Iranian President - 1979 Hostage Taker?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Az


I've never claimed that all muslims or even most of them, are arabs, or are followers of arab culture. I've said that many people who were not arabs originally, became arabs, as a consequence of the muslim explosion.

I don't really see how they did though- unless you mean something like the offspring of Arab masters and non-Arab slave women, because Islam held that a man could not 'own' his own children.

If you mean identified with Arab culture or Arabs then that would be true only up to a point (as the Qu'ran was in Arabic and so the universal religion remained as a transmitter of some Arabic ideals at a certain point in time) but Iran was never 'Arabized' nor even were the Berbers- many of whom today still do not speak or read or write in Arabic and yet are Muslims.

[Az]

I wasn't talking about Iran. I was talking people in the middle east in General. let us establish first that the vast majority of people in: Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, Libya, Iraq ( somewhat less vast ), Tunisia, Algeria, Morocco ( again, somewhat less vast) consider themselves arabs.

Let us also establish that their genetical heritage doesn't really come mostly from the Arabian peninsula.

There are black arabs in Sudan, and there are pale arabs, well, in a lot of places.

How did this happen? How do descendants of thousands of tribes noone remembers now call themselves by the names of their ancestors' conquerors? It's the way of the world.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Az


How did this happen? How do descendants of thousands of tribes noone remembers now call themselves by the names of their ancestors' conquerors? It's the way of the world.

Well even ethnic Chinese in Singapore speak better accented English than some Britons, and have English names too. Same goes for First Nation artists such as Bill Reid in Canada, or Koori statesman such as David Unaipon in Australia.

Having names derived from Arabic sources doesn't make you an Arab- as having names from ancient Iranian sources doesn't make Pakistanis, Indians, Uzbeks or Afghans Iranian.

Firdaus and Pervez as names are found all over the Near East and Central Asia, for instance. One of my earliest sets of neighbours I remember from growing up were ethnic Kashmiri refugees from Tanzania- the sons and daughters spoke English, Swahili and Farsi and Arabic, had a mixture of Iranian and Arabic names, had never been to Iran, India, Pakistan or the Middle East and were British citizens.

Oh and:

the vast majority of people in: Egypt consider themselves arabs.

Cairo Press Review

" President Mubarak inaugurates Armed Forces' International Medical Centre
*Centre offers high level services to Egyptians, Arabs, foreigners"

http://www.sis.gov.eg/pressrev/html/pv051024.htm

Given that the 'Arab World' supposedly encompasses everything from Kuwait to Mauretania to black Africans in southern Sudan, it's taking propaganda a bit at face value to assume that simply because they have Arab names they are somehow 'Arab' in outlook or culture.


Even that old villain the Mufti of Jerusalem Amin al Husseini could have passed for Caucasian- as could many of Morocco's inhabitants. It's not uncommon even now to see blue eyed blond haired children in Morocco's souks and medinahs- all with good 'Arab' names, of course.

[DarkCloud]

The greatest intellectual achievements of the Moslem world have traditionally originated in the Arab world. For example, Naguib Mahfouz, an egyptian, won the nobel prize for literature- and the premeir islamic university is at Al-Azhar in Cairo. Students from all over come there to be educated. Qom is a much more regional thing- and its for many less moslems. Only for shiites...

Then of course, the founder of the Moslem brotherhood was an arab- the first allegedly islamist political organization. (and no, I'm not forgeting the first political party based around islamist ideology- "jamat-i-islami" in pakistan- but this is the first islamist org.)

Then there's Said Zaghlul, the egyptian nationalist with his Wafd party.

And honestly- Egyptians are genetically arabs. Some may claim a longer-history relationship to the Old Kingdom, but they were part of the Arab League, and attempted to found an arab union with their 'genetic brothers in Syria' and frankly ARE arabs.

--
and all moslems look to the arab world for 'pure islam.' Indeed, how can they not when they must visit mecca once in their lifetimes.

Arabs commonly insult the Indonesian moslems for following an unorthodox form that is syncretic with paganistic rituals.

Also, the majority of moslems are Sunni. The only shiite nations are as follows:

Iran, Azerbaijan, Tajikistan (or one of hte other -stans), Iraq (nowadays), Syria (if you count the Alawites as ****tes)

All other moslems are mostly Sunni.
-
As a list of arab states-
pretty much all the maghreb... then most of hte middle east; excepting Turkey.
Not Iran, Pakistan or anything to the east of them.

Yes, the non-arab moslems may outnumber the arabs, but they look to the middle east for guidance and the middle east is their origin.

And honestly- you give the BERBERS as example of non-assimilation... by g-d. there are hardly any berbers around. They only survived by hiding in the mountains for hundreds of years. They are not a factor in any argument that states that arabs aren't dominant.

A final point is this- all moslems must learn arabic to read the quran. to have it translated is to lose its value. If that wouldn't prove that arabs are the center of islam- I don't know what is.

They hold the basic tools to interpretation of scripture- when was the last time you heard a moslem stating that he gets his theology from an Indonesian, a malaysian, a pakistani (from the 'land of the pure' no less), an indian, etc.?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by DarkCloud
The greatest intellectual achievements of the Moslem world have traditionally originated in the Arab world.

Except those that didn't- like Muslim Iranian mathematics, astronomy and medicine, Muslim Turkish architecture and illuminated manuscripts, Muslim Moghul architecture and illuminated manuscripts and and metalworking and astronomy, the Muslim Iranian Firdaussi's 'Shahnama' in Middle Farsi, the poetry of Turco-Iranian Jalal al Din Rumi, the poetry of Omar Khayyam, the observatory of Ulugh Begh et cetera, et cetera.


As for Egyptians being 'genetically' Arabs, that's as bizarre and meaningless as saying Hassan II of Morocco was 'genetically' Arab. Yes he had Arab ancestry, but he also had Berber ancestry and a black African grandmother.

One look at Anwar Sadat's physiognomy would convince any doubter that he was considerably less 'Arab' than any member of the house of Saud.


The Egyptian language isn't related to Arabic, it's related to Berber- and as for there being hardly any Berbers around- when were you last in Morocco ?

The notion that all Muslims look to the Arab world for 'pure Islam' is equally odd, given that you haven't supplied a definition of what pure Islam is, and just seem to ignore centuries of non-Arab Islamic states doing their own thing without checking in with nominal Arab quality controllers.

Can't say as I recall the Ottomans, Timurids, Moghuls or Safavids asking for an Arab stamp of authenticity for their brand of Islam.

[Az]

I tried to post the following yesterday a dosen times and I've failed. Trying again.

[quote]
Having names derived from Arabic sources doesn't make you an Arab- as having names from ancient Iranian sources doesn't make Pakistanis, Indians, Uzbeks or Afghans Iranian.

Firdaus and Pervez as names are found all over the Near East and Central Asia, for instance. One of my earliest sets of neighbours I remember from growing up were ethnic Kashmiri refugees from Tanzania- the sons and daughters spoke English, Swahili and Farsi and Arabic, had a mixture of Iranian and Arabic names, had never been to Iran, India, Pakistan or the Middle East and were British citizens.
[/q]
A case of immigrants and shifting identities. This is not the case of most populations in the world, after all.

Even that old villain the Mufti of Jerusalem Amin al Husseini could have passed for Caucasian- as could many of Morocco's inhabitants. It's not uncommon even now to see blue eyed blond haired children in Morocco's souks and medinahs- all with good 'Arab' names, of course.

Making my point for me there, mate. . The fact that they look like aryan posterboys don't mean that they're not arab. I wonder if the Mufti considered himself, or was considered an arab by others ( The answer is 'yes, duh').

But caucasian isn't the proper word - It's not much of a surprise that the people of coastal northen africa, and of the middle east look caucasian - after all, they ARE caucasian. 'European' is more suitable, I guess.

Well even ethnic Chinese in Singapore speak better accented English than some Britons, and have English names too. Same goes for First Nation artists such as Bill Reid in Canada, or Koori statesman such as David Unaipon in Australia.

Again, this isn't about what you speak, or about your name. It's more about what you consider yourself, and how are you considered by others.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Az

Making my point for me there, mate. . The fact that they look like aryan posterboys don't mean that they're not arab. I wonder if the Mufti considered himself, or was considered an arab by others ( The answer is 'yes, duh').

In which case the definition of Arab becomes so loose and vague as to be meaningless. Is it someone who speaks Arabic ?

Someone who is born to at least one parent of 'Arab' descent ? Someone adopted by Arabs ? Someone born in an 'Arab' country ?

Given the comings and goings of invaders, slaves, children born to slaves and their owners, mass migrations all over North Africa and the Middle East and the Near East good luck finding anyone who is 'pure' anything.

I'd say if anything identifying as Arab these days is much more about a geopolitical stance than anything genetic or ethnic. There are several internet forums where there are very heated debates between Arabs and Egyptians about who or what is an Arab- with many Egyptians vociferously denying they're Arabs.

If some poor benighted poverty stricken dust bowl in North Africa wants to say it's Arab when its inhabitants are mostly Nilo-Saharan, Berbers, or Touareg- let it. It's all about the petro dollars at heart.

[Ramo]

And honestly- Egyptians are genetically arabs. Some may claim a longer-history relationship to the Old Kingdom, but they were part of the Arab League, and attempted to found an arab union with their 'genetic brothers in Syria' and frankly ARE arabs.

It's a mistake to conflate language (and by proxy, nationality) with race. If that were so, Swedes would be genetically closer to Gujaratis than Finns, and Catalans would be genetically closer to Persians than Basques.

A final point is this- all moslems must learn arabic to read the quran. to have it translated is to lose its value.

No one believes that outside of fundies (and perhaps some Arab nationalists)...

[Az]

....

In which case the definition of Arab becomes so loose and vague as to be meaningless. Is it someone who speaks Arabic ?

Someone who is born to at least one parent of 'Arab' descent ? Someone adopted by Arabs ? Someone born in an 'Arab' country ?

.......

As I've said, trying to define a nationality is meaningless:

It's about how you percieve yourself, and how others percieve you. Trying to define it in logical terms is flawed, since it's based not on definitions, but on emotions. How would one define one's adopted family for example?

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Az

As I've said, trying to define a nationality is meaningless:

I wish you'd said it a lot earlier before we both started to define it.....


It's funny but I was just reminded of an illustration of a scroll of the Book of Esther dating from 1700, produced in or around the area of modern day Lebanon.

It's decorated all over with Chinese miniatures.

[Az]

I wish you'd said it a lot earlier before we both started to define it.....

Now now, I never tried to define nationality. My claim is that most people in the Middle east (bar the Persians, the kurds, and other smaller peoples, like Israelis ) consider themselves arab. 'tis a fact. I never claimed them to make any sense.

In fact, I feel very close to the position of the Canaanite movement ( if you are familiar with them), and in fact I feel that our society has a certain obligation to push the middle east into a direction some of the canaanites have envisioned.

[Az]

btw... time for a new signature.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Yup, just look at what was done to the Iriquois confederacy by other revolutionaries, or to those Colonists who remained loyal to the crown.

Yes, stuff happens in revolutions.

The American revolution was a virtual civil war - with atrocities both ways. And many (most?) of the notable founding fathers called for restraint. The question here is not that Iranian revolutionaries killed or exiled supporters of the Shah - yes, that kind of sh*t happens in revolutions - its that A. They crushed fellow revolutionaries, who werent as extreme - we're talking more Robespierre, or Lenin, not Madison. and B. The guy who is NOW becoming president is one of the chief security security thugs. Like Dzerzhinski (sp?) becoming head of the USSR.

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark



The American revolution was a virtual civil war - with atrocities both ways. And many (most?) of the notable founding fathers called for restraint. The question here is not that Iranian revolutionaries killed or exiled supporters of the Shah - yes, that kind of sh*t happens in revolutions - its that A. They crushed fellow revolutionaries, who werent as extreme - we're talking more Robespierre, or Lenin, not Madison. and B. The guy who is NOW becoming president is one of the chief security security thugs. Like Dzerzhinski (sp?) becoming head of the USSR.

Or maybe its like some of the lesser known heads of internal security taking over, like, say, the guy after Beria?

But please, do state the worst possible case out of thin air. Cause I guess your optimism only applies to those people with world views you accept. Everyone esle must be definition be TEH EVIL.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap

Or maybe its like some of the lesser known heads of internal security taking over, like, say, the guy after Beria?

Malenkov? he was a security guy? Youre suggesting we should trust the new Prez of Iran as much as we trusted Malenkov? Or that he will fall as quickly?

But please, do state the worst possible case out of thin air. Cause I guess your optimism only applies to those people with world views you accept. Everyone esle must be definition be TEH EVIL.

Of couse I said no such thing. I merely stated some facts. If you have basis for optimism in this case Id like to hear it. Actually I AM optimistic. As I said earlier, i think on the other thread, i think this adds clarity to the situation.