For those interested in this subject, I recommend: "Perceptions of Islam in the Christendoms" by Dr. Nasir Khan ( Solum Forlag 2006).
This is a very well documented book and which has a wealth of information from hundreds primary sources. I just finished reading a week ago. A friend of mine brought it for me from London where he was on a recent business trip. Dr. Khan (born in Poonch-Kashmir) is a serious Marxist historian who is able to explain the rise of negative stereotypes in the West vis-a-vis Islam as a complex phenomenon that encompasse both ideological-political and powerful economic motives. Among many other texts, he cites, for example, Fulcher of Chartres, who gives the following eye witness account of the Crusades at the end of the 11th century: “This may seem strange to you. Our squires and footmen … split open the bellies of those they had just slain in order to extract from the intestines the gold coins which the Saracens had gulped down their loathsome throats while alive … With drawn swords our men ran through the city not sparing anyone, even those begging for mercy … They entered the houses of the citizens, seizing whatever they found in them … whoever first entered a house, whether he was rich or poor … was to occupy and own the house or palace and whatever he found in it as if it were entirely his own … in this way many poor people became very wealthy.”
MarĂa Lionza is the most popular Goddess in Venezuela. In the Venezuelan mythological universe, this Goddess is an exception because, depending on the representations, she is represented as Indian, of mixed race, white and black. Sometimes she is a beneficial entity and sometimes evil. The individuals in this documentary offer a portrait of the rich symbolism of Maria Lionza, and highlight some of the roles her image plays in contemporary Venezuelan society, and some of the ethnic, religious and social conflicts which characterize this society. **
ReplyDeleteRoger Canals Vilageliu
Fulcher's description sounds remarkably like what the Assyrians have endured time and time again in their long history of being under Islamic rule.
ReplyDeletehttp://www.aina.org/martyr.html
<span>In 1933, another Muslim massacre hit the Nestorian (Assyrian) people in Iraq. The Catholicos protested by saying that: "Men, women and children were massacred wholesale most barbarously by rifle, revolver and machine gun fire...Priests were killed and their bodies mutilated. Assyrian women were violated and killed. Priests and Assyrians young men were killed instantly after refusing forced conversion to Muhammadanism...Pregnant women had their wombs cut and their babies destroyed..." (See R.S. Stafford, The Tragedy of the Assyrians, Gorgias Press, Piscataway, NJ"</span>
http://www.furkono.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7347&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0
Of course, we also have the poor Copts who continue to be persecuted to this day.
"Egypt was not spared from the massive execution of the Copts in 1321. Muslim historian Al-Maqrizi recorded the mobs, which attacked the Christians: "Then they destroyed the Church of St. Mennas in the Hamra, which had from ancient times been much revered by the Christians...the people climbed the walls, opened the gates and took money, vessels and wine jars out of the church; it was a terrible occurrence. Thereupon they went from the church in the Hamra after they had destroyed it to the two churches near Seven Wells, one of which was called the Church of the Maidens, and was inhabited by a number of Christian girls, and by monks."
"
Al-Maqrizi witnessed the mobs and recorded that: "in the district of Al-Bahnasa there were many monasteries now destroyed...near Suyut, on both the dams there are said to have been 360 monasteries and the traveler went from Al-Badraishin to Asfun, continually in the shade of the gardens. Now this part laid waste, and deserted by the inhabitants...The houses are all destroyed and forgotten, though in former times they were so populous and their monks so numerous... what were once the thousand monks of Bu Fana were now reduced to two". (See Evett, Churches and Monasteries.)"
http://andorra.indymedia.org/news/2009/05/30744.php
OK, OK. It's not a competition to prove who's worse VZA. Read the book please, and then let's talk.
ReplyDeleteThis is fascinating link Mara. Thanks man!
ReplyDeleteI put it on my wish list of books I won't be able to afford any time soon. :( I don't know if she was trying to prove who's worse or provide some balance. Personally, I think whoever's in power persecutes the minorities.
Will do. :) Definitely not a competition. Just a reminder that is was not all one sided. There are plenty of examples of cruel and inhumane behavior from most groups who were in the majority...or the victors ..or who wanted to be the victors.
ReplyDeleteIt is not competition Moy, it is an old lame ass excuse, and not wantiung to start the process where you have the most influence - at home
ReplyDeleteIt was the Kurds that committed that unspeakable atrocity.
ReplyDeleteEnglish newspaper headline from 1933
ReplyDeletehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:TheLethbridgeHeraldAugust181933.JPG
<span>Evidently more than just Crusaders indulged in massacring defenseless people.</span>
ReplyDelete<span>
<div>"In 1480, Ottoman forces committed notorious massacres against the Christians and their clergy. In Italy, the Turks destroyed the city of Otranto, killing twelve thousand and executing leading clergymen by sawing them. In 1570, they did the same thing to the Christians of Cyprus. Some of the punishment methods used included impaling, crucifixion, and flaying."</div>
<div>"In the nineteenth and early twentieth century more massacres of Christians took place under the Ottoman Empire. The French ambassador reported in 1895 that "Asia minor (Turkey) is literally in flames.They [the Turks] are massacring all the Christians without distinction." (See Sebastien de Courtois, Forgotten Genocide - Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2004).</div>
<div>
</div>
<div>"In 1915, the New York Times reported that "the roads and the Euphrates are strewn with corpses of exiles, and those who survive are doomed to certain death. It is a plan to exterminate the whole Armenian people."</div>
<div>
</div>
http://www.furkono.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7347&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0</span>
<span>Evidently more than just Crusaders indulged in massacring defenseless people.</span>
ReplyDelete<span>
"In 1480, Ottoman forces committed notorious massacres against the Christians and their clergy. In Italy, the Turks destroyed the city of Otranto, killing twelve thousand and executing leading clergymen by sawing them. In 1570, they did the same thing to the Christians of Cyprus. Some of the punishment methods used included impaling, crucifixion, and flaying."
"In the nineteenth and early twentieth century more massacres of Christians took place under the Ottoman Empire. The French ambassador reported in 1895 that "Asia minor (Turkey) is literally in flames.They [the Turks] are massacring all the Christians without distinction." (See Sebastien de Courtois, Forgotten Genocide - Piscataway, NJ: Gorgias Press, 2004).</span>
<span>
"In 1915, the New York Times reported that "the roads and the Euphrates are strewn with corpses of exiles, and those who survive are doomed to certain death. It is a plan to exterminate the whole Armenian people."
http://www.furkono.com/modules.php?name=News&file=article&sid=7347&mode=thread&order=0&thold=0</span>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style=" color: #404040; font-family: Verdana;"> In the early 1960’s, Mustafa Barzani and his Peshmerga fighters received training and support in Israel. The current Kurdish president in Northern Iraq has expressed his government’s “positive feelings towards Israel and relations with the Jewish State.” It was the US occupation that turned the marginalized and unrepresentative chieftains of two tribal families Talabani and Barzani to merciless and menacing tyrants whose criminal paramilitary death squads massacre Turkmen, Aramaean Christians, Yazidis. </span>
ReplyDelete<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style=" color: #404040; font-family: Verdana;">“They (the Kurds) are abducting thousands of Arabs, Turkmens and other minorities from Mosul, Kirkuk, and other hundreds of smaller towns and villages in the north of Iraq, and imprisoning them in many secret prisons, of which only five are known in Suleimaniya, Arbil, Shaqlawa, Dahok, and Aqrah …and the Peshmerga refuse to admit that. Trained by hundreds of elite Israeli intelligence officers, the Peshmerga four battalions are controlling Mosul, practicing brutal ethnic cleansing in Kirkuk and many other northern towns. They forced 100.000 Arab families out of Kirkuk, again committing different kinds on grave human rights violations. Eye witnesses of a huge explosion in Mosul last January, which killed tens families and injured hundreds, say that the Peshmerga was behind it.”</span>
ReplyDeleteAnd thinking that the great Saladin/Salahuddin was a Kurd!!
ReplyDeleteYou know, I did not want to say this, because I did not want to believe it to be frank - but this constant banter about what some perceive to be a defense of "who is worse," etc. is not what is going on - it is done to excuse current atrocities. In other words, if I kill someones brother it is perfectly fine for that victim to completely massacre my family when they see fit. It is used so vehemently and without rest (because there is no argument for what I am saying), that it is nothing less than "if you commit genocide so can I (because you did it ages ago, or whatever the case may be)." It is still NO ARGUMENT, and has lept from "defense" (which, it never quite was) to verbal atrocity!
ReplyDeleteAbove is me.
ReplyDeleteSince this is the Angry Arab comments section, and what Israel is doing is not acceptable in the general and real view, I will take my obserbation one step further. The argument from atrocities in the past and somehow "balancing" the atrocities committed today, is a colonialist excuse. Take for example Benny Morris, who boldly states that because America did what it did to its indigenous population, and the obviously "great democracy" that emerged, why should it be any different for Israel?
ReplyDelete<span style="">"Morris now provides a moral justification for ethnic cleansing that he did not offer before the second <span>intifada</span>, arguing that [e]ven the great American democracy could not have been created without the annihilation of the Indians. Native Americans and those with a sounder knowledge of North American history may demur. But in Israel, appeal to the authority of the US is the ultimate clincher in any argument. Yearning for the success of the American example, Morris now criticizes Israel's first prime minister and defense minister, David Ben-Gurion, for failing to do a complete job because this place would be quieter and know less suffering if the matter had been resolved once and for all. If Ben-Gurion had carried out a large expulsion and cleansed the whole country. It may yet turn out that this was his fatal mistake. Palestine-Israel might also be quieter today if Hitler had completed his planned genocide of world Jewry. It does not occur to Morris that there might be a parallel between these two historical counterfactuals. The first is in the realm of acceptable speculation; the second is too obviously outrageous to consider."</span>
I think I will let this rest here, because it obviously puts to bed the idea of "balance" brought about (or belittling of current atrocities) by the examples of others in the past. It is no argument, and it is no excuse.
Since this is the Angry Arab comments section, and what Israel is doing is not acceptable in the general and real view, I will take my obserbation one step further. The argument from atrocities in the past and somehow "balancing" the atrocities committed today, is a colonialist excuse. Take for example Benny Morris, who boldly states that because America did what it did to its indigenous population, and the obviously "great democracy" that emerged, why should it be any different for Israel?
ReplyDelete<span>"Morris now provides a moral justification for ethnic cleansing that he did not offer before the second <span>intifada</span>, arguing that [e]ven the great American democracy could not have been created without the annihilation of the Indians. Native Americans and those with a sounder knowledge of North American history may demur. But in Israel, appeal to the authority of the US is the ultimate clincher in any argument. Yearning for the success of the American example, Morris now criticizes Israel's first prime minister and defense minister, David Ben-Gurion, for failing to do a complete job because this place would be quieter and know less suffering if the matter had been resolved once and for all. If Ben-Gurion had carried out a large expulsion and cleansed the whole country. It may yet turn out that this was his fatal mistake. Palestine-Israel might also be quieter today if Hitler had completed his planned genocide of world Jewry. It does not occur to Morris that there might be a parallel between these two historical counterfactuals. The first is in the realm of acceptable speculation; the second is too obviously outrageous to consider."</span>
I think I will let this rest here, because it obviously puts to bed the idea of "balance" brought about (or belittling of current atrocities) by the examples of others in the past. It is no argument, and it is no excuse - it does not lighten the gravity of the current atrocities. Especially because of what is supposed to be the hindsight of enlightenment today, multiplicity of crime is no excuse for what you have done in a court of law.
r.s amazes me ! He's one well organised dude!!LOL.
ReplyDelete<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style=" color: #404040; font-family: Verdana;">In almost all Christian states until modem times only one form of religion was accepted. This was obviously not true in the Ottoman domains. The success of Ottoman tolerance can most easily be seen in the fact that large Christian and Jewish communities existed in the Ottoman lands until the end of the Empire. In Europe only one religion was tolerated and conversion, exile or death was the rule for those who dissented.</span>
ReplyDelete<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style=" color: #404040; font-family: Verdana;">“Even among contemporary sadists like the Spanish Inquisition's Tomas Torquemada (1471-84), Vlad Dracula's techniques and enthusiasm for torture were unequalled.”</span>
ReplyDelete<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style=" color: #404040; font-family: Verdana;"> </span>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style=" color: #404040; font-family: Verdana;">“During his main reign (1456–1462), "Vlad the Impaler" is said to have killed from 20,000 to 40,000 European civilians (political rivals, criminals, and anyone else he considered "useless to humanity"), mainly by using his favorite method of impaling them on a sharp pole… Vlad III is revered as a folk hero by Romanians for driving off the invading Turks. His impaled victims are said to have included as many as 100,000 Turkish Muslims.”</span>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style=""><span style=""> </span></span>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style=" color: #404040; font-family: Verdana;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlad_III_Dracula</span>
<p style="margin: 0in 0in 0pt;"><span style=""><span style=""> </span></span>
Oh my, we are really determined when we bring out Dracula as reinforcement!
ReplyDeleter.s., I am sure you have better things to do with your time. You do not have to convince me of the many atrocities committed by Christians. I learned all about the Crusaders' bloody history and the massacres... at CATHOLIC institutions of higher learning! That is the BIG difference. Think about it.
The unexamined religion is just as bad as the unexamined life. It does not look good for enlightenment when the courageous Muslim writers and thnkers who do try to examine the religion have to fear for their lives or write under another name, or have to go into hiding, or are arrested for insulting Islam or their country, or are attacked by fanatics, or must flee to the WEST, that bastion of intolerance.
ReplyDeleteThe unexamined religion is just as bad as the unexamined life. It does not look good when the courageous Muslim writers and thnkers who do try to examine the religion have to fear for their lives or write under another name, or have to go into hiding, or are arrested for insulting Islam or their country, or are attacked by fanatics, or must flee to the WEST, you know, that bastion of intolerance.
ReplyDeleteThe unexamined religion is just as bad as the unexamined life. It does not look good when the courageous Muslim writers and thinkers who do try to examine the religion and its history in an uncompromising manner have to fear for their lives or write under another name, or have to go into hiding, or are arrested for insulting Islam or their country, or are attacked by fanatics, or must flee to the WEST,... you know, that bastion of intolerance.
ReplyDeleteBalance for what? The intent of the post was to present an interesting book about how negative stereotypes vis-a-vis Islam emerged historically in the dominant West, not how bad or evil the Christendom is. And I insist: the dominant West. If it was the other way around, then it would be also quite interesting to explore how negative stereotypes emerged in a putative dominant East (Muslim nations). But since the world is what it is, and not the other way around, for those of us fighting all forms of oppression, it is particularly important right now to analyze and deconstruct religious bigotry and racism among those who dominate the world today. Its their discourse that is of essential import nowadays. Now, let me add, that it is also important to understand all those other localized situations of oppression in which manipulation of Islam has led to rising negative stereotypes of peoples and nations that are not Muslim. But those are localized situations, which do not reflect upon the structuration of our current world system, dominated at the center by Western Judeo-Christian values.
ReplyDeleteSpeaking of Catholics, the whole religion should be banned for their priests' constant rape of children.
ReplyDeleteYou hear about the latest scandal in Ireland Molly?
ReplyDeletehttp://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/belief-blog/2009/may/21/the-reporter-and-the-irish-priest-abuse-tragedy/
They don't have to ban the religion, they have to ban and prosecute the enablers, the ones in the chain of command all the way to the top who remained silent and moved these sick predator priests from one parish to another. They have to ban the administration and faculty in the seminaries who KNEW those guys had major problems and either looked the other way or participated in the same sickness.
ReplyDeletehttp://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090527/ap_on_re_eu/eu_ireland_catholic_abuse
ReplyDeleteDUBLIN – The Catholic orders responsible for abusing <span style="background: none transparent scroll repeat 0% 0%; cursor: hand; border-bottom: #0066cc 1px dashed;">Ireland</span>'s poorest children say they're struggling to come up with money to help their victims. Yet investigations into their net worth paint a very different picture — that of nuns and brothers with billions' worth of carefully sheltered assets worldwide.
<span style="background: none transparent scroll repeat 0% 0%; cursor: hand; border-bottom: medium none;">Irish government leaders</span> said Wednesday they expect the 18 religious orders involved in abusing children in workhouse-style schools to pay a much greater share of compensation to 14,000 state-recognized victims. They also demanded that the secretive orders reveal the true scope of their wealth for the first time in face-to-face negotiations with the government.