Silat Mubai: Muslim Silat Combatives

[Uke]

We? Are you not an American? Why did they not fight Saddam? Was he not an oppressor of muslims as well? Why do honorable muslims there and elsewhere stand for oppressors and tyrants who pervert the holy Q'uran and allow themselves to be forced to live in poverty and need?

Couldn't the American Indians and the slaves brought from Africa make a case against America for doing a lot worse to them? I mean, more slaves and Indians were killed by American "discoverers" and so-called settlers than all the Arabs and Americans combined in these conflicts.

Again, I'm not trying to condone what any tyrant does. I'm simply pointing out that America doesn't have a moral leg to stand on when it comes to pointing fingers at tyrants. We're not number one because we play fair or avoided doing what those "other" tyrants have done.

Why is it that when a muslim ruler like Mahmoud Ahmadenijad comes to power, with aims of wiping whole civilizations off the face of the planet, honorable and peaceful muslims abide this?

I guess Muslims abide by it for the same reasons that Americans abide by the US government slowly taking away our civil rights everyday: There's a mass feeling like there's nothing that we can do about it. Writing our congressman hasn't helped yet. Voting doesn't help as voters saw in Florida. So maybe, just maybe, those Muslims just like we Americans are hoping things fix themselves? Afterall, there are few if any countries at all in this world where the people don't feel helpless against the system that governs them.

I think, sir, that you are rushing to justify the actions of criminals, terrorists, and insurgents. You say that they are rising up to defend themselves against invaders, but the fact that their actions are now being called a civil war by everyone is a clear indicator that the violence there has far less to do with removing an invading power than it has to do with grabbing power in order to subjugate the opposition.

Isn't this exactly what America is and has been doing? Hasn't this administration been trying to justify its actions in Iraq by claiming WMD's? And then when none were found, this war became about "freeing a subjugated people", and "taking tyrants out of power" so we could impose democracy on them. Since when is the USA in the business of freeing people? But Americans are the ones who rush to justify the governments agenda, because if we don't we are labled unpatriotic. People talk about how their children are at war ... how America's children are at war, so therefore we must support the war. That couldn't be further from the truth. You can support the American troops without having to support a war that makes no sense. But because of the overwhelming sense of patriotic vengence America feels since 9-11, we let our government do damn nearly anything to us and abroad and we don't dare question the motives.

So again, if we as Americans make those kinds of accusations, it would be a case of the pot calling the kettle black. This has little to do with the conversation that Mike Brewer was having with Ustaz Hussein, but I saw some points during their dialogue and I felt like addressing them.

[Ustaz Hussein]

Replies and Clarifications

Hello Gentleman,

Sorry for the delay in response, it was a busy day.

Mr.Brewer, I appreciate your emails and I will answer your concerns here as much as I possibly can. You have concerns about me and my nation and I have concerns about you and yours. With respectful dialogue I'm sure we can at least get to a point where we can understand each other better. God willing, that will benefit both our peoples.

"I believe strongly - very strongly - that a teacher has a higher moral obligation than anyone in the world, because it is the teacher who prepares others to go out and do."

I agree with you totally, Sir. I am not only a Teacher for Combatives but also for English and Computers so I deal with a vast amount of influencable minds on a regular basis. I know my responsibilities. In my capacity as a Combatives instructor I follow very strict Islamic regulations of conduct and that simply means that I obey the Military rules of the Qur'an and the Prophet Muhamad, peace be upon him. I try my best, as any Teacher would, to make sure that my students come away from my classes with a proper education physically, mentally and spiritually. I rarely use vague ideas but rather stick to the clear ones in the Shariah (Islamic Law), nothing more and nothing less.


"My criticism is based on the notion that you are teaching civilians to kill. You are teaching people who have no reason to even know the military aspects of fighting how to use those very methods to kill and injure others - and you are doing it based on a religious and ethnic history and tradition that so loosely defines one's enemies as to make these students potential criminals."

I have no monopoly on this information, Sir. You can walk into any school for Sayoc Kali or Pekiti Tirsia with any Instructor worth his name tag and get similar training you will get with me. Then walk over to Thunder Ranch or Suarez International and get similar training that you would get with me again. The primary difference is that I'm a Muslim and I impart my knowledge to people with a Futawa (chivalry) that is part of my Islamic heritage. As I said before I follow strict regulation of the Shariah when it comes to giving this knowledge and I am duty bound to give it to those who are worthy. I expect loyalty in return, yes, but only because I must ensure that my students learn properly and act properly.

In Islam we do not have the same rigid status for an individual as the US Govt does. A Muslim can be a shoe maker then a Warrior in the blink of an eye. We define a "Mujahid" as a Muslim who fights in the way of Allah, so if you are doing this or training with that intention then you are a Mujahid, not a civilian. From an Islamic perspective none of my Muslim students are civilians as they would willingly give there lives in defence of Islam and the Muslim Nation. A Soldier's duty not a civilian's, so they can be considered Soldiers. They would also give their lives to save your life in a street engagement or the lives of innocent people if they entered an active shooter situation. A Police Officer's duty, so now they can be considered Police Officers for that moment.

As you can see, a "Mujahid" fights in the way of Allah, and the way of Allah is to establish justice in an unjust situation. I hope this makes the issue more clear.

As for the issue of defining an enemy. I don't define what an enemy is, the Shariah does. All who study with me will hear only what is clear in the Shariah.


"You make no effort to impart any loyalty to one's own homeland - America. In my opinion, and I say this without any negative intentions whatsoever, to preach in your classes that immigrant forces like the US in Iraq have no right to be where we are, then you should also point out the parts of the Q'uran that talk about muslims being forbidden to live in non-muslim lands. "

I have never said that one should not have loyalty to one's homeland. I can't make a statement like that, it is against Islam to betray those who give you home and sanctuary. The Qur'an teaches that Islam is above any person's tribe or nation and that is why Muslims from any corner of the world can see each other and say Salam Alaykum, eat together and feel something of community. This does not diminsh one's respect for their place of birth.

The issue of the US forces in Iraq is very different. They are an invasion force. If Muslims sent the same kind of force to the US you would be the first to pick up your guns and start fighting. Why do you expect less from us?

Also, Muslims are not forbidden to live in non-Muslim lands. It is completely permissable as long as they do not collude with or aide that nation against the Muslim Nation. Muslims have lived in non-Muslim lands for centuries. In China, India, South America and many other places. I also am a citizen of Canada and have great respect for my country.


"You (as a member of the greater nation of Islam rather than as a citizen of the United States, since you yourself have said that you see your faith as greater than your nation) should admit to being a foreigner here, and you should also acknowledge that you are training soldiers against this nation by teaching your military arts and your "Islam is greater than Nation" philosophy."

I don't have any "Islam is greater than Nation" philosophy. That is a teaching of the Qur'an itself and I only relay that message as most Muslims who are Islamically inclined will usually do.

From an Islamic perspective, yes, I am training Soldiers as those people who train with me consider themselves Mujahideen. But then again so does any Islamically inclined Muslim who trains any Combative art or attends any tactical training sessions. There is no requirement that they come to me. They can read Qur'an and study Islamic Military teachings then proceed to train at Gunsite or any of America's open information sources for excellent Warrior education. They are still Mujahideen as long as their intention flowed towards that from the onset.


"Why did they not fight Saddam? Was he not an oppressor of muslims as well? Why do honorable muslims there and elsewhere stand for oppressors and tyrants who pervert the holy Q'uran and allow themselves to be forced to live in poverty and need?"

That's an excellent statement, and so very true. I never blame America for our problems, the US govt looks out for itself not us so we should never expect anything from them. There is no reason to look to them for fairness or help. We should look to ourselves and fix our own problems. I have said this from the start and this is the main reason why the Muslim Nation has so many problems, they rely on others rather than themselves. As for Saddam, well, America is directly responsible for supporting the worst and filthiest regimes oppressing Muslims in our lands. Saddam was only one of your govt's good bed fellows. Uzbekistan, Pakistan, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, and all the puppets are just the same as Saddam and even worse, and all happen to be good friends of the US govt. They offer money and weapons to these criminals to oppress our people and when we stand against these regimes they use that money and those weapons to remain in power. How much aid did the dictator in Pakistan get this year from the US? what about the dictator in Jordan? and the dictator in Kuwait where our Muslim sisters can't even vote like human beings?

Those honourable Muslims you mentioned are very hard pressed in the face of all this "aid" and "support" from their govt's friends in Washington. Please keep this in mind when you mention these men and women who work tirelessly risking life and limb to rebuild their societies into correct Islamic societies.

Believe it or not Islam offers men and women equal rights, freedom of speech, freedom of religion and all those things you call human rights and we call revelation. These so called rulers in Muslim countries are not representatives of Islam but rather representatives of Satan. We have to be careful not to confuse what Islam teaches and what corrupt Muslims do.

Mr.Uke, you make some excellent points, Sir. Thank you for seeing both sides in these issues.

Well I hope this explains my position a bit clearer. Best wishes of health to you and your families.

Ustaz Hussein

[BoarSpear]

I would also be interested in an answer to BoarSpear's question earlier - what do you think the response would be to a Christian setting up a school in, say, Iran to teach whomever wanted to learn the ways of the Christian Warrior and the code of chivalry held by the Crusaders? I think it would make an interesting parallel discussion.

actually that wasnt my question, it was Koma1 who asked....i thought it was silly though....i got his point but really.....The muslims cant stop killing other muslims!! like a christian warrior school would survive the night Im quite sure some "True" Muslim would strap on a bomb and visit during the grand opening

[BoarSpear]

As long as religions teach hatred and violence instead of understanding and tolerance of other HUMANS you are all a danger to the world ....how big does your ego have to be that you kill other people because they dare believe differently grow up....If your god NEEDS warriors of flesh and blood to do his bidding, he aint that powerful...god made everyone muslim and non muslim...what gives you the right to second guess him and declare war on the ones different from you? oh yeah, your big ego you think you're special...well you arent, you're murdering savages because actions define people, not thier beliefs or rhetoric.

[BoarSpear]

Go to this link...CAUTION....PORN ON PAGE ....oh wait, advertisement ...PORN ON PAGE....

This is SICK...christians do this as well...but this is why we live in the world we do today...because pigheaded ignorant scum do this to children....may you all burn in whatever hell you believe in

http://www.crazyshit.com/cnt/medias/8788

[BoarSpear]

You're right, every faith does this kind of thing in its more radical wings.

Not ALL of us Taoist, and Buddhist aint real big on indoctrinating their young to HATE other religions or races....hmmmm come to think of it neither do agnostics and athiest

[medic06]

If you can't see that, then please, ask one of the millions of wealthy and free minorities in this country how free they feel, and then ask a Kurd frim Saddam's Iraq how free they felt. As I've said before, the "moral leg" that we are standing on is that we learned more than a century ago that oppression was not the way to govern.

Eeh, try 35 years at the most. Ask the poor if they feel oppressed. . . .

The people we formerly displaced or oppressed are now as free as the rest of us, and can not only rise to all levels of our nation's government, but can benefit from the economy in the same way as anyone else.

"We minorities" are in better shape now but we are far from being as free as "the rest of us".

[BoarSpear]

And Boar,
Touche. Although a Buddhist terrorist group would be something to behold, wouldn't it?

i was sitting here wiping the tears of laughter from my eyes and trying to imagine the methods of attack...I guess its all about location eh? self immolation on an airliner would take a creative approach....perhaps they could eat massive quantities of mexican food before the flight and attempt to contain the gas releases under their robes until a suitable amount was trapped to make a large explosion? perhaps they could ignite it raising their body temperture? or cheating and scraping a rock embedded in the sandal on the metal seat bracket...... They'll probably be called the "Blue Flamers"

[Tom Yum]

self immolation on an airliner would take a creative approach....perhaps they could eat massive quantities of mexican food before the flight and attempt to contain the gas releases under their robes

I hope they don't get ahold of my recipes....

That's it...I'm takin' my recipes off this board so no one will ignite their methane release.

[Ustaz Hussein]

Replies and Clarifications

Hello Gentlemen,

Mr.Brewer:

"Very true. But I doubt if you'd find a Gunsite Instructor, a Sayoc Kali Instructor, or anyone at any of the places you mentioned that would suggest that their true warriors strap on bombs and blow up enemy convoys."

The method of delivery is irrelevant, Sir. That method is acceptable to us. Whether you like it or not makes no difference so there is no point arguing about Martyrdom operations. If Americans don't want to use this method that's their choice.


"I also submit to you that if you asked any of the instructors you cited whether they considered themselves Americans first, the answer would be "yes."

So what? that is an American position and Americans have the right to hold to that position. Why do you expect the entire world to be like you? If you think your Nation is above your religion, that's cool. As Muslims we do not.


"Also, the courses at those places are not driven by the laws of the instructors' religions, by by the laws of the nation in which they live."

Yes, THOSE AMERICAN INSTRUCTORS. I'm not an American nor do I subscribe to your way of thinking. As a Muslim my religion comes first and there is no negotiating that point. I am duty bound by Islam to obey the laws of the land in which I live, as long as those laws do not ask me to do anything that is against Islamic laws. The law in America and Canada forces no person to do anything that is against Islam, so it is quite fine to live in those places.


"Therein lies a major difference, and I think it's enough to make the two approaches (yours and theirs) dissimilar enough as to be incomparable."

They are similar physically but otherwise they have nothing in common. Again, all are free to hold to the position they feel is acceptable to them. If you want the Islamic position, fine.If you want the American one, fine.


"You say that you don't hold this philosophy (Islam over Nation) - that it is the Qur'an's. Doesn't that mean it's the philosophy you live by?"

You misunderstand me, Sir. I did not make this philosophy, it is the teaching of the Qur'an itself and if it is in the Qur'an then I surely accept it. But I did not make it as I understood you were implying.


"No. You can't have it both ways, my friend. First you say that you should look to yourselves to solve your own problems, but you (and I am including you in the group of fighters in Iraq only because you have done so first) use the American presence as much as an excuse an anything else. if you were truly looking to yourself, there would have been some action taken by the oppressed before America showed up."

Mr.Brewer, it is easy for the strong to point a finger at the weak and say why didn't you stand up. The reality is that it is not as easy as it looks under a dictator like Saddam. Many groups and individuals tried to stand up to Saddam and his regime throughout his reign.

"It's conveneient to blame America, but it isn't practical. The fact is, any nation that trades globally is receiving money from a whole lot more than America. You call other governments "puppets." But the House of Saud is more than happy - without any guns to their heads - to take any mnoney that ANYONE throws at them, not just dollars. Why are you not upset at the money given to these countries by Canada? England? China? Japan?"

Sir, don't fool yourself into believing that the US govt is kind hearted and does right by us. The American govt supports corrupt regimes in Muslim lands with financial and military aid. Canada and Japan buy oil from Saudi Arabia but they don't give it weapons and use it as a camp to keep troops which can be used to attack other countries nearby. If Canada was like the US I would never accept citizenship there.


"Are you aware of how many steps America has taken to finding an equitable solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict? To say that we only side with Israel in these issues is plain ignorant."

An "equitable solution" ????

The equitable solution is waiting in the background as US aid, both Military and financial, keep on flowing into Israeli Army coffers. The Muslims in Palestine live in shanty towns without running water, electricity, proper medical facilities and other neccessities for basic standards of living. Children can't even go to school without being harrassed at checkpoints constantly by aggressive occupation Soldiers. That is the situation there Mr.Brewer.

The US attempts at an "equitable solution" is almost always biased towards Israel. As I said, I expect nothing less from them because the American govt is no friend of the Muslim Nation. They are a friend of Israel so it is only natural that they try and get the best deal for their friend. I am by no means saying that America doesn't honestly want to make a settlement between us and the Israelis. What I'm saying is that the settlement will almost surely be in the favour of Israel and the US, not the Muslims. There is no "equitable solution" possible between a people who are under occupation and their occupiers. There is only a solution, whatever it may be.


"You would fault other foreigners for going to Muslim lands and doing what the muslims there refused to do for themselves for so long?"

I don't fault your govt. The US govt is no friend of the Muslim Nation so I expect nothing from them.


"Since you have pointed out that the definitions of what constitutes an enemy are clearly defined by the Shariah, I would be very interested to learn what it has to say."

In the case of Iraq the "enemy" would be the US forces. They are classified as a foreign Military force which entered a Muslim land with the intention to control that land. In that instance the US Military in Iraq is the enemy. If the Muslims there choose to fight the foreign Soldiers, that is their choice. If for some reason they feel that negotiation is better then that is their choice. The leaders of those Muslims will have to make that choice, no one else.

Notice I said "US Forces", not Americans. The Shariah distinguishes clearly between combatants and non-combatants (man la yuqatalu). I still teach Americans and have many American friends, but they are classified as non-combatants and they are against the war. I agreed with getting rid of Saddam and I always fault the false Muslim leaders for not putting an end to people like him, but then again they are like him. Sad situation.


"What do you think the response would be to a Christian setting up a school in, say, Iran to teach whomever wanted to learn the ways of the Christian Warrior and the code of chivalry held by the Crusaders?"

You can't equate Muslim society in Iran which is almost homogenous with American society which is multi cultural and multi religious. What's acceptable in Iran may not be acceptable in other Muslim countries like Malaysia either for the same reasons. I know that there are Sikh religious combat training camps in Canada, yet they are allowed to function. They could probably function in Malaysia (Hindu ones exist) also as it is a multi religious/multi-ethnic country. In Iran it might not be welcome. Islam allows alot of freedoms to minorities aswell. Corrupt un-Islamic rulers seize these freedoms from poeple, not Islam.


Best wishes of health to you and your family.

Ustaz Hussein

[medic06]

Your labels. Not mine.

That's a straight quote from your own post. And I did say we are in much better shape here than anywhere else.

I'm done. . . . posting out of impulse. I'll comment more on this topic when I have some time.

[medic06]

OK, I reread my post and I will admit it sounds as though I'm saying minorities are in bad shape. Truth is we have much much more opportunity in this country than in any other relatively speaking.

[Uke]

There is a huge difference between the blacks and native americans here in this country and the subjugated minorities in Iraq under Saddam. If you can't see that, then please, ask one of the millions of wealthy and free minorities in this country how free they feel, and then ask a Kurd frim Saddam's Iraq how free they felt. As I've said before, the "moral leg" that we are standing on is that we learned more than a century ago that oppression was not the way to govern. The people we formerly displaced or oppressed are now as free as the rest of us, and can not only rise to all levels of our nation's government, but can benefit from the economy in the same way as anyone else.

When did America learn this? The USA might have "outlawed" slavery, in the mid 1800's, but it didn't abolish its practice until nearly the 1900's. And even then the only part of slavery that was abolished was the wageless labor part. The mistreatment found in slavery was then replaced by Jim Crow and the Knights of the Golden Circle, who had recently changed their name to the Mystic Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. The Klan's reign of terror has burned churches, hung children, raped woman, burned innocent men alive for simply being black. That terror lives even today, as a man in Jasper, Texas was beaten and tied to the back of a truck, and dragged until his head popped off. That was in 1998. Blacks were even denied by law a decent education up until the Civil Rights Act of 1964: a century after the Emancipation Proclamation. So let's not pretend that America's dirty little past is ancient history. Lynching remained commonplace up until the mid to late 1960's. And keep in mind, that all of the segregation and mistreatment of Blacks was LEGAL in this country up until the 1960's. Not just accepted, but LEGAL, as in laws were created to make it safe to do so without the fear of persecution.

I agree with Mike that today's(1968-2006) minorities in the USA have more rights and opportunities than any place else. But not before mass protests, marches and riots made the global community cast a judgemental eye on how America treated its own citizens. That is when America abolished Jim Crow, segregation and misegenation laws. Not before.

America didn't abolish slavery for any moral reasons. The Civil War was fought because the South wasn't willing to end a tradition of "no overhead" that made it impossible for the North to compete with them. The North had factories instead of plantations, and had winters that made agricultural competition with the south impossible as well. The Civil War was a war fought because the states who were unwilling to part with century old traditions wanted to part with the states that demanded that they did. It only happened because slavery no longer served the cause of capitalist expansion. And while America may not have a monopoly on slavery, its practice of cruelty and and its methods of terror and hate rival anything done in the last 1000 years.

The war objectives were supposedly about Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempts to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups. Those are the reasons that Bush himself gave. But where are the weapons? If we haven't found any weapons, how do we justify the first two objectives? It wasn't based on intelligence, and how they got around that was calling it a "pre-emptive strike".

I'm not one of those guys who needs to blame this war solely on oil. It is very much about oil, but its also about defending the worth of the dollar. The dollar's current worth and strength is supported by OPEC, and OPEC's current requirement that all OPEC oil sales to any nation be made in dollars. This little "deal" is now in danger of being thrown out because some OPEC countries are expressing that they want OPEC to allow OPEC oil sales to be paid for in euros.

I understand that the move was in the American's best interest, being that we only use the dollar and all. But tell the truth to the people: We had a deal and now these OPEC guys are trying to renege and that would cripple our economy. Bringing these other issues like "freeing a subjugated people" into it is just an attempt to seem altruistic when in the entire history of our nation, we've been anything but.

Loving this country and turning a blind eye to the truth are two very different things. I love this country, but its sorted history has chopped its own moral legs out from underneath itself. Are the other countries f'd up? YES. Are they behind us in terms of economics and military? Most, YES. Have we avoided making the same mistakes that they have? Not by a longshot.

[cam427]

I am pretty surprised by the views of Mr Hussein. It seems obvious from the points made by mike that he is prepared to ignore things when it suits him and enjoy life in a free country while working against the very things that made it free. If he is so keen on living by islamic law then surely he should be living in Iran which is ruled by clerics and shariah law.

I look forward to his response to mikes questions/statements. I wonder if he will leave Canada now

In answer to Mikes question, I had a friend who was sent to prison in Iran for preaching christianity.

Alternatively, I also have muslim friends who are not fundamentalists. Fundamentalists of any religion are dangerous and I think that the views on this thread should be veiwed as fundamentalist and not those of the majority of muslims (I hope). Hopefully other muslims will join the thread and we can get different viewpoints.

[medic06]

I said the people "we" displaced to refer to the American Indians and slaves brought over by the early settlers on this continent. You also used those terms first, so I thought it best for the purposes of communication to stay with your own terminology.

You think America has a monopoly on slavery? No, my friend, we outlawed that in the mid 1800's. Look at China, Thailand, Philippines, Korea, Africa and about a hundred other places still making fortune upon fortune in human trafficking. No, in this country, we provide even homeless kids like me a chance to rise up from our "station" in life and remake ourselves. In this country, it doesn't matter if you're Asian, Black, Mexican, or European (or Native American, for that matter), you can make a fortune and live any life you choose doing anything from simply being funny on TV to inventing new products to simply investing in the creations of others. Failing that, you can just work hard for it. And you know what else? If you choose not to work, and you'd rather sit around crapping out babies all day enjoying your poverty, we've got programs for that too. Yep, all the people who have worked and made something of themselves will pay for your food stamps, your unemployment, your tax relief, your public schools with the free breakfasts and lunches and bi-lingual teachers, your public transportation, and even your local news so you know enough about what's going on to continue to vote for more relief because you aren't willing to pick yourself up and make a life on your own.

And as far as not knowing how the world works? You're right. I don't. I'm full of questions about how this world works. Chief among them is how people who would willingly line up and take everything this country has to give would then turn and dump all over it talking about how unfair it is to be poor here. Which brings me to my questions for Mr. Ustaz.

You skillfully dodged every question I asked. Regarding the Christian school in Iran? Come on. You yourself said that Muslims are tolerant of non-muslims. Or are you saying that we are so much more tolerant that there's just no comparison. Either way it paints a pretty unsavory picture of Islam is you would take it upon yourself to go into a foreign land and undertake an activity that you KNOW would be forbidden in your home if undertaken by another.



When we stood up as a nation and won our freedom from our then-oppressors, we were a fledgling nation without so much as a common government, and we fought against the mightiest empire the world had yet seen. We were the weak, and they were as strong a force as this planet had yet known. looking at my nation's own history, it is not easy at all, as you have insinuated. We have lived those lessons, and because we have lived them, we know what can be done in the face of such odds.



Saudi has asked us there, both explicitly and implicitly. And don't fool yourself, either. A quick search on Google reveals that some 75% of Canada's arms sales tothe third world go directly to the middle east and in 2002, the total number of sales there ran nearly $674 million dollars - in that year alone. For some picture as to what that means, that number translates to roughly 30% of the total military exports from Canada to the entire world. So of a list of 180 nations, the people you say Canada doesn't sell arms to received nearly a third of Canada's overall weapons and military exports. Those numbers were taken from Sources: DFAIT and International Trade Canada, Statistics Canada, in case you'd like to look them up. That's correct - Canadian sources - not some American source trying to beef up the numbers. Further, the website controlarms.org reports that the nations of the middle east are spending nearly 40 times as much on buying arms than on developing social programs and researching things like AIDS. Where does the blame fall with respect to them? Why is America's fault for selling and not their fault for buying? Are they blameless because they are Muslim? And as far as Canada failing to place troops in muslim lands? Canada's military is currently deployed in Afghanistan, Central Asia, the Balkans, Bosnia and elsewhere. Doesn't that count? Wait. I just re-read your post. You're right. They don't "give" weapons to these countries - they sell weapons. One third of all their total exports, to be exact. And when they've sold all they care to sell, the leaders in these sacred Muslim lands go scrambling to buy more from whomever will sell them. To the tune of billions and billions that could be spent on education, social reform, and any number of charitable, muslim activities.

Next, you slipped this punch.



Then explain to me why it is that so many civilians, both American and other - and so many muslims civilians in Iraq - have been shown on television falling under the knife of some masked executioner who revels in beheading them? Where is the public outcry? If this is so very against what Islam stands for, why are more muslims not fighting to be rid of these infidels who are not invaders, but who live among the pure and righteous, using their teachings to justify evil?

Let me ask just one more question this post. Would you be offended, or would you feel it wrong if your home was broken into, and you were taken prisoner by American forces? By your own logic and statements, you stand against the American military and you consider them your enemy. By your statements, you consider it the duty of other muslims to fight them in any way necessary - including sending 13 year olds with bombs into convoys. By your statements, Islam is a nation above one's country of citizenship, and so you stand with those freedom fighters who are fighting the Americans abroad. Yet somehow, I get the distinct impression that you are content to enjoy your relative peace and freedom in North America, and would be more than just a little offended if you were taken into custody as a combatant.

Can you not see how I might understand the statements you've made as quite contradictory? And can you see that your own beliefs about the country in which you live (and which is so different from the US that you consider "enemy") are not based in facts, but in the preconceived image of what you would like to be true? The numbers fly in the face of the statements you've held to be true, and you've still failed to place any blame for these sales (by anyone, including Canada) on the heads of your own Muslim leaders. How would so much money change hands in sales if there were no buyer on the other end? So far, I see as much finger pointing from you as I see you accusing others of. Everyone is responsible except the muslims? Is that it?

I regret to say that none of my original fears have been laid to rest. In fact, many have ben amplified. What I have taken away from our discussion thus far is that I cannot compare anything western to anything muslim, even if the actions on either side are parallel. I cannot expect muslims to stand up in the same way that christians did in our own history. I cannot expect you to research the country of your citizenship (one to which you claimed you'd never accept citizenship if they did the very things I showed you they are doing each and every day) before casting statements about my country. I cannot expect you to explain the aspects of your faith - such as how the Shariah defines "enemy" (as I doubt seriously it defines it as "The US in Iraq" as you did), but I can expect you to teach it and assure the rest of us that it is righteous. And I cannot expect you to see that there is indeed a difference between teaching children to blow themselves up and an instructor teaching a firearms course inaccordance with the laws of the land. My friend, I've come away with more questions and concerns than when we started this. I'd love clarification, if you can give it.

............. . . . . . .