TFT: Debating a Dictator

[313ghazi]

Did you miss this line?



You are doing the same thing!

This is what he asked;

Firstly, why is the religion which emphasizes compassion and kindness known internationally as the religion of cruelty and violence—its image is that of people’s heads and hands being chopped, of public lashings, women facing honour killings, and so on?”

I answered it. For a long time the people of that religion have been under attack and have had to fight back. That resistance has historically been portrayed as savagery, barbarism and such. The "international" image, actually means the white mans image - which is the image portrayed by the same people attacking those people for their resources.

Secondly, I inquired, “Why is it that the religion of Islam, which emphasizes knowledge, to the point that it is seen as the greatest part and passageway to understanding the Divine, is associated with illiteracy and ignorance? The figures throughout the Muslim world for education are most disappointing and appallingly low.”

Again I answered appropriately. Historically there has been no great disparity between the Muslim nations and other nations in education. For several hundred years now, our nations have been attacked, our education systems dismantled, our teachers executed, our leaders removed and out institutions left unfunded to crumble. In those conditions illiteracy takes hold. Forget everyone else, look at the Muslims of the subcontinent. Pre colonialism the education system for Muslims and hindus was seperate and was based in their temples or madrasas. The British came and destroyed the madrasas, took over the empires and the resources that funded them, caused their financial collapse and also executed thousands of thousands of scholars. They then created an education system based on their language designed to produce serfs that suit that. It wasn't create to educate a nation, just the required workforce of brown sahibs. Thats why our people sunk to illiteracy. The financial resources to run educational institutes were no longer in our control and many of the institutes were destroyed physically or economically.

It takes time to recover from that, but we can't recover from it because we now have remote control colonialisation, where our economies and politics is controlled through sanctions and bombs.

 

[VCheng]

This is what he asked;



I answered it. For a long time the people of that religion have been under attack and have had to fight back. That resistance has historically been portrayed as savagery, barbarism and such. The "international" image, actually means the white mans image - which is the image portrayed by the same people attacking those people for their resources.



Again I answered appropriately. Historically there has been no great disparity between the Muslim nations and other nations in education. For several hundred years now, our nations have been attacked, our education systems dismantled, our teachers executed, our leaders removed and out institutions left unfunded to crumble. In those conditions illiteracy takes hold. Forget everyone else, look at the Muslims of the subcontinent. Pre colonialism the education system for Muslims and hindus was seperate and was based in their temples or madrasas. The British came and destroyed the madrasas, took over the empires and the resources that funded them, caused their financial collapse and also executed thousands of thousands of scholars. They then created an education system based on their language designed to produce serfs that suit that. It wasn't create to educate a nation, just the required workforce of brown sahibs. Thats why our people sunk to illiteracy. The financial resources to run educational institutes were no longer in our control and many of the institutes were destroyed physically or economically.

It takes time to recover from that, but we can't recover from it because we now have remote control colonialisation, where our economies and politics is controlled through sanctions and bombs.

You are making a false distinction between the religion and its followers. A religion is only what is followers actually do, not what they claim. Think about that for a second before proceeding.

 

[313ghazi]

You are making a false distinction between the religion and its followers. A religion is only what is followers actually do, not what they claim. Think about that for a second before proceeding.

No its not - that's completely wrong. If I start kicking the ball, is it still cricket? Of course not. If we all start kicking the ball it's still not cricket. Kicking the ball becomes cricket when we change the rules to legalise kicking the ball.

You're really stretching today in your attempts to malign Islam. Bending logic itself.

 

[VCheng]

No its not - that's completely wrong. If I start kicking the ball, is it still cricket? Of course not. If we all start kicking the ball it's still not cricket. Kicking the ball becomes cricket when we change the rules to legalise kicking the ball.

You're really stretching today in your attempts to malign Islam. Bending logic itself.

Islam is not cricket, is it? Your analogy fails.

 

[313ghazi]

Islam is not cricket, is it? Your analogy fails.

It's an analogy, it doesn't have to be the same. The principle is the same. A set of rules can't be judged by how a subset of people follow them.

 

[VCheng]

It's an analogy, it doesn't have to be the same. The principle is the same. A set of rules can't be judged by how a subset of people follow them.

But when a majority of the people start following them, the rules are changed de facto.

 

[313ghazi]

But when a majority of the people start following them, the rules are changed de facto.

Firstly thier not, the rules only change when they are actually changed and with consensus the new rules are considered the rules.

And secondly I'd love to see the leap you have to make to suggest the majority of muslims are violent illiterates.

 

[VCheng]

And secondly I'd love to see the leap you have to make to suggest the majority of muslims are violent illiterates.

I have no reason to make that jump. Mr. Akbar asked that question to General Zia, not me.