably get banned for anti-semitism!).

Homosexuality is forbidden in large parts of the world. People are homophobic (thanks, Devrim).

In a way, all these statements are true. A majority of Russians, a majority of Jews, a majority of all the people in the world may be against homosexuality, or at least have some kind of misgivings about it. Muslims aren't uniquely homophobic, nor is any other group, regardless of religion, culture or 'race'. But of course, religious reaction doesn't exactly help, either. Clerical elites gleefully spread reactionary sentiment like sexism, homophobia or nationalism to divide the working class. But it is not the same as "the muslims".

"Stoned to death" is just pure ignorance, just like saying "the muslims want to force women to wear burqas", "the muslims want to enforce vaginal mutilation", etc. There is no proper response to this, people who willfully disseminate this cack should be ashamed of themselves.

Anyway, to get back to the subject of this thread, what does it matter if Islam is reactionary or not? This isn't some socialist government that democratically decides to clear the last remains of religious reaction and use the land for something useful, protested only by a bunch of clerics. This is just a disgustingly racist act.

[jake williams]

Wanted Man is right.

[Yehuda Stern]

Anyway, to get back to the subject of this thread, what does it matter if Islam is reactionary or not? This isn't some socialist government that democratically decides to clear the last remains of religious reaction and use the land for something useful, protested only by a bunch of clerics.

Because then our little "Marxists" can find an excuse not to actively oppose the racist politics of Israel and 'their' ruling classes.

[Faction2008]

You don't. In the same way you don't know whether or not "Muslims" have any other trait. Why you can't grasp this and yet are able to operate a computer is, frankly, baffling.
Homosexuality_and_Islam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Islam)


Simply fascinating.
Yeah...


They don't stone me for being gay, I'm not even gay. Again characterising the entire muslim population as a group that will chuck stones at a gay person until they're dead is just as stupid as characterising them as people that will fly planes into buildings.

No because one isn't described in Shariah while the other one is. So it's fine to associate them stoning as they will openly say it's ok. Now you can say I'm generalizing.

Yes. A lot, maybe even a majority, are homophobic bastards who may or may not be all up for stoning gay people. That's "most muslims" or "the muslims I have encounted" but not "muslims". The difference is small but important if you want to be taken seriously. I guarentee it's a majority.


Could you turn down whatever setting it is that's mangling your statements into awkwardly phrased gibberish and try running this by me again?
Apologizes, I am mentally ill so at times I do come out with weird things.



For fuck's sake. The point you're ignoring a number of muslims, a sizeable minority at the least, in order to make a rhetorical point about muslims as a whole. While descending into the murky world of generalities and sterotypes is fantastic if you're all mouth and trousers as regards your politics, but if you have something oof substance mainting a bit of intellectual honesty is helpful.
Out of curiosity where is your proof to say that Islam and Muslims don't hate gays? From what i see and know they're laws and values burst with homophobia.



This is extremely simple. I do not want you to insinuate for a second that I am defending islam or the practices of its fuckhead followers because this would be insulting to my intelligence and yours.
Well you are defending Islamic homophobia, you are say they aren't necessarily homophobic while when I was Muslim I was always taught Islam first and everything else second. So what this means without reasoning we should put everything under ''Allah''.


I daresay that nearly anyone regardless of whether they are "about the cultur and Islam" knows that homosexuality is a fact. I'm flumoxed, though, as to the relevance of this.
What the fuck are you on about? Many regard it as a choice rather than a natural occurance.


A large "communist" party in Russia marched with the fascists against Moscow gay pride and this turned violent...therefore all communists are homophobic?! No, they're not communists.


A large proportion of African nations have banned homosexuality...therefore all Africans are homophobic?
Not all but a large proportion, otherwise they wouldn't ban it.



This is obviously because doctors are homophobic.
You are a moron. I wouldn't assume a whole group of people is homophobic upon one person but rather I have come across many Muslims who are homophobic, in fact not one that isn't. You are forgetting that I am not judging upon a minority but rather on the whole concept that they believe in which is the backward ways of Islam.


Aren't stupid extrapolations and enormous strawmen fun.
Well you are the main source of contribution.



You are making no sense. Are you drunk?
Schizophrenic actually.

[benhur]

I respectfully suggest that people stop attacking Faction2008. He's making some good points. At some point, you have to generalize, or we'll never understand any political situation. In fact, nothing in life can be understood without some level of generalization.

[Wanted Man]

I respectfully suggest that people stop attacking Faction2008. He's making some good points. At some point, you have to generalize, or we'll never understand any political situation. In fact, nothing in life can be understood without some level of generalization.
I already explained it. Are you saying that nobody can disagree with discriminatory statements? Yeah, just shut up and let chauvinism take the day, that sounds like a great strategy for the left. :rolleyes:

[Glenn Beck]

Lots of bigoted bullshit in this thread. I don't know I just see this as some sort of litmus test. I don't see how you could possibly be progressive if you are not powerfully disgusted by the idea of a settler state clearing historical graveyards of oppressed nations to build monuments to their own self-serving image as heroic and progressive civilized people.

Was it okay for the various governments of the Americas, most notoriously the US, Canada and Argentina to clear the majority of their land of its native inhabitants through population transfer, massacre, and forced assimilation simply because the perpetrators of these acts were secular modernists who could "better use" the hunting grounds, farmland, towns, and sacred spaces of the natives? You are making a Euro-centric, highly toxic, and supremely bigoted argument and if you can't see that then I have pity for you. Pity and not a small amount of contempt.

[BobKKKindle$]

Again: We need to abstain from any kind of generalizations about Muslims, because Muslims are increasingly the targets of negative discriminatory stereotypes which portray Islam as a faith devoted to the destruction of all liberal values and the creation of a theocratic state which will force everyone to be a Muslim whether they like it or not, and accept all the laws of the Islamic faith. These stereotypes form the basis of popular hatred against Muslims which has recently allowed far-right organizations to make such impressive electoral gains and increase their party membership far beyond anything they have previously enjoyed. The left must be the voice of reason, and present a more nuanced and complex understanding of Islam and the Muslim community, This is precisely what so many members in this thread have utterly failed to do, because you are obviously incompetent.


I respectfully suggest that people stop attacking Faction2008If someone has deeply reactionary views then they deserve to be attacked, you don't change the way people view the world by refusing to criticize their ideas and accepting discrimination as a legitimate point of view.

Faction2008, do you seriously thing that posting a Wikipedia article is an acceptable argument in a discussion forum devoted to serious political debate? If you want to use something you've found on Wikipedia as a source for an argument you're putting forward then that's fine, but just posting a link and then expecting people to believe you solely on the basis that Wikipedia reflects your opinion is absurd - you need to learn how to actually argue your position instead of just making assertions, and assuming that because something is believed by a large number of people it must automatically be true.


No because one isn't described in Shariah while the other one isThe Koran does contain many statements which are discriminatory against homosexuals. However, only a small minority of Muslims treat the Koran as a document which is literally true - as in the case of all other religions, how we interpret religious texts has changed over time and increasing numbers of Muslims are beginning to adopt a more liberal interpretation of the Koran which allows people to make their own life choices and live according to their own decisions, but still be part of the Muslim faith. Consider, for example, the Grand Mufti of Egypt's decision in 2007 to declare that leaving the Islamic faith should not result in people being given the death penalty even if they convert to another religion or become atheists.


I guarentee it's a majority.This is exactly the kind of sloppy argumentation that we need to get rid of. Your "guarantee" that something is true is not sufficient evidence to support your argument. I could just as easily "guarantee" that most Muslims are strong advocates of homosexual rights.


Out of curiosity where is your proof to say that Islam and Muslims don't hate gays?I've already directed you to a documentary which deals with the experiences of gay Muslims and also looks at how the Muslim community has engaged with the issue of homosexuality, including those who have taken a liberal stance and argued that homosexuality should be accepted as a legitimate expression of love between individuals. There have also already been Muslim gay marriages (nikahs) in the USA, Canada and India. Documentary footage is strong evidence in favor of a more nuanced understanding of Islam, but you have given no evidence to support your position that Muslims are always rabidly homophobic. A quick Google search give us further examples of tolerance within the Muslim community: Imaan, Muslim LGBTQ Support (http://www.imaan.org.uk/),


Well you are defending Islamic homophobia, you are say they aren't necessarily homophobic while when I was Muslim I was always taught Islam first and everything else second.Arguing that not all Muslims are homophobic is not the same as saying that homophobia is acceptable. The fact that you may have been a Muslim in the past and were brought up to reject homosexuality is totally irrelevant, because your experiences cannot be applied to the whole of the Muslim population, given that the Ummah is a very diverse paradigm of association which includes a range of different communities, each of which has their own special beliefs and attitudes.


What the fuck are you on about? Many regard it as a choice rather than a natural occurance.Again, where is the evidence for this? "Many" is such an imprecise term, it could be taken to mean anything, and you have provided absolutely no evidence to support your assertions.


I wouldn't assume a whole group of people is homophobic upon one person but rather I have come across many Muslims who are homophobic
Your personal experiences are boring and irrelevant. If you lived in a conservative christian community for the whole of your life you would possibly never encounter a singe person who spoke out in favor of gay rights, and yet this does not mean that every christian in the entire world or even a majority of Christians are homophobic.

[Devrim]

However, only a small minority of Muslims treat the Koran as a document which is literally true -

Actually Muslims consider the Koran to be the literal word of God.

Devrim

[Jazzratt]

Homosexuality_and_Islam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Islam)

Have you actually read a single fucking word I've been writing or has this entire undertaking been one massive exercise in frustration?


No because one isn't described in Shariah while the other one is. So it's fine to associate them stoning as they will openly say it's ok.

Look you fucking dimwit, I've had it up to here with this bollocks. The point I've been repeatedly (and fruitlessly apparently) trying to drill into your thick skull is that muslims aren't a monolithic entity. Not every single muslim is as single mindedly dogmatic as you seem convinced they are. Your generalisations are unhelpful, completely and utterly unhelpful.


Now you can say I'm generalizing. I guarentee it's a majority.

That does not matter. Unless you can garuntee that majority is so large as to make no odds as compared to every single muslim your generalisation is rash and stupid.


Apologizes, I am mentally ill so at times I do come out with weird things.

A mental illness that manifests sitself as poor syntax in occasional sentences? How singular.


Out of curiosity where is your proof to say that Islam and Muslims don't hate gays? From what i see and know they're laws and values burst with homophobia.

We'll start here and extrapolate outward... (http://www.imaan.org.uk/) Oh and Devrim's post. And, y'know, not being a spackoid.

Also I'm not arguing that muslims & islam are not anti-gay. I'm arguing that not all muslims are anti-gay, islam itself from what I've seen of the qu'ran seems irredeemably reactionary in every way.


Well you are defending Islamic homophobia,

Ar you illiterate or deliberately trying to insult your own intelligence?


you are say they aren't necessarily homophobic while when I was Muslim I was always taught Islam first and everything else second. So what this means without reasoning we should put everything under ''Allah''.

I couldn't give less of a shit about your life experiences if I tried. Unless you happen to be the entire muslim community you are unqualified to speak for them.


What the fuck are you on about? Many regard it as a choice rather than a natural occurance.

Ah, point of confusion. See you said "fact" rather than "inborn trait" or some other sensible wording so you seemed to be suggesting that there are people who do not believe that homosexuality actually exists; which made me wonder how the hell they could be homophobic.


No, they're not communists.

Missing the point.


Not all but a large proportion, otherwise they wouldn't ban it.

Still missing the point.


You are a moron.

You're the one who has yet to actually understand anything I've written to you.


I wouldn't assume a whole group of people is homophobic upon one person but rather I have come across many Muslims who are homophobic, in fact not one that isn't.

:rolleyes: So assuming stuff about a group based on one person is incorrect but "many" is acceptable. So where do you draw this highly arbitrary distinction? 10, 50, 100, 500?


You are forgetting that I am not judging upon a minority but rather on the whole concept that they believe in which is the backward ways of Islam.

You're still being an idiot by assuming that every single muslim takes every single part of the most extreme islamic doctrine hook line and sinker. Your world view is so hilariously lacking in nuance that you're practically a carichature.


Well you are the main source of contribution.

After trying to work this out, mindful of your singular illness, I've guessed that you are still missing the point I tried to make earlier in my post.

[PostAnarchy]

More reaction from the Israeli apartheid state.

[benhur]

Man is a product of the society in which he lives. And since Islamic societies are homophobic (going by their theocracies, sharia laws, their leaders etc.), it's logical to conclude that a vast majority of people living in such societies will also be homophobic. Our job is to understand the individual in relation to the society in which he lives, and how societies shape individual consciousness. We can't brush these conclusions aside as generalizations.

[progressive_lefty]

Please note that I am NOT supporting one side over the other. As far as Israel-Palestine conflict is concerned, I am still very confused because both sides seem to be equally right, or equally wrong. It's not all black and white.

Well I suggest you look into the conflict a bit further. In my mind, the conflict is very black and white. There is not two sides, basically there is a nation fighting a nationless people. Nothing is more sick then seeing a nation behave so brutally, towards a people that have had their land frequently stolen, even up until this year.

Why people are whinging about Islamic extremism on this thread, bewilders me.

[gorillafuck]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7715921.stm
A "Museum of Tolerance"? The irony of this is simply dumbfounding.
Seriously, Israel? Seriously?