HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: faris@sarcasm.trl.OZ.AU (Aziz Faris)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
Subject: Re: To Aziz Faris
Date: 20 Dec 92 21:47:00 GMT
Reply-To: a.Faris@trl.oz.au
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne,Australia

In article <1go4qdINNg34@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, cl056@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Hamaza H. Salah) writes:
|> 
|>  Stand-up comedian, barabaric, religious hypocrate, blind, illetrate,
|>  lack historical knowledge, dont know what, racist nut, anti-semetic,...
|>  How about fundamintalist, radical, fanatic, mechanical minded, ... ???
|> 
|>  That is what they call "character assisnation."  It's ok I can handle
|>  it.
|> 
|>  Aziz is asking for some proofs that show that some verses in the Quran are
|>  true.  Well, you just made my day.  Read the following verses and compare
|>  them to your previous postings.  In particular, the ones to me and that
|>  talk about Islam:
|> 
|>  AlBaqarah 120. "And the Jews will not be pleased with you, nor the
|>  Christians until you follow their religion."
|> 
|>  AlBaqarah 109. "Many of the followers of the Book wish that they could
|>  turn you back into unbelievers after your faith, out of envy from
|>  themselves."
|> 
|>  Al-i-Imran 69. "A party of the followers of the Book desire that they
|>  should lead you astray, and they lead not astray but themselves, and
|>  they do not perceive."
|> 
|> 
|> *Thanks* to Aziz and others for making these verses so evident and clear
|> to all muslims!!
|> 

Dear Hamaza:

Let me start by saying that the statements above do not apply here. I and all
Christians do not want you to abandon Islam and do not desire you to go hell
for not having faith. In one of your posts, you challenged Ibaa to give you
proof that the religious books do not offer accurate historical evidences and
have contradictions with archaeological findings. I gave you examples as any
well read person could have given regardless of his faith. However, those
archaeological evidences are not the works of Jews and Christians and infact
contradict those religions also. I suggest that you read about the ancient
civilisations and see for youself. As a Christian, I am allowed to read about
ancient people and their religious beleifs and formulate my own opinion. The
fact that archaeology contradicts my religion does not infringe on my moral
and ethical standards and does not mean that I do not consider you as my equal.

Please note that ignoring those facts is also against Islam and all other
religions as I understand. I could go on tell you more stories, however, I
prefer you read on your own and see for yourself as Islam teaches you to
fulfill your part of Ijtihad.

Hamaza, as a Christian I desire to have the same right as you do in the country
of my birth. I do not desire to destroy your faith as you seem to think. We
have come along way and learned alot and I hope not to judge each other based
on personal faith and conviction. My postings have always made that point and
you continue to ignore them.

A.Faris
From: abde@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Tamer A. Abdelgawad)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
Subject: Re: Three troubling questions about Islam
Summary: Can't we negotiate?
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:28:43 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <nabeel.724043862@oracle.sce.carleton.ca> nabeel@sce.carleton.ca (Bulbul) writes:
>
>   You are lost, Tamer. "al'A.kirah" does not mean the hereafter here. The
>original meaning of "'A.kirah" is the opposite of "'OlA" even when it
>refers to the hereafter. In the context above it means "the latter." Your
>interpretation fails to explain verse 8, "wa'in ^odtom ^odnA."
>

Sorry for taking so long to respond.
I agree.  Does the verse however mean that if Israel behaves, and Jerusalem
is internationalized (i.e. the promise to 'enter the mosque' is fulfilled),
that the second promise is fulfilled?

Remember my original point:  The Quran does not tell us to exterminate Israel.
This should not be taken to mean:  Let Israel do what it wants in the middle
east.  The current Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, and the 
anexation of Jerusalem and the Golan are unacceptable to almost any Muslim or
Arab.  But can't we negotiate instead of fight?

Tamer Abdelgawad
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic,soc.culture.bangladesh,soc.culture.indian,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.pakistan,soc.culture.turkish,talk.r
From: faris@sarcasm.trl.OZ.AU (Aziz Faris)
Subject: Re: The Meanning of Deen
Reply-To: a.Faris@trl.oz.au 
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne,Australia
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 20:57:37 GMT

In article <1992Dec7.195828.5706@dsg.cs.tcd.ie>, ahmed@dsg.cs.tcd.ie (Ahmed El-Habbash) writes:
|> 
|> I don't think that christianity and judaism allow secularism, but 
|> those who claim that they follow these religions, are those who
|> introduced secularism. The same happened also in the some countries that
|> claim that they are Muslim, they follow secular systems.

Christianity does allow secularism, infact, Jesus himself said that give what
is due to Cesar and give what is due to God. It is clear that religious beleif
and state affairs at times are at odds that prompted that statement.

However, Judaism by definition does not allow secularism. Israel has become
secular primarily to allow a form of democracy.

|> 
|> We cannot say that Christianity and Judaism allow secularism , while
|> Islam doesn't. There is no such a law that permits introducing other
|> laws which may contradict with it.

The statement above is only true for Judaism and Islam, both do not permit any
law to override the laws of the religion. Christian teaching is not concerend
with interpreting laws and making sure people follow them. Chrstianity is 
essentially a code of ethics not a collection of strict laws.

A.Faris
From: abde@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Tamer A. Abdelgawad)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
Subject: Re: 'Riba' and Interest (was: Re: Civilization bandwagon)
Keywords: Riba, interest, Islam, economics
Date: 14 Dec 92 19:18:36 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <1992Dec11.205255.7555@cbfsb.cb.att.com> mmdh@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (Mazen Mokhtar) writes:
>
>  What you are saying is correct and makes sense. This does not change the
>fact that Islam made the interest forbidden. I am not denying the advantages
>of charging it, I am only suggesting that the disadvantages are greater. More
>important is that it is forbidden whether or not it is advantageous.
>
>  This is a little like the ruling on pork. I personally do not deny that
>pork may have some nutritional value, nor do I insist that pork was forbidden
>because of disease. Even if pure and healthful it is still forbidden. The one
>who set the law is Most Knowing of the wisdom behind it.
>

Please understand the motivation of my original post.  Pork is not going to
matter to the physical welfare of society, and the ruling is clear cut:
'thou shalt not eat pork'.  Interest, however, is vital, and the ruling is
not clear at all from the Quran and Hadeeth (at least as far as I could 
understand).  If you ask most of those who equate interest with 'Riba'
(yourself excluded), part of their argument is that charging interest on
a loan is evil in and of itself, and that is why God forbids it.  My hope
was that if we approach the question of interpretation without preconceptions
about interest being evil,  the interpretation of 'Riba' we would arrive at
would be different (something along the lines of monopoly profits).


>
>  The issue as I understand it is that money should not make money by vitue of
>its existence. Money can make money by virtue of the work it generates or
>the change in value of something which was bought.
>
>  I cannot speak for God in things which He did not say, but I feel safe
>asserting that the business behaviour resulting from an economy which allows
>interest is contrary to the values which Islam tries to establish. In other
>words, if interest were allowed, people would use their money in a way which
>is far less desirable than the way they would use it if interest were not
>allowed. The Islamic system encourages business and discourage so called
>"lazy saving." It would also eliminate a majority of bankruptcies.
>

Let me assure you that your fears about investment are unfounded.  Saving =
Investment is an identity.  By disallowing interest, you are actually
discouraging investment (think of the person who would rather save the
money under the matress instead of risking loosing it in the stock market).

>  I would like to thank you for carrying on an intelligent and useful
>discussion, free of flames or insults. Usenet needs that.
>

Don't you think it is rather sad that you have to thank me for "carrying on
....."?  After all, that should be the rule, rather than the exception.
But knowing that it is not the rule, I would like to thank you as well. :-)

Tamer Abdelgawad
From: yamin@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Ammar Masalkhi)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
Subject: Re: Masjid -> What will the Arabs do ?
Date: 16 Dec 1992 09:24:29 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <Byx6wy.JHF@fiu.edu> ahmada@serss0 (Azeem Ahmad) writes:
>THis I found in soc.culture.indian:
>
>In article <1992Dec7.211241.8437@cbfsb.cb.att.com> rrp@cbnewsg.cb.att.com (rakesh.r.patel) writes:
>>
>>What will the Arabs do?  
>>
>>Nothing. I don't think Arabs(Muslims) identify with subcontinental
>>Muslims. You might hear the Ayotollah and a few others
>>make statements about India had better watch out when the
>>Muslims of the world unite and all that jazz. But, really,
>>I don't think Arab Muslims, on the average, give a hoot about
>>subcontinental Muslims. 
>>
>>
>>Rakesh PAtel
>
>
------
Mr.Patriot Hindu, I know you are eager to let everybody know that Muslims
hate each other, but I hate to disappoint you. You are entitled to your
prejeduce opinion, and I am not going to try to change your close minded 
hindu ideas (because it is useless). However, I would like to inform all
the open minded people that are reading this, that all Muslims are alike.
As an "Arab" Muslim, I can safely say that I will sacrifice my life for 
my Muslim brothers out there, no matter who or where they are. Islam is
one if not THE most universal religions there is. If a bunch of sick hearted
so called "Muslims" don't "give a hoot about subcontinental Muslims", then
that is their problem. Don't stereo-type all the Muslims, It's inconsiderate
people like you that give bad name to Islam. Instead of discussing a 
matter that you have no authority in, you should be condoning all the nieve 
beast like actions of hindus in India.
If you have any decency left in you, you should apologize to all the Muslims.


						Ammar Masalkhi
						Anwer Khan
						Muslim Students' Assoc.
						UW-Milwaukee

Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
From: v117pdg8@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (DEMIAN)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic,soc.culture.misc,soc.misc,alt.sex
Subject: Re: Ear Rings
Date: 12 Dec 92 06:36:00 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University at Buffalo
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41

In article <1992Dec2.002114.26491@yenta.alb.nm.us>, ben@yenta.alb.nm.us (Ben Klausner) writes...
>nabeel@sce.carleton.ca (Nabeel Ghuzlaan) writes:
> 
>>   I wonder about the cultural origin of wearing ear rings, as to how
>>this bad tradition propagated almost through all contemporary cultures
>>and what opinions people may have about it.
> 
>I have a related question, that may display some cultural ignorance on my
>part ;-). When american men wear a single earring, does the side they wear it
>on denote a sexual preference?
> 
>-- 
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>  inet: ben@yenta.alb.nm.us     |  N5DJL       | My opinions are my own.
>  CI$:  76337,1730              |              | Who else would want them?
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


I think I'm as good a person as any to offer some insight (personal opinion) on
this.  First of all, I don't, unfortunately, know the history behind earrings. 
I do belive it is a very old custom.

What I do know is that it is a relatively popular custom.  I personally have
three earrings in my left ear.  The first one was done by my mother when I was
12.  The second one was done at a mall when I was 14, and the third one was
done by myself last year.  Being a male, I was conscious of the stigma that it
might bring.  When I had my first one done, it was pretty rare for men to
pierce their ears.  It was thought that the person was "gay"(homosexual) and
people weren't very accepting of this custom.  I endured many comments such as
"faggot, homo, gay, queer, etc....", but just turned the other cheek.  I did
it because I wanted to, because I wanted to be different and it didn't matter
what other people thought of me.  I thought it was cool and just didn't give a
damn.
After a while, earrings among males became socially acceptable as long as it
was in the persons left ear.  An earring in the right ear meant that you were a
homosexual.  But even that has begun to change because more and more I see many
males with both ears pierced.  I have thought about getting the right ear
pierced but never did.
Today, the idea of sexual preference based on the ear in which you have an
earring has waned considerably.  I tend to believe that it is no longer a
symbol of sexual preference but one of fashion.

                                                      - DAME

********************************************************************************
"LETUS DEPARTUS RIGHTUS AWAYUS!"                                   -DAME
Xref: sparky soc.culture.arabic:5775 soc.culture.misc:480 soc.misc:1089 alt.sex:39999
From: chrisl@sancho.sybase.com (Xian the Drive)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic,soc.culture.misc,soc.misc,alt.sex
Subject: Re: Ear Rings
Date: 18 Dec 92 15:05:24 GMT
Distribution: na

In article <nabeel.724197495@oracle.sce.carleton.ca>, nabeel@sce.carleton.ca (Nabeel Ghuzlaan) writes:
| In <Bz4vot.Hz3@acsu.buffalo.edu> v117pdg8@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (DEMIAN) writes:
| 
| " "faggot, homo, gay, queer, etc....", but just turned the other cheek.  I did
| " it because I wanted to, because I wanted to be different and it didn't matter
| " what other people thought of me.  I thought it was cool and just didn't give a

|>    Do you think it is OK to do something to be different? Now, everybody is
|> different, so you are no longer different. I prefer that people be _better,_
|> _not_ different.
|> 
|>    What is wrong in being like everybody else? Or do we like to be queer but
|> in different senses? It is possible that someone be so good that they are
|> different where it counts, not in their accessories where it hints that
|> someone's original design was inferior that he had to modify it or improve
|> on it, but it stays that it originally sucked.


 I don't think there is a problem with being like everyone else.

 I think there's a problem with feeling _forced_ to be like everyone
else. With being labeled "freak" for exercising personal freedom,
even in something as trivial as fashion. 

 When I used to attend classes in my black cotton skirt, I got plenty
of those labels. Same thing when I put on makeup. Not drag makeup. Not
garish Halloween crap. Just highlighting my own features.

 I did these things because _I_ wanted to, yes. But I also thought about
people who were reluctant to stand out, but who weren't comfortable
with the homogenization of their society. When I do something "to be
different", I feel I am expressing the fact that there are options
available to everyone. It is not an attack on the "norms of society".
What I am doing is telling the more hesitant that some people like
to dress or look differently. And that that's ok. Often the reason
people remain in peer groups that make them unhappy is that they don't
realize there is an alternative.

 I have 3 holes in my left ear and 2 in my right. I didn't modify them
because I thought Man should have had these to begin with. I modified 
them because I like the way they look now. So does my wife.

 "Being different" today leads to tomorrow's "fitting in". Now, everyone
"cool" has an earring. Years ago, only the freaks did. Punk Rock, in the
60s and 70s, was unbearable. Now those songs are "classics" and can't
stand up against what is playing now, volumewise.

 Be what you want.

 Look how you want.

 Dress how you want.

 Just don't force me to follow you.


Xian.




 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic,soc.culture.iranian,soc.culture.turkish
From: abde@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Tamer A. Abdelgawad)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
Subject: Re: Three troubling questions about Islam
Summary: pragmatism.
Date: 18 Dec 92 20:24:49 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester (Rochester, NY)

In article <1992Dec17.163208.17661@cbfsb.cb.att.com> mmdh@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (Mazen Mokhtar) writes:
>Assalamu `alaykum,
>
>In article <1992Dec17.024436.28182@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> abde@troi.cc.rochester.edu (Tamer A. Abdelgawad) writes:
>
>>My view is that eventually there should be a Palestinian state in the West
>>Bank and Gaza, with guaranteed international access to Jerusalem (or at
>>least the relevent parts of it).  I am sure Syria and Israel can work 
>>something out for the Golan.
>
>  I beg to differ. One cannot accept transgression. How about the Palestinians
>who lost their land in Haifa?  Would you accept a two state solution for Egypt
>if forty years pass to an Israeli occupation of Egypt? [Min alFurati ila alNilu
>arduki ya Isra'eelu.]
>

What about 100 or 400 years?  The fact is, time matters (again, I'm assuming
you wouldn't advocate the reinvasion of Spain, and all those parts of the 
world that were at one point part of the Islamic empire, and were forcibly
detatched from it.).  Luckily, forty years is short enough that those who
lost their lands can be compensated.

Again I want to stress that my position does not imply that I condone the
actions of zionists forty-some years ago, or that monetary compensation for
confiscated Arab land is fair.  We have to be practical, however, and
unfortunately, or fortunately depending on your point of view, Israel is
here to stay.  Let's accept that, and move on.

>>Is this unislamic?  Remember that there are Israelis who were born and raised
>>in Israel, who have not participated in any acts of violence against anyone.
>
>  That is why they should be allowed to live peacefully within the state
>established over all of Palestine, after land obtained by confiscation is
>returned to its owners.
>

A noble objective, but completely unrealistic.


Tamer Abdelgawad
From: P.Hasan@cs.ucl.ac.uk (Pervaiz Hasan)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
Subject: DEMONSTRATION - PAKISTAN EMBASSY - Re: PERSECUTION OF MUSLIMS IN INDIA
Date: 17 Dec 92 11:13:11 GMT

Bismillahirrahmanirrahim

Assalam-o-alaikum Brs & Srs,

	There is a demonstration on Friday after Jumma at the Pakistan Embassy
in London (details are given below). 
When will the muslims wake up - Palestine, Kashmir, Bosnia, India ..... 
Every muslims should look at himself regarding each of these situtions and 
see if he/she has fullfilled his/her duty. 
Are the muslims not concerned that their Sister are getting raped that their
brothers are being tortured & killed, and their children are being abused and
murdered.

"Anyonewho wakes up in the morning and does not care fore the affairs of the
Ummah, is not one us" Muhammed (SAW)
This is  what the Prophet (SAW) said, yet we find Muslims fail to respond
positively. 

The issue is not just the mosque, the issue is the muslim blood being so cheap.
Remember that the Prophet (saw) said that the blood of a muslim is worth more
than the Ka'aba and all its surroundings.
Think about the armies we have and the millitary might we possess, and yet
they do nothing but clean their weapons and target practice. Their orders from
the corrupt leaders is not wage Jihad but to suppress their own people from
calling for Jihad and Islam.

There are three way in which a muslim can fullfill his/her duty of Jihad :
 `.......By your Wealth, By your Tongue, By your Body`.

It is importent that the muslims in Britain support this Demonstartion.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------

	  MUSLIMS OF INDIA, WILL THEIR CRY GO UNHEARD !!!!



  It is the duty ie fard of the Muslim governments to do everything
in their power to come to the aid of Muslims in India ;especially
those governments who are in close proximity to the area,like
Bangladesh and Pakistan.We would like to encourage the Pakistani
government to take the following measures:

  1) Break off diplomatic relations with India;maintaining any
relationship with a government presiding over  a vicious onslaught
against Muslims is totally unacceptable.

  2)Pakistan should lobby the Gulf States to impose a total trade
ban(especially an oil embargo) on India and expell all Hindus in their
territories.

  3)Additionally they should lobby all Muslim countries to break off
diplomatic ties with the murderous Indian regime.

  4)If Pakistan's Generals really want to undertake some
comprehensively Islamic action,then they should use all means
necessary to the lives,property and honour of Muslims in India.

DEMONSTRATE!!!!DEMONSTRATE!!!!DEMONSTRATE!!!!DEMONSTRATE!!!!DEMONSTRAT

PAKISTAN EMBASSY
LOWNDES SQUARE
LONDON SW1    (NEAREST TUBE:KNIGHTSBRIDGE)

FRIDAY 18TH DECEMBER
2.30pm

ORGANISED BY WESTMINISTER ISLAMIC SOCEITY
IN CONJUNCTION WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE ISLAMIC SOCEITIES OF:
Imperial
LSE
Kings
UNL
UCL
South Bank
QMW
Brunel

Contact Mohammed on 071-723 5429.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Wasalaam
Pervaiz Hasan (UCL).


Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
From: wjhrc@rc.rit.edu (Bill Hoagland)
Subject: Arabic calendars
Followup-To: soc.culture.arabic
Organization: RIT Research Corporation
Date: Fri, 18 Dec 1992 21:42:41 GMT


Could someone clear up a discrepancy that I have come across?  I have seen
several references that alternately claim that:

1) The Moslem calendar consists of 12 months that alternate between being
29
and 30 days long with the last month of the year variable to account for
any
drift

and

2) The number of days in all months cannot be predicted more than 6 months
or
so in advance because the month begins when that first cresent of the moon
is
actually visible.

Are there slightly different calendars in use in different countries or for
different purposes (eg. religious and civil)?  I would be grateful for any
information or pointers to sources.

Thanks,

Bill Hoagland
wjhrc@rc.rit.edu
From: cs_e411@ceres (Hana Awwad)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.arabic
Subject: Re: Does the PLO Represent the Palestinian Arabs?
Date: 18 Dec 1992 11:37:53 GMT
Organization: Kingston University
NNTP-Posting-Host: ceres.kingston.ac.uk
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

astein@nysernet.org (Alan Stein) writes:
: The PLO claims to represent the Palestinian Arabs.  In that case, how
: can it stand silently by while Palestinian Arabs are perpetuating
: murderous acts against innocent people, the cold-blooded murder of Mr.
: Toledano being only the latest?
: 

In case you are blind and haven't seen what the palestinians use against
the israelites, they use STONES while the israelites use WEAPONS. And, in
case you are thick and don't know what the difference between stones and
weapons then i'll tell you. Weapons can KILL, INJURE SEVERLEY, etc
where as stones just HURT  and the person would be in pain for a short
period. NO ONE seem to make a big deal out of it, but when one or two
israelites are killed it hits the top news. Aren't the palastenians humans?
Why doesn't it hit the top news when the israelities kidnap a palastenian?
I tell you why, its because the media is controlled by the jews and the 
people are brain washed by the jews.!