Don't Press the "Like" Button in Saudi Arabia

[n david]

Originally Posted by shazeep

1) ok well we've done this before, and i can direct you to pages of Muslim condemnation that will not appear in most news sources, so...

1.a I find it incredibly hard to believe that neither the evening news nor this administration would help clerics or imams get the message out. They do all they can to try to claim iSIS/iSIL isn't really islamic.

1.b If they wanted the message to get out, they could. People buy ads in USA Today, NYT and other publications all the time. They could also schedule a news conference. There are ways to get the message out. And perhaps a few from here in the US will denounce what's happening. But the overwhelming majority are silent. Their silence is deafening.

Originally Posted by shazeep

2) yes, my point is that we lack the cultural perspective to comment on matters on the other side of the planet, that do not affect us. I am a Christian, and so will never go to KSA, simply because Fools rush in.

So beating someone for liking a Facebook page is okay, because it's their culture? And we should look the other way when women are beaten and killed ... because, it's just their culture? Should we turn a blind eye and allow an entire nation go to hell because, it's their culture?

That kind of thinking would be hilarious, if it wasn't so sad.

Originally Posted by shazeep

3) that it is where our focus might be better placed, as what fruit can the OP here possibly reveal.

So what do you want to talk about with it?

[shazeep]

1) as i said, i'm pretty sure that i could find you 100 condemnations of IS from Muslims before sundown, but our media is completely corrupted now, and i find your pov there naive, wadr. You won't hear them on Fox. IS is about as Islamic as you are. The US created IS, in all likelyhood; with the rationale that we were compelled--for some unfathomable reason--to resist/combat Assad. How that might be any of our business is beyond me. The justification that "they" can always buy an ad in like the NY Times or something? is descriptive of the situation, to say the least, and i am doubtful that "they" could accomplish even this, although that might be marginally possible.

2) We've done this one before too, it is just the hate-refrain now--and Muslim's feet still work just as well as yours--they can leave or rise up anytime they like. You/we are not responsible in these matters, and so "look the other way" and "turn a blind eye," which are much better applied to our lack of coverage of the abundant Muslim outrage at IS, are now mis-applied for nefarious ends. You had to pull your eye out of your head, so to speak, to even discover that some Muslim on the other side of the planet "liked" a Christian whatever. A believer's course in this matter would plainly be to support him, rather than throw rocks, at least in this manner--on a forum where you are sure to be among peers, safe in a harbor, so to speak. Like a punk, wadr. Perhaps you could take out an ad in a KSA newspaper

and so please grasp that i am not interested in your sideways condemnations of my "thinking," either, wadr. Don't you think the issues here are inflammatory enough? After all, that was the point of the OP was it not?

3) i don't, but the point, which you seem to steadfastly wish to deflect from, is that there are no whorehouses in KSA; there are no exotic dance clubs. I doubt that there is even an Arabic word for "pimp." We have ample testimony that even Christians are tolerated there, as long as they are not total idiots. Why, i cannot fathom, as it is just asking for trouble to mix cultures. Regardless, the point is that there are many, many areas in which a Christian and a Muslim might agree, even where KSA is concerned, yet disagreement is dutifully highlighted with regularity here, and the citizens of other countries' sensibilities offended, on purpose, for sport.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

What a joke. The stain of Islam must be cleansed from the earth or they need to get into this century.

[n david]

Originally Posted by shazeep

1) as i said, i'm pretty sure that i could find you 100 condemnations of IS from Muslims before sundown, but our media is completely corrupted now, and i find your pov there naive, wadr. You won't hear them on Fox. IS is about as Islamic as you are. The US created IS, in all likelyhood; with the rationale that we were compelled--for some unfathomable reason--to resist/combat Assad. How that might be any of our business is beyond me. The justification that "they" can always buy an ad in like the NY Times or something? is descriptive of the situation, to say the least, and i am doubtful that "they" could accomplish even this, although that might be marginally possible.

1.a Oh, the US created iSIS? You remember that bit about Al Gore creating the internet? And some guy on FB swears he saw Elvis at the mall last weekend.

1.b How hard can it be to buy an ad? It's pretty simple, really. They write a statement, a condemnation against iSIS; then, they take money and give it to the publication in which they wish to publish said statement/condemnation. Voila!

1.c I'm in a dilemma over whether to agree whether our media is completely corrupt or not. On one hand, I agree, because of the liberalism of the press. On the other hand, you suggest that by being corrupt, they paint islam in a bad way -- I disagree. The media spins any story it can to help paint islam in a positive or neutral way. I would bet the farm (if I owned one) that the media would LOVE to have 100 muslim clerics/imams go on the air and condemn these so-called islamic extremists. Here's the problem, while many would privately condemn iSIS, few would do so publicly.

It's like relationship with our friends, the Saudi's and the Paki's. Privately, Pakistan agrees and allows routine drone attacks by the US government. Publicly, however, they condemn the attacks. They do so in order to appease their muslim citizenry. Same thing with the Saudi's. What's spoken in private versus public is different and skewed to appease the masses.

Likewise, few, if any, major muslim clerics/imams will comment publicly, though perhaps they will privily.

Originally Posted by shazeep

2) We've done this one before too, it is just the hate-refrain now--and Muslim's feet still work just as well as yours--they can leave or rise up anytime they like. You/we are not responsible in these matters, and so "look the other way" and "turn a blind eye," which are much better applied to our lack of coverage of the abundant Muslim outrage at IS, are now mis-applied for nefarious ends. You had to pull your eye out of your head, so to speak, to even discover that some Muslim on the other side of the planet "liked" a Christian whatever. A believer's course in this matter would plainly be to support him, rather than throw rocks, at least in this manner--on a forum where you are sure to be among peers, safe in a harbor, so to speak. Like a punk, wadr. Perhaps you could take out an ad in a KSA newspaper

and so please grasp that i am not interested in your sideways condemnations of my "thinking," either, wadr. Don't you think the issues here are inflammatory enough? After all, that was the point of the OP was it not?

2.a I get it. These muslims in SA should just go to hell, right? I mean, the few who dare try to convert from islam should simply accept their fate. After all, Paul said "to die is gain." Amiright?! Besides, it bums me out thinking about people in other countries being oppressed. I'm depressed enough reading local and national news, simply eliminating thought of what's happening internationally would alleviate a bit of that.

2.b Punk. Uhm, minor issue though. Unlike here in America, one cannot simply buy an ad in a KSA newspaper which would support the blogger and condemn the government for its intolerance of Christianity. It would be great if one could though.

2.c I don't mean to attack you personally. Apologies if you felt I did.

Originally Posted by shazeep

3) i don't, but the point, which you seem to steadfastly wish to deflect from, is that there are no whorehouses in KSA; there are no exotic dance clubs. I doubt that there is even an Arabic word for "pimp." We have ample testimony that even Christians are tolerated there, as long as they are not total idiots. Why, i cannot fathom, as it is just asking for trouble to mix cultures. Regardless, the point is that there are many, many areas in which a Christian and a Muslim might agree, even where KSA is concerned, yet disagreement is dutifully highlighted with regularity here, and the citizens of other countries' sensibilities offended, on purpose, for sport.

3.a Yay for SA not having whorehouses. But they still beat women there, they still flog or sentence to death people who "like" a Facebook page or make fun of the false prophet or dare to leave islam. But hooray for not having whores or exotic clubs.

3.b The "ample testimony" shows that Christianity is ONLY tolerated within the confines of either an Embassy or expat compound. "Ample testimony" shows that one cannot live his/her faith amongst the public.

[Rudy]

And we {USA} give them aid.

[shazeep]

no kidding. talk about a wealth transfer--buy their oil, and sell all of our natgas to foreign markets, and send all of these countries "aid" what is wrong with this picture.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Rudy

And we {USA} give them aid.

It's called nation building. All we are getting is blowback.

[shazeep]

Originally Posted by n david

1.b How hard can it be to buy an ad? It's pretty simple, really. They write a statement, a condemnation against iSIS; then, they take money and give it to the publication in which they wish to publish said statement/condemnation. Voila!

see that this is not necessary, or even practical, as 1) there is no "they" responsible for this, unless it be the US gov, printing an apology, and 2) i have read and seen 100 condemnations like you describe already; they just do not appear in our media, as that would be conciliatory, and media is designed for strife.

[shazeep]

"It's like relationship with our friends, the Saudi's and the Paki's. Privately, Pakistan agrees and allows routine drone attacks by the US government. Publicly, however, they condemn the attacks. They do so in order to appease their muslim citizenry. Same thing with the Saudi's. What's spoken in private versus public is different and skewed to appease the masses."

there you go. trust that they learned from the masters.

[shazeep]

"Likewise, few, if any, major muslim clerics/imams will comment publicly, though perhaps they will privily."

see above, and understand that you are being intentionally misled and misinformed.