FIVE AMERICANS WHO ARE STANDING AGAINST RADICAL ISLAM

[laughing dog]

Babbling about the Woman's March does not address the fact is that neither woman that you claim is instrumental for the Women's Strike is on the list of organizers for the womenstrikes. Nor does it address that there were many names on the Woman's March list of organizers which suggests Sasour was not instrumental.

I think boycotting speakers serves the purpose of giving them more publicity, not less. So, it is a tactical mistake.

Maybe the definition is in dispute

Instrumental means serving as a means of pursuing an aim.

dictionary.com states
serving or acting as an instrument or means; useful; helpful.

Instrument: a means by which something is effected or done; agency:

There can be more than one instrument. Sasour was one of them.

Your use of the term "instrumental" in this instance is trivial - anyone who licked one envelope asking for help in the march satisfies your definition.

Is it right to boycott the Honor Diaries film? I think you would disagree with a boycott.

What did you not understand in "I think boycotting speakers serves the purpose of giving them more publicity, not less. So, it is a tactical mistake."

 

[whichphilosophy]

Maybe the definition is in dispute

Instrumental means serving as a means of pursuing an aim.

dictionary.com states
serving or acting as an instrument or means; useful; helpful.

Instrument: a means by which something is effected or done; agency:

There can be more than one instrument. Sasour was one of them.

Your use of the term "instrumental" in this instance is trivial - anyone who licked one envelope asking for help in the march satisfies your definition.

Is it right to boycott the Honor Diaries film? I think you would disagree with a boycott.

What did you not understand in "I think boycotting speakers serves the purpose of giving them more publicity, not less. So, it is a tactical mistake."

Your last point is often correct but in the process there can be hostility and violence. In fact I think it is proving to be a tactical mistake.
an envelope could be if it serves what is being achieved. However we can look at the degree and impact of the person.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Does Sarsour really think she speaks for all muslimas? This is like a woman standing up during the suffragette movement and saying "We women don't need the vote".

There's a line of loose women's coats in the UK which as now fashionable women wear open when they walk. A high street shop (PRIMARK) brought one out which actually looks like an open hijab; especially the black ones. So a lot of Muslim ladies were trying these on. My daughter who was shopping preferred a short coat.

Most Muslim women coming from the UAE where I once worked took the Hijabs off when they arrived in Italy and the UK. In the UK the Hijab is a slight trend. It's okay if this is a matter of choice.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Agreed

If you agree, then to claim someone was 'instrumental' in organizing an event, there needs to be evidence they did more than lend their name to the website... More like, it wouldn't have happened, or would have been substantially less, if they hadn't been involved.

Sasour was at the marches and speaking at them. She would be offended if you say she was not instrumental.She is a Co Chair as shown on the women's march website. She is a former director of the Arab American Association of New York. She is not anti Jewish. She works with Jewish groups in New York. For instance she was part of a campaign to raise funds to give to vandalised Jewish cemeteries. She also successfully campaigned for Muslim holidays to be recognised in the US.

She is however not taking an opportunity to include dialogue with reformers operating in the Muslim countries outside the USA. Islam is spreading worldwide and as part of a reformation process it can absorb progressive concepts and remove those actions which are a violation of human rights.

With enough reformation within Islamic societies, we can expect to see Islam changing like Christianity did, and no doubt end up just as boring.

 

[Warpoet]

I don't agree with all but much of what AHA says but there is nothing to suggest she is a hate preacher.

Wrong

This project contains Muslims, ex Muslims and Atheists. The focus should be on the message not the messenger. As Malcolm X once stated, "The Truth is the truth, no matter who stated it."

Haven't seen the film, can't comment. Any project which touts the Clarion Project as a supporter, as though that lent it credibility, is pretty suspect in my eyes.

You can provide your view of the trailer if you choose to do so.

My sense is that it's highlighting significant human rights issues, but Hirsi Ali's prominence sets off alarms as she has an agenda that extends far beyond simply helping oppressed women. Moreover, the film seems to want to pin the blame for the mistreatment of women squarely on Islam when it obviously goes far deeper than that; women didn't fare much better in most of these countries before Islam, and there are abundant examples of non-Muslim countries where the treatment of women is comparably horrid. A few years back, around 400 experts on gender rights and equality were asked which countries were the best and worst to be a woman in. The country at the bottom of the list was not a Muslim country. Systemic misogyny, even when narrowed down to "honor killings," isn't something Islam has a monopoly over.

So, while the film is discussing valid issues, and many Muslim countries have plenty to answer for re: women's rights, the filmmakers appear, at first glance, more interested in blaming Islam than in addressing the problems themselves. That explains why AHA and the Clarion Project are behind it, and why Muslim groups are pissed off over it.

 

[Warpoet]

Islam is spreading worldwide and as part of a reformation process it can absorb progressive concepts and remove those actions which are a violation of human rights.

With enough reformation within Islamic societies, we can expect to see Islam changing like Christianity did, and no doubt end up just as boring.

"Islam" doesn't exist in a vacuum separate from the societies its adherents belong to. Islam in Pennsylvania likely looks very different from Islam in Yemen. Nor was the overall defanging of Christianity in the West some clean, streamlined process. It was a long and bloody one. And there are still plenty of Christians here and abroad who would gladly burn people at the stake if they thought they could get away with it. Christianity didn't change, its environment did, and so too it will be with Islam.

 

[iolo]

Islam is spreading worldwide and as part of a reformation process it can absorb progressive concepts and remove those actions which are a violation of human rights.

With enough reformation within Islamic societies, we can expect to see Islam changing like Christianity did, and no doubt end up just as boring.

"Islam" doesn't exist in a vacuum separate from the societies its adherents belong to. Islam in Pennsylvania likely looks very different from Islam in Yemen. Nor was the overall defanging of Christianity in the West some clean, streamlined process. It was a long and bloody one. And there are still plenty of Christians here and abroad who would gladly burn people at the stake if they thought they could get away with it. Christianity didn't change, its environment did, and so too it will be with Islam.

Not that simply, I think - a lot depended on groups within Christianity - Anabaptists, Levellers, Diggers, Quakers and Unitarians, for instance - and on clashes between groups having unexpected consequences - Thirty Years War, Civil War in the UK and so on. The same, doubtless, will happen with Islam, especially if outside powers could possibly learn to leave it alone,

 

[Keith&Co.]

Sasour was at the marches and speaking at them. She would be offended if you say she was not instrumental.

YOU are the one claiming she was instrumental. Back it up, if you can.

She is a Co Chair as shown on the women's march website.

And Wolverine is a producer for Marvel movies. Instrumental?

She is a former director of the Arab American Association of New York.

Former credentials don't maker her instrumental.

She is not anti Jewish.

A null on the 'instrumental' meter.

She works with Jewish groups in New York. For instance she was part of a campaign to raise funds to give to vandalised Jewish cemeteries. She also successfully campaigned for Muslim holidays to be recognised in the US.

Still reading a null on the 'instrumental for the march' meter.

 

[whichphilosophy]

Wrong

This project contains Muslims, ex Muslims and Atheists. The focus should be on the message not the messenger. As Malcolm X once stated, "The Truth is the truth, no matter who stated it."

Haven't seen the film, can't comment. Any project which touts the Clarion Project as a supporter, as though that lent it credibility, is pretty suspect in my eyes.

You can provide your view of the trailer if you choose to do so.

My sense is that it's highlighting significant human rights issues, but Hirsi Ali's prominence sets off alarms as she has an agenda that extends far beyond simply helping oppressed women. Moreover, the film seems to want to pin the blame for the mistreatment of women squarely on Islam when it obviously goes far deeper than that; women didn't fare much better in most of these countries before Islam, and there are abundant examples of non-Muslim countries where the treatment of women is comparably horrid. A few years back, around 400 experts on gender rights and equality were asked which countries were the best and worst to be a woman in. The country at the bottom of the list was not a Muslim country. Systemic misogyny, even when narrowed down to "honor killings," isn't something Islam has a monopoly over.

So, while the film is discussing valid issues, and many Muslim countries have plenty to answer for re: women's rights, the filmmakers appear, at first glance, more interested in blaming Islam than in addressing the problems themselves. That explains why AHA and the Clarion Project are behind it, and why Muslim groups are pissed off over it.

What you say invites dialogue and not conflict. You disagree with the Clarion project, but here are still others involved who are actual Muslims involved in reforms. Hirshi Ali has her views, some of which I agree with and some I don't. She has been allowed to participate in debates in the UK. She has appeared with moderate Muslims on British TV and all debated in good faith.

I worked with Sharia Law and there are some aspects we could use in English Law. For instance, when a person makes a promise prior to a contract, he cannot then change any key points on the contract. While the man gets twice the inheritance of his wife, the calculation then is the father then shares his amount with the wife and the children.

The Clarion Project contains one or two Luney Tunes but it also shares a platform with moderate Muslims.

The Muslim groups as part of the Women's March are campaigning for human rights in the USA and recently it was focused against Trump. The Honor Diaries is contributed to by self critical Muslims who wish to end what they describe as Institutionalised oppression of women. This is a missing ingredient (whether this is how it is supposed to happen or not).

Islam does change according to the societies it lives in. Christianity took nearly 2,000 to reform itself and there are still some fanatics here and there.

The problem is there are several areas in Islamic countries where there are severe abuses of human rights, which the Honor Diaries activists are campaigning against.

My view is that CAIR and other groups have concentrated more on politics and less on human rights. I hope these activists I refer to will bear an influence on CAIR to be more active on human rights and less on political campaigning.

Here's a debate on Fox News for interest.

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hKV9TDXU9EI[/YOUTUBE]

The clip to the Honor Diaries here:

[YOUTUBE]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w-zWq_Xzw_g[/YOUTUBE]

The Clip is a few minutes.

 

[whichphilosophy]

"Islam" doesn't exist in a vacuum separate from the societies its adherents belong to. Islam in Pennsylvania likely looks very different from Islam in Yemen. Nor was the overall defanging of Christianity in the West some clean, streamlined process. It was a long and bloody one. And there are still plenty of Christians here and abroad who would gladly burn people at the stake if they thought they could get away with it. Christianity didn't change, its environment did, and so too it will be with Islam.

Not that simply, I think - a lot depended on groups within Christianity - Anabaptists, Levellers, Diggers, Quakers and Unitarians, for instance - and on clashes between groups having unexpected consequences - Thirty Years War, Civil War in the UK and so on. The same, doubtless, will happen with Islam, especially if outside powers could possibly learn to leave it alone,

Christians have been behaving themselves in recent years. Well there's still a few scandals here and there but less slaughter and inquisitions etc.

- - - Updated - - -

YOU are the one claiming she was instrumental. Back it up, if you can.

She is a Co Chair as shown on the women's march website.

And Wolverine is a producer for Marvel movies. Instrumental?

She is a former director of the Arab American Association of New York.

Former credentials don't maker her instrumental.

She is not anti Jewish.

A null on the 'instrumental' meter.

She works with Jewish groups in New York. For instance she was part of a campaign to raise funds to give to vandalised Jewish cemeteries. She also successfully campaigned for Muslim holidays to be recognised in the US.

Still reading a null on the 'instrumental for the march' meter.

Null, she was marching with the leader of the march and speaking there. She has as I quoted stated she is involved.

 

[iolo]

Not that simply, I think - a lot depended on groups within Christianity - Anabaptists, Levellers, Diggers, Quakers and Unitarians, for instance - and on clashes between groups having unexpected consequences - Thirty Years War, Civil War in the UK and so on. The same, doubtless, will happen with Islam, especially if outside powers could possibly learn to leave it alone,

Christians have been behaving themselves in recent years. Well there's still a few scandals here and there but less slaughter and inquisitions etc.

- - - Updated - - -

My point was that 'Christianity', like 'Islam', is far too loose a term to describe the various movements and populations involved.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Do western feminists side with or against this Sarsour character?

All western feminists meet in committees where they agree on what to think

 

[Derec]

If you agree, then to claim someone was 'instrumental' in organizing an event, there needs to be evidence they did more than lend their name to the website... More like, it wouldn't have happened, or would have been substantially less, if they hadn't been involved.

Sasour was at the marches and speaking at them. She would be offended if you say she was not instrumental.She is a Co Chair as shown on the women's march website. She is a former director of the Arab American Association of New York. She is not anti Jewish. She works with Jewish groups in New York. For instance she was part of a campaign to raise funds to give to vandalised Jewish cemeteries. She also successfully campaigned for Muslim holidays to be recognised in the US.

She is however not taking an opportunity to include dialogue with reformers operating in the Muslim countries outside the USA. Islam is spreading worldwide and as part of a reformation process it can absorb progressive concepts and remove those actions which are a violation of human rights.

With enough reformation within Islamic societies, we can expect to see Islam changing like Christianity did, and no doubt end up just as boring.

LInda Sarsour supports Sharia Law. She is not a moderate under any definition of the term.

She also has links to terrorist group Hamas.

 

[Keith&Co.]

Null, she was marching with the leader of the march and speaking there.

Present != instrumental.

She has as I quoted stated she is involved.

1) Involved != instrumental.
2) Her making a claim is not supporting your different claim.

 

[laughing dog]

an envelope could be if it serves what is being achieved. However we can look at the degree and impact of the person.

Thank you for admitting your claim is trivial.

 

[Warpoet]

I worked with Sharia Law and there are some aspects we could use in English Law. For instance, when a person makes a promise prior to a contract, he cannot then change any key points on the contract. While the man gets twice the inheritance of his wife, the calculation then is the father then shares his amount with the wife and the children.

I think Sharia law in a familial setting is not appreciably different than halacha is for Jews. It's got its own set of problems, but those tie back to larger issues with religion in general. And it's certainly not something society at large needs to be too worried about.

The Clarion Project contains one or two Luney Tunes but it also shares a platform with moderate Muslims.

I think you're downplaying their looniness. They've produced a number of anti-Muslim films totally in line with the worldview of the likes of Gaffney and the gang. They're also funded by right-wingers and are linked to ultra orthodox Jewish groups in Israel. If you didn't look into these things prior to posting this thread, that's fine - but on balance, they are simply not a credible or honest source. Even if some of the people they work with are well-intentioned.

Islam does change according to the societies it lives in. Christianity took nearly 2,000 to reform itself and there are still some fanatics here and there.

I'd say that's a bit of an understatement. Christian fanatics may be few and far between in Western Europe, but that's certainly not the case in some regions of the U.S. And in parts of the world where the rule of law is less stable you'll find Christians just as nutty as their brethren from the days of yore. As I said, Christianity didn't change. The world around it did.

The problem is there are several areas in Islamic countries where there are severe abuses of human rights, which the Honor Diaries activists are campaigning against.

That's fine, but the fact that so many of Clarion's people are involved in it is a huge red flag, and the laser-like focus on Islam as the source of these problems, ignoring other factors or similar problems in non-Muslim countries, smacks of an agenda.

 

[whichphilosophy]

an envelope could be if it serves what is being achieved. However we can look at the degree and impact of the person.

Thank you for admitting your claim is trivial.

If the envelope contained an urgent document. The instrumental act would be more than trivial.
Leading the march speaking at the march and stating she accepted that role indicates here role was far from trivial.

 

[whichphilosophy]

I think Sharia law in a familial setting is not appreciably different than halacha is for Jews. It's got its own set of problems, but those tie back to larger issues with religion in general. And it's certainly not something society at large needs to be too worried about.

The Clarion Project contains one or two Luney Tunes but it also shares a platform with moderate Muslims.

I think you're downplaying their looniness. They've produced a number of anti-Muslim films totally in line with the worldview of the likes of Gaffney and the gang. They're also funded by right-wingers and are linked to ultra orthodox Jewish groups in Israel. If you didn't look into these things prior to posting this thread, that's fine - but on balance, they are simply not a credible or honest source. Even if some of the people they work with are well-intentioned.

Islam does change according to the societies it lives in. Christianity took nearly 2,000 to reform itself and there are still some fanatics here and there.

I'd say that's a bit of an understatement. Christian fanatics may be few and far between in Western Europe, but that's certainly not the case in some regions of the U.S. And in parts of the world where the rule of law is less stable you'll find Christians just as nutty as their brethren from the days of yore. As I said, Christianity didn't change. The world around it did.

The problem is there are several areas in Islamic countries where there are severe abuses of human rights, which the Honor Diaries activists are campaigning against.

In the UK Sharia courts are perfectly legal under the Arbitration Act. Judgements must however not violate the persons rights in English Law. There are some reportedly rogue courts but the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT) consults with English Law experts. I have posted threads on this in the past.

That's fine, but the fact that so many of Clarion's people are involved in it is a huge red flag, and the laser-like focus on Islam as the source of these problems, ignoring other factors or similar problems in non-Muslim countries, smacks of an agenda.

What about the Muslims involved. The particular project is by Muslims in Muslim societies. Of course similar things do happen the same in other countries. However the extent that some of these are institutionalised in these societies and intensely so, is a concern. ion
Muslims are concerned so I don't see this project as a problem. The trailer gives an idea of this. What are your views on that?

 

[Keith&Co.]

If the envelope contained an urgent document. The instrumental act would be more than trivial.

Writing the document would be instrumental. Any moron could stuff the envelope.
Not instrumental.

Leading the march speaking at the march and stating she accepted that role indicates here role was far from trivial.

Still != instrumental.

 

[laughing dog]

Thank you for admitting your claim is trivial.

If the envelope contained an urgent document. The instrumental act would be more than trivial.

If "instrumental" means to you that anyone had any role, that your claim is trivial. If your claim that "instrumental" means important, you have yet to prove anything.

Leading the march speaking at the march and stating she accepted that role indicates here role was far from trivial.

She did not lead the march. And you made the claim that both women were also instrumental in the womenstrike. Yet neither are on any list of organizers.