al-Qaeda seizes village that still speaks the ancient language of Christ

[-:Undertaker:-]

Well i cannot convince you of how i am reading this article. I think though, that if you read it again carefully at perhaps a later date when you don't have as strong opinions on the crisis then you might see what i see.

Yes. But that would be the equivalent of this article being no more than ''Rebels attack christian village". Which this article isn't.

So the article and newspaper should censor itself (and the facts) and omit the word 'Islamic' from the report as to not cause offence to muslims?

I loathe this sort of intellectual dishonesty.

[Eoin247]

So the article and newspaper should censor itself (and the facts) and omit the word 'Islamic' from the report as to not cause offence to muslims?

I loathe this sort of intellectual dishonesty.

Ok so you would prefer ''Muslims attack Christian village'' (Even though everybody knows that all the rebels are Muslims anyway?). Fine, but this article still just isn't that.

I don't really know what else i can say to prove to you what kind of article this is, I'll repeat part of my earlier post.

I mean just look at these quotes before you even get halfway through the article: "They entered the main square and smashed a statue of the Virgin Mary," Two shells hit the St Thecla convent." ''associated with the earliest days of Christianity.'' ''St Thecla, who is supposedly buried in the convent,was a follower of St Paul '' ''the language spoken by Christ, is still used. ''

To add to that i'll take some more out of the article, except from the second half this time:

"First they took a brick factory owned by a Christian guy, who is now missing," - Very vague. Of course insinuating that the Christian was killed even though the caller simply hasn't seen him.

"Some of the rebels entered a home near the checkpoint belonging to Yousef Haddad, a Christian. They tried to force him to convert to Islam." - Insinuating that they beat and tortured him. Yet that isn't what the witness said. They could have just given him some verbal abuse.'


'A nun living in a convent in the village told the Associated press that 27 orphans living in the convent were taken to nearby caves for shelter.'' - A precautionary measure because the town is a warzone between government and rebel forces as we see from the next sentence. Yet of course the reader is given the impression that the muslims were going to kill them otherwise.


''video footage posted on YouTube showed rebel fighters on a pick up truck with an anti-aircraft gun mounted on the back firing erratically from inside the mountain town.'' - Funny how they don't mention what they are firing at. The key words ''from inside'' should also show that they are probably attacking government forces.


''Almost a third of the Syriac Christian population has fled the rebel-held northern town of Hassakeh '' - Considering that there is currently near 2 million syrian refugees this is hardly much of a surprise


And Finally:


''They have been annoying the Christian people of the village since then. A Christian farmer cannot go up there to his land unless he is accompanied by a Muslim resident of the village." - I suppose the word '' annoying'' says it all really.
This article insinuates so much, without saying anything explicitly. When i first read through the article i felt outrage. It was only when i read it slower a second time that I truly saw what this article was.

[karter]

Since when did violent Muslim groups become an "element" of Islam or the Islamic culture, pretty sure everywhere you go, the Islamic teachings tell you to follow peace and brotherhood. The problem is that many Muslims get easily offended and use violence to show their disagreement. This has become so common in the present times that it has spread almost everywhere, so much that it has literally become an image of Islam. The fatwa against Salman Rushdie for example (who by the way is my favourite author) was a huge overreaction to something which was not even mildly offensive. Events like these happen because of mainly the attitude in Muslims of protecting the religion no matter what, a result of obsession with the religion. Lack of education in most Islamic countries could be the reason too.

Anyway, criticising Islam, it's elements or culture is not a right thing to do. Criticising the Muslim groups and bodies which spread hate and violence in the name of Islam is what you should do

[-:Undertaker:-]

Eoin,

You haven't answered my question, all you are doing it reposting a post that I am struggling to find something wrong with. Your 'issue' with this is clearly the mention of 'muslim' or 'Islam' in the article - which of course you are only taking issue with due to your desire not to upset Islam or muslims. Now you may take that position, but i'm asking you again: should the newspaper omit the words Islam and/or muslim from articles which may offend or criticise the Islamic religion? it's a yes or no question.

Since when did violent Muslim groups become an "element" of Islam or the Islamic culture, pretty sure everywhere you go, the Islamic teachings tell you to follow peace and brotherhood. The problem is that many Muslims get easily offended and use violence to show their disagreement. This has become so common in the present times that it has spread almost everywhere, so much that it has literally become an image of Islam. The fatwa against Salman Rushdie for example (who by the way is my favourite author) was a huge overreaction to something which was not even mildly offensive. Events like these happen because of mainly the attitude in Muslims of protecting the religion no matter what, a result of obsession with the religion. Lack of education in most Islamic countries could be the reason too.

So you at least concede that Islam as a whole does overly take offence.

Now the only part we could possibly have disagreement on now is whether or not criticism of Islam should be allowed even if it causes offence - I personally think it should and that if muslims are offended and decide to take to the streets burning books, threatening authors or intimidating news channels - that they should be told no, that is not how you act to criticism and/or mockery and we will not tolerate it.

If you agree with me on that statement then we agree with one another.

Anyway, criticising Islam, it's elements or culture is not a right thing to do. Criticising the Muslim groups and bodies which spread hate and violence in the name of Islam is what you should do

I will criticise the parts of Islam which use violence, threats and intimidation to silence any criticism of Islam.

[Eoin247]

You haven't answered my question, all you are doing it reposting a post that I am struggling to find something wrong with. Your 'issue' with this is clearly the mention of 'muslim' or 'Islam' in the article - which of course you are only taking issue with due to your desire not to upset Islam or muslims. Now you may take that position, but i'm asking you again: should the newspaper omit the words Islam and/or muslim from articles which may offend or criticise the Islamic religion? it's a yes or no question.

I'm not sure if you're talking to me or karter. But if you are talking to me you have misread my last post. I edited it to highlight my points. I never said they should omit the words islam or muslim. In fact i said it was fine to include that at the begining of my last post. The second part of my post shows what is wrong with this article.

[Onirela]

why do they want to sieze a small village anyway oh

[oli]

Eoin, I get what you're saying and I completely agree.
Just so you know

[AgnesIO]

You know what I can't stand? I can't stand it when people become apologists for Islam when any rational thinking person would accept that Islam has some very serious problems within itself and that pretty much all Islamic countries are incompatible with our western values. I don't hate or dislike Islam - infact i've been down time and time again defending Islam as a religion by saying that I believe without Islam the Middle East would be a much worse place.

But does that mean that in every negative article that is TRUE I have to jump in and call it the Religion of Peace when it's record says otherwise? no. The parts of Islam that treat Christians like this, the elements in Islam which treat women as filth and gays as subhuman - I will criticise Islam on that and so should you. It's time you and other westerners stop being spineless on this issue and for once stand up for what is right rather than kowtow to a religion that often uses threats and violence to silence it's opponents.

I am not denying Islam has problems, however why should Islamic countries have to conform to our Western values? That to me is an ignorant viewpoint, and I cannot understand why anyone would see this as a problem. I can see you are not totally anti-Islam given your last part of the first paragraph - so kudos there.

Additionally, I still categorically refuse to blame Islam for the terrorist group that is Al-Qaeda. These lunatics can use Islam as their shield, but I don't believe that - Islam may have started their beliefs, but it isn't the cause of their sickening acts. On the other hand, I totally agree with your views on the way it views women - it is ridiculously old-fashioned for a start.

[-:Undertaker:-]

I'm not sure if you're talking to me or karter. But if you are talking to me you have misread my last post. I edited it to highlight my points. I never said they should omit the words islam or muslim. In fact i said it was fine to include that at the begining of my last post. The second part of my post shows what is wrong with this article.

I do not see one point in your post that makes any sense, it appears to me that you are seriously nitpicking. In any case, take the example of the man who you say might have been verbally abused (because those rebels/al-Qaeda are just kitty cats aren't they?) - who on earth as a soldier would make it their mission to verbally abuse somebody of another religion in a supposed non-religious war?

You are closing your eyes here to what the Syrian war is - it's heavily influenced by religion, of which you are correct - the Christians are a very small part of it. But it's telling that the Christians, Druze and Alawites all are hoping for an Assad victory. And why? because the Assad Government has protected religious minorities over the years against the muslim majority .... just take a look at the attacks in Egypt on thr Coptic Christian Church.

So to conclude that, yes it is important that the fact Islamic fighters have entered a Chrisitian village and are purposely intimidating the local Christian population - just as it would be a massive story if Christian US troops entered an Iraqi city and started firing at the Cresent over the mosque and desecrating the local mosque whilst telling the locals to convert.

I am not denying Islam has problems, however why should Islamic countries have to conform to our Western values? That to me is an ignorant viewpoint, and I cannot understand why anyone would see this as a problem. I can see you are not totally anti-Islam given your last part of the first paragraph - so kudos there.

I haven't argued that they should be compelled to conform to our western values, indeed as a small-c conservative there are many issues socially that i'm probably much closer to conservative Islam on than western liberalism. But this isn't what i'm getting at and i've argued this in a university class too - i'm merely arguing that I refuse to have Islamic values imposed on myself or my country and that I am not going to sit here and pretend that Islamic (Saudi, Jordanian, Iranian etc) culture is somehow equal to British Christian culture - and that it shouldn't be treated so in law for example regarding Sharia Law.

I actually had the majority of my left wing class argue back with me that Saudi culture of Iranian culture (the same cultures which regard homosexuality for example, an issue the left are obsessed with, as worthy of death) ... that somehow these cultures are equal to our British Christian culture and thus should be treated equally so in this country. I don't regard such backward cultures (in many aspects) as equal to my culture and do not believe I should be cociered into pretending it is.

Additionally, I still categorically refuse to blame Islam for the terrorist group that is Al-Qaeda. These lunatics can use Islam as their shield, but I don't believe that - Islam may have started their beliefs, but it isn't the cause of their sickening acts. On the other hand, I totally agree with your views on the way it views women - it is ridiculously old-fashioned for a start.

Depends on the interpretation of Islam, the problem is more widespread throughout Islam than people seem to believe - you just have to take a look at the history of Islam for the evidence of that.

[AgnesIO]

I haven't argued that they should be compelled to conform to our western values, indeed as a small-c conservative there are many issues socially that i'm probably much closer to conservative Islam on than western liberalism. But this isn't what i'm getting at and i've argued this in a university class too - i'm merely arguing that I refuse to have Islamic values imposed on myself or my country and that I am not going to sit here and pretend that Islamic (Saudi, Jordanian, Iranian etc) culture is somehow equal to British Christian culture - and that it shouldn't be treated so in law for example regarding Sharia Law.

I actually had the majority of my left wing class argue back with me that Saudi culture of Iranian culture (the same cultures which regard homosexuality for example, an issue the left are obsessed with, as worthy of death) ... that somehow these cultures are equal to our British Christian culture and thus should be treated equally so in this country. I don't regard such backward cultures (in many aspects) as equal to my culture and do not believe I should be cociered into pretending it is.



Depends on the interpretation of Islam, the problem is more widespread throughout Islam than people seem to believe - you just have to take a look at the history of Islam for the evidence of that.

I apologise, Dan. The way that post was written made it appear you were complaining that they weren't conforming with Western values which is wrong (I should have known better from a guy like yourself!) May I ask exactly what you study at University? Got to say, I am going to miss having those sort of debates

In fairness, the history of Christianity is not exactly glorious! I'm yet to meet an Islamic follower who is an extremist nut case, but you never know what the future holds :L I agree that Islamic culture should not be imposed on you, but I guess having been brought up away from cities I've never experienced this (my Islamic experiences being in other countries).