Shocked Jordanians Protest Bombings in their Capital

cabbage,

As I am trying to reply to NewYorker, I notice there is something odd here. The article you posted does NOT match the one in the link that you provided, although the content is similar and the author is the same. Maybe the NYT updated that linked site? Nothing really major, but I'd just like to point it out.

If you actually read the New York Times article in the link, you would see

Granted, there were some chants by protesters that are rhetorically extreme and violent, such as "Burn in Hell", as reported elsewhere. IMO, however, in the immediate aftermath of a horrific terrorist act, these angry messages need to viewed in context. If you didn't find anything radical the anger felt by most Americans after what happened on 9/11/2001, I believe it shouldn't be that difficult for you to understand the bitterness amongst the high emotions displayed by the Jordanians directed at the mastermind behind bombing.

 

i already respect muslims - it wasn't my respect I was talking about.

Not my fault how you form your misconceptions.

 

Probably when Muslims were busy building observatories, making contributions to mathematics, astronomy, medicine, and chemistry and advancing technology while Christians and Europe was lost in the dark ages - in a prison of fanatical religion that led to a 'jihad', i mean 'crusade' against Islam.

Ironic isn't it?

 

Possibly - you did hear individuals making really nasty comments about Muslims after 9/11. But you know, there was never a mass protest with "Bin Laden burn in hell" or "Death to Afganistan"

It just makes me wonder if there is some kind of propensity for - I don't know what to call it - but it's like violent anger. In this case it's not directed toward America - but at terrorists - but it's a bit eyebrow raising and I was genuinely surprised.

 

Wow! I applaud your knowledge base. A lot of people are unaware that Muslims of the past made such contributions. Actually, reading about the contributions of historic Muslims truly makes the situation (whether imposed or brought-on by Muslims themselves) of Muslims today that much more tragic.

 

There's a book called Ibn Battuta that details the travels of this guy in the 1300's from Morroco to India and back over the course of 30 years. Supposedly the greatest traveler ever. Anyway, his journals really demonstrate how advanced of a civilization Islam had acheived.

From what I recall, the downfall of the Golden Age for Islam had to do with sailing. All the trade routes overland ran through Islamic lands - so the exchange from Europe to China/India was right through the Islamic world. That was lucrative of course, as well as fostering the exchange of ideas - diversity of sorts.

Europeans were eager to bypass the overland route and expensive ports of course, and eventually made improved sailing ships (some from Muslim technology) and they were able to sail around Africa. Not only did they control the seas, trading began to fade on the overland routes, and Europe discovered the new world lowering the importance of India and China.

So that's one theory - probably other factors too.

I honestly think that for that area of the world to make a comeback, it's not about democracy or oppression. What it really comes down to is education and the tolerance for new ideas. What about resources? Well, look at Japan -that country has no resources and it's an economic powerhouse.

I think that's the sort of "soul-searching" that needs to occur. That the rigidity has to loosen up a bit. It's not westernization...because you know what - that area invented the west in a way. It's the first place where commerce thrived and open ideas were exchanged. It was the earliest form of capitalism and tolerance. I don't think it's about Iraq becoming more like America - it's about Iraq becoming more like the Iraq of 600 years ago...which is what the west eventually became. It's like the civilizations swapped places.

 

Well, I think you've got a skewed view of history there, and projecting your frustrations with the current state of affairs onto the past.

Anyway, it's moot, eventually people will start investing in the region once Latin America, China, and India industrialize, the search for cheap labor will drive business to start investing in the middle east. It's a matter of time now. Those nations which are the most tolerant will benefit first (such as Egypt) and then it will slowly spread as Egypt begins investing in it's neighbors too.

In the end, that's what will probably defeat the terrorists...so really, when folks say "we don't want you" that's fine...we if they reject that, how are they going to ever create jobs without foreign investment?

 

Saudi Arabia just joined the WTO

 

Actually, Europeans use to include Arabic culture in their curricula.

It was Islam that viewed the west as unimportant and paid little attention to it - beginning to ignore western culture. It lost touch with the technological innovations and turned inward.

It's time to stop blaming the west man. The west moved from medieval systems to more free economic systems - the Islamic world did not. You need to let go of that resentment - it's not doing you or anyone else any good.

It amazes me how you claim on one hand the Muslim world doesn't need to be like the west and doesn't want the West's culture or ideas....but then in the next sentence attack the west for neglecting the Muslim world and not doing enough to advance Islam.

Dude - Islam rejected the west, not the other way around. And that rejected resulted in it being left behind. The Islamic world has to either get back to education, industrialization, and such - but please stop blaming U.S. which didn't do jack to hold down the middle east.

 

I don't think thacabbage is wrong here, NewYorker. What you said about the contribution of the Islamic world in the past was certainly true, and very well put, but while they were doing these great things, Christendom was constantly trying to figure out how to destroy that civilization. Time and time again, they assaulted it. They succeeded in Spain, which was a tragedy for the Iberian peninsula and for Europe, in my opinion.

It is admittedly unlikely that peaceful commerce and exchanges of ideas could have developed with that highly advanced Islamic civilization that evolved in Spain, but if somehow that could have played out, there is no telling what benefits Europe could have obtained. They would have been immense.

Another example of religion's destructive forces. The expansionist policies of both resulted in disaster for both civilizations. Europe tottered about for hundreds of years, beset with backwardness, bigotry, and infighting, while the Islamic world became corrupt and busy fighting among themselves over different tenets of their religion, when they weren't fighting Europeans.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

There's now doubt these two civilizations clashed because they were competing with each other.

But Europe gleaned so much in ideas and insights from the Muslim world....the other direction didn't happen. It wasn't because Europe wasn't sharing - it was because Islam really did write off Europe - it was a cultural arrogance of sorts.

 

dude. muslim scholars were obsessed and in love with greek thought. greece=europe. the whole reason why we still have many of the greek literature is because it was preserved in arabic.

and there are countless muslim scholars in the past hundred years who were educated in europe who loved europe.

 

I disagree. The fact is, Europe, at that time, had little to offer. The Islamic world had far more access to the remnants of Greco-Roman civilization than Europe. Oh, I know that sounds silly on the face of it, but it's true. The Church was busy tossing away the advanced civilizations of it's ancestors, while the Islamic world was busy making use of it, and adding elements of their own.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

In the beginning of the golden era this is true...but towards the end Islam looked down on the barbaric europeans.

I'm sorry insane man, you have got to let go of blaming the west for all the woes of the region.

 

did i even mention any negative aspects of the west in that post?

and no i just said that there are scholars today who study in the west. who are in the western mindset. who have fully adopted the scientific revolution and the renaissance and have incorporated these into their works. and they are respected in the muslim community.

the great muslim poet/philosopher of india, iqbal, (who by the way died i believe in the late 40s...so this wasn't in some glory days of islam a thousand years ago) freaking was obsessed with kant/nietzsche/goethe. these people aren't living in some vacuum where the west is evil.

 

Facts can be proved. "The world is round" "1.6km to a mile" Those are facts. Please explain how your statement is fact? Based on what?

And let's not forget as well that the Church did not always dominate Europe.