Israeli forces storm Gaza aid ship, and beat people on board. Fatalities reported.

[frogwoman]

cheers for that, that was a really interesting post

 

[free spirit]

cheers for that, that was a really interesting post

true, but also, banning clapping... what is this, phoenix festival circa 1995?*













*this is almost certainly only a reference that I will get...

 

[danny la rouge]

whatever. quoting my post out of context is meaningless and a bit shit. i'm not going to argue with you about demo slogans on this thread, if you want to start another thread, go ahead.

The context is whether it is helpful for anyone (Wesleyan, Catholic, Hari Krishna, Jewish or Muslim) to be randomly shouting "God Is Great" at a demo. It isn't, and whoever they are should be asked to leave it out.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

true, but also, banning clapping... what is this, phoenix festival circa 1995?*


*this is almost certainly only a reference that I will get...

OMG! Were you there too?!?










I wasn't.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

The context is whether it is helpful for anyone (Wesleyan, Catholic, Hari Krishna, Jewish or Muslim) to be randomly shouting "God Is Great" at a demo. It isn't, and whoever they are should be asked to leave it out.

But they're not necessarily randomly shouting "God Is Great" they might be doing it as an substitution for clapping.

As I explained above, some Muslims go along with the interpretation by some Islamic scholars that clapping is prohibited, and that's the permitted alternative.

If you're going to ask Muslims to leave a demo for, effectively, doing their permitted equivalent of clapping, are you going to ban everyone else from clapping as well?

 

[dylans]

But they're not necessarily randomly shouting "God Is Great" they might be doing it as an substitution for clapping.

As I explained above, some Muslims go along with the interpretation by some Islamic scholars that clapping is prohibited, and that's the permitted alternative.

If you're going to ask Muslims to leave a demo for, effectively, doing their permitted equivalent of clapping, are you going to ban everyone else from clapping as well?

Which "Muslims?"

You see, by simply saying "some Muslims" you strip the slogan of all political meaning and present it as something it's not. As just a harmless slogan by some Muslims, used in place of some kind of vague religious injunction.

These kind's of injunctions (against clapping or images of prophets for example) are associated with Wahabist theology and accompany Islamist political ideologies.

It's not simply a harmless slogan. It's use as a poltical slogan is Islamist in character and often associated with either Wahibist Islamism of Hamas or Iranian type revolutionary Shia rhetoric. Usually the former.

These things don't happen in a vacuum, they indicate a political as well as a religious position and I think it is foolhardy for us to pretend otherwise.

I'm with Danny on this one and though I don't think people should be asked to leave a march because of it I think it is divisive and people should be challenged on it and told to pack it in. I don't want to March under a Hamas banner and I don't want to march under Hamas slogans.If they want to turn the march into a march for Hamas they are free to organise one of their own. They won't because it will be 3 men and a dog

 

[free spirit]

The context is whether it is helpful for anyone (Wesleyan, Catholic, Hari Krishna, Jewish or Muslim) to be randomly shouting "God Is Great" at a demo. It isn't, and whoever they are should be asked to leave it out.

problem with this being that the same could really apply to most groupings on any protest doing more than simply marching from a to b in silence - eg swappies with megaphones, samba bands etc.

who's to decide what's helpful or not?

stopping someone coming out with anti-semitic or racist shit is one thing, stopping people shouting god is great is a bit different IMO.

 

[Spion]

In Jordan to say 'allahu akbar' (in normal speech) is like saying 'wow'/'good god' etc

 

[treelover]

Big protest in Israel where it matters calling for peace and a two state solution.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/06/453026.html

 

[dylans]

In Jordan to say 'allahu akbar' (in normal speech) is like saying 'wow'/'good god' etc

In Iran secularists and socialists marched under the slogan "allahu Akbar" and were repaid for by being massacred in their thousands as soon as Khomeini siezed power.

 

[treelover]

and they were attacked by angry mobs, though I am not sure why the OP calls them fascists, right wing thugs, maybe

 

[discokermit]

The context is whether it is helpful for anyone (Wesleyan, Catholic, Hari Krishna, Jewish or Muslim) to be randomly shouting "God Is Great" at a demo. It isn't, and whoever they are should be asked to leave it out.

so, you're on a demo in support of people who are oppressed because they are muslims, surrounded by a few thousand people who also feel they are oppressed because they are muslims. you're gonna have a strop when they chant 'god is great' and tell them all to leave it out?

 

[dylans]

Big protest in Israel where it matters calling for peace and a two state solution.

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2010/06/453026.html

The demonstration was supposed to be protected by the police. But on numerous occassions hundreds of fascists attacked the demo. A smoke bomb was thown right into the rally, which met with chants against the rise of fascism in Israel.

After the demo fascists attacked the alternative area of Tel Aviv. The BBC world service reported that clashes had broken out. Leading peace activist Uri Avnery, who fled from Nazi-Germany in 1933, was chased by an angry mob through the streets and police had to rush him into a taxi.

A fascist mob went on a rampage in Tel Avivs Ibn Givrol Street area, shouting "Dirty Tel Avivians get out of your bubble!". Locals and guests of cafés had to defend themselves against the nazis.

 

[free spirit]

and they were attacked by angry mobs, though I am not sure why the OP calls them fascists, right wing thugs, maybe

eta - sorry, ignore, I missed your first post

 

[dylans]

(

so, you're on a demo in support of people who are oppressed because they are muslims, surrounded by a few thousand people who also feel they are oppressed because they are muslims. you're gonna have a strop when they chant 'god is great' and tell them all to leave it out?

So the slogan has no political dimension?. It's just "Muslims" . That's naive. On a political demonstration, the slogan has a political character. It's Islamist.

And they are not oppressed because they are "Muslims" they are oppressed because they are Palestinians.There are Christian Palestinians too. The claim that they are oppressed for being "Muslims" is also Islamist discourse.

 

[discokermit]

(

So the slogan has no political dimension?. It's just "Muslims" . That's naive. On a political demonstration, the slogan has a political character. It's Islamist.

And they are not oppressed because they are "Muslims" they are oppressed because they are Palestinians.There are Christian Palestinians too. The claim that they are oppressed for being "Muslims" is also Islamist discourse.

like i'm gonna go into the fucking ins and outs of the fucking situation?

you gonna stop them chanting it then?

 

[Barking_Mad]

 

[dylans]

like i'm gonna go into the fucking ins and outs of the fucking situation?

you gonna stop them chanting it then?

That's not really my point. My point was in response to the claim that these slogans have a purely religious and non political character and that they are somehow harmless expressions of language by "Muslims" on the march. I think that's wrong. These slogans have a very distinct political character and that character is wrong, dangerous and divisive.

I think it's also indicative of the rise of religious based discourse "Muslims are oppressed" as opposed to secular nationalist politics that the Palestinian cause was once so proud of. (Palestinians are oppressed) and I think it is dangerous for those of us who support the Palestinians to concede the debate to the Islamists. Part of that debate is the nature of language and slogans and definitions.

As for stopping them, it depends on the context but If I had the opportunity to discuss it then yeah I would raise my objections.

(and tbh I think if you think about it you know I am right)

 

[Diamond]

Has anyone read the NYT Chabon article?

It's worth a few minutes of your time:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/06/opinion/06chabon.html?hp

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

Which "Muslims?"

You see, by simply saying "some Muslims" you strip the slogan of all political meaning and present it as something it's not. As just a harmless slogan by some Muslims, used in place of some kind of vague religious injunction.

These kind's of injunctions (against clapping or images of prophets for example) are associated with Wahabist theology and accompany Islamist political ideologies.

It's not simply a harmless slogan. It's use as a poltical slogan is Islamist in character and often associated with either Wahibist Islamism of Hamas or Iranian type revolutionary Shia rhetoric. Usually the former.

These things don't happen in a vacuum, they indicate a political as well as a religious position and I think it is foolhardy for us to pretend otherwise.

I'm with Danny on this one and though I don't think people should be asked to leave a march because of it I think it is divisive and people should be challenged on it and told to pack it in. I don't want to March under a Hamas banner and I don't want to march under Hamas slogans.If they want to turn the march into a march for Hamas they are free to organise one of their own. They won't because it will be 3 men and a dog

You ask "Which Muslims?"

I say "some Muslims" because I acknowledge that different scholars from different schools of thought have different stances on the issue and therefore to simply say, generically, "Muslims don't clap" would not have been accurate. I was trying to avoid making a sweeping generalisation about what "Muslims" do or don't do.

Trying to imply that it's a universal, extremist view is akin to tarring all Israelis with the same brush as the extremists in their government and the settlers, and that's not true either.

You're definitely projecting if you're trying to say that it's some kind of shorthand for Shia rhetoric, Wahabism or supporters of Hamas.

In saying this:

"It's not simply a harmless slogan. It's use as a poltical slogan is Islamist in character and often associated with either Wahibist Islamism of Hamas or Iranian type revolutionary Shia rhetoric. Usually the former."

you're making a sweeping generalisation, an assertion that I can tell you, categorically, is incorrect.

Here, I'll correct that for you:

"It's not always simply a harmless slogan. It's sometimes used as a poltical slogan that is Islamist in character and which is sometimes associated with either Wahibist Islamism of Hamas or Iranian type revolutionary Shia rhetoric."

For the record, the people I heard about the 'is clapping permitted or not?' debate from were/are relatively moderate Sunnis. Some of the women wore hijab, some didn't, I think one or two wore niqab and gloves, some of whom studied or worked, some of whom were housewives raising their children. But they definitely weren't Wahabbi or Iranian-school Shia they were mostly British Pakistani and a few converts/reverts, so not in the Hamas-supporting Palestinian camp either.

I've been to talks and conferences where the audience or delegates were relatively moderate Muslims (if they were proper hardcore, me as a single woman wouldn't have been allowed) and it just wasn't the done thing to clap, it was de rigeur to say "Allahu akhbar" and I've done so.

So, I reiterate, *some* Muslims will simply say "Allahu akhbar" as an alternative to clapping. I reassert that. And I reject your sweeping generalisation that it's an Islamist political statement used by Shia, Wahabbis and Hamas supporters. I don't dispute that for *some* Muslims it might be a political statement, but you can't make assumptions about the political leanings of a fellow protester at a demo purely on the basis of them shouting "Allahu akhbar". If I found myself in a big crowd and none of them were clapping, if they were all shouting "Allahu akhbar" I'd probably do so as well, and I'm a wine-swigging, shagging-outside-marriage 'as far away as you could possibly get from shia and wahabbi islam' muslim as you can get (well, I'm straight, I'm not gay, so you could probably get slightly further away). Would you tell sometime like me to pack it in and ask me to leave a protest march? Or would you just ask the bearded swarthy-skinned ones?

And as for the prohibition against depictions of prophets and for that matter other people or animals, that's not extremist either, so far as I'm aware, that one's actually universal, painting or sculptures of animals or people are haram. That's why Islamic art tends to be geometric patterns and calligraphy. As to whether people comply with that prohibition, or whether they are liberal and choose to ignore it or turn a blind eye, that's different, but I don't think it's disputed that it's prohibited. Or at least that's my understanding of that issue.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

...So the slogan has no political dimension?. It's just "Muslims" . That's naive. On a political demonstration, the slogan has a political character. It's Islamist.

Again, I disagree with your sweeping generalisations.

To make the sweeping generalisation that on a political demonstration it has a political character, you're trying to reassert the unspoken "Islamist" again.

To *some* Muslims it might be a political slogan. To *some* Muslims it might be Islamist.

To *some* Muslims it's the equivalent of clapping or like a hip hip hooray-type chant.

To *some* Muslims it's no more or less political than other people clapping at a political demonstration.

 

[Diamond]

Again, I disagree with your sweeping generalisations.

To make the sweeping generalisation that on a political demonstration it has a political character, you're trying to reassert the unspoken "Islamist" again.

To *some* Muslims it might be a political slogan. To *some* Muslims it might be Islamist.

To *some* Muslims it's the equivalent of clapping or like a hip hip hooray-type chant.

To *some* Muslims it's no more or less political than other people clapping at a political demonstration.

At the end of the day it's an evangelising gesture.

There's no way to get around that.

 

[rioted]

TBF crosses ought to be banned too.

 

[AnnO'Neemus]

That's not really my point. My point was in response to the claim that these slogans have a purely religious and non political character and that they are somehow harmless expressions of language by "Muslims" on the march. I think that's wrong. These slogans have a very distinct political character and that character is wrong, dangerous and divisive.

You're misrepresenting what I said and you know it.

You're arguing against what I never actually said. I never said "Muslims" in the sweeping generalisation sense. I specifically said "some Muslims".

Shall I repeat what I actually said, for the sake of clarity?

But they're not necessarily randomly shouting "God Is Great" they might be doing it as an substitution for clapping.

So, did I say the slogan was "purely religious" and "non political" in character? No. I didn't.

As I explained above, some Muslims go along with the interpretation by some Islamic scholars that clapping is prohibited, and that's the permitted alternative.

Did I say "Muslims" in a sweeping generalisation sense? No. Did I say "all Muslims"? No. Did I say "some Muslims"? Yes.

Instead of saying, effectively, AnnO'Neemus is wrong, it's not a religious dictat, you could, more correctly, have said something like Well, yeah, AnnO'Neemus has a point, according to some scholars there's a prohibition on clapping and saying Allahu Akhbar is the permitted alternative, but it can also be political... it might be indicative that the Muslim who's saying Allahu Akhbar is Iranian Shia, Wahabbi or a Hamas-supporter, because sometimes there's a political dimension.

...I think it's also indicative of the rise of religious based discourse "Muslims are oppressed" as opposed to secular nationalist politics that the Palestinian cause was once so proud of. (Palestinians are oppressed) and I think it is dangerous for those of us who support the Palestinians to concede the debate to the Islamists. Part of that debate is the nature of language and slogans and definitions.

As for stopping them, it depends on the context but If I had the opportunity to discuss it then yeah I would raise my objections.

(and tbh I think if you think about it you know I am right)

And you're part of that problem, because you're projecting Islamist political ideologies on to many moderate Muslims for whom it wouldn't have that political undercurrent, for whom it would simply be something they do instead of clapping, because they understand that to be disliked or even haram.

 

[audiotech]

Dr Norman Finkelstein's appearance at the University of Waterloo was a combative one with lots of heckling and cheering throughout the speech. As we've come to expect, he delivered a blistering message on Israel that was the polar opposite of the mainstream mantra

And when an audience member tried to guilt him with a show of tears because he used the "Nazi" word, Finklestein would have none of it. He dismissed her emotional outburst as "crocodile tears.

 

[laptop]

Imagine my surprise, given British preconceptions, when I heard an Arabic-speaking Christian say "Allahu Akhbar".

I think she was being slightly ironic. But "god is great" doesn't specify which god

 

[audiotech]

Photos show Mavi Marmara passengers protecting and aiding Israeli soldiers.

http://aliabunimah.posterous.com/blog-post-israel-hasbara-fails-again-pics-sho

 

[dylans]

You're misrepresenting what I said and you know it.

It wasn't my intention to misrepresent you and if I gave that impression i apologise

No, did I say the slogan was "purely religious" and "non political" in character? No. I didn't.

Fair enough

Did I say "Muslims" in a sweeping generalisation sense? No. Did I say "all Muslims"? No. Did I say "some Muslims"? Yes.

Yes and I asked you which Muslims, It seems to me to be a reasonable assumption on a political demonstration particularly around an issue that is increasingly being seen in religious (as opposed to national or ethnic terms) that religious slogans, like all slogans on a demonstration, should be seen as political. I say now I remain unconvinced by what I think is a tendency in your posts to strip them of their political character.

And as for the prohibition against depictions of prophets and for that matter other people or animals, that's not extremist either, so far as I'm aware, that one's actually universal, painting or sculptures of animals or people are haram.

This is just wrong and I would like to explain why by way of a short anacdote.

I used to live in Egypt, in Cairo. I was there for several years in the early 90s. As you know this was the time of the rise of Al-Gama'a al-Islamiyya, who were waging a war against the Egyptian state.

They were waging war against the state but a more insidious form of Islamist influence was taking place culturally. There is a large intellectual class in Egypt and these guys were in the front line over the battle for hearts and minds over what it means to be a Muslim. They are (were) in favour of the secular state and open intellectual and cultural life. A movie was made about the life of Jacob. It deliberately showed Jacobs face in the movie as a statement against the rise of Islamist intolerance. I went to see it.

Then Al Azar University, a very influential establishment, issued a decree banning the movie. Al Azar has no legal authority but the state banned it anyway and many of my Egyptian friends were very angry. "How dare the Wahibists define Islam for me" was a common complaint.

Then something happened, in 1993 (I think) Egypt's Nobel prize winning author Naguib Mahfouz was stabbed in the neck by Islamists. They went too far and opinion swung against them. Mubarrak visited him in hospital and then......The movie I saw was back in the cinema.

My point in telling this is simply to make a point that nothing occurs in a vacuum. Declarations about images or clapping etc are not universal at all. They are political and they are symptomatic of a fight for the heart and soul of the Muslim world and a fight for the right to define what is and what isn't Islam.

And you're part of that problem, because you're projecting Islamist political ideologies on to many moderate Muslims for whom it wouldn't have that political undercurrent, for whom it would simply be something they do instead of clapping, because they understand that to be disliked or even haram

No liberals like you who ignore currents of Islamist discourse within Muslim communites or worse paint those trends as universal are the problem. Your argument helps disarm those opposed to Islamism in the fight for the hearts and minds of a billion people.

 

[tangentlama]

Elohim gadol!

 

[free spirit]

Your argument helps disarm those opposed to Islamism in the fight for the hearts and minds of a billion people.

which billion people?

if you mean the billion or so Muslims of one sort or another, I think you're barking up the wrong tree if you think that preventing muslims who want to from chanting 'God is Great' on demonstrations is going to in any way win their hearts and minds.