homeland mentality

i struggle to figure out at what point a minority mentality and tieing yourself to a piece of land can become an obstacle to a peaceful existance. very interesting how Sharon believed that the palestinians already have a state - Jordon. an article a while ago mentioned that some anti-israeli american jew had said WWI was manipulated by the zionists to get palestine. at the root of any jew's self identity is that he or she belongs to a dislocated people, a minority with a unique identity and a shared struggle to survive. that self identity seems to effect the choices made and the methods used in their survival struggle. a couple of days ago on PBS, i saw a documentary on the armenians. it appears that they also carry that oppressed, displaced unique people mentality. another example -gypsies. there are probably several others... hold up! - we have a complication - the jews got thier promised land (by shady zionist efforts), and armenians got thier homeland (through communists). now... having a homeland again, - shouldn't those who identify with that land return? and if they choose to stay in the host country, shouldn't they just admit that they really are no longer an outcaste people? shouldn't the no-longer persecuted armenians or homelandless scattered jews accept a new identity, a new reality and move on with life? ...lets put aside the fact than many probably don't move to the homeland because, lets face it, would you move to a place of bloody conflict or no jobs. ...but i'm not talking about the reality, i'm trying to understand meanings (hernalmanewrticks). ...another problem is those who already have home countries that they willfully left behind, discarded, brain-drained. they should be the last ones running around claiming to be anything-anything (pakistani-american, indian-american, etc, etc) but wait - african-americans and palestinian-americans don't quite fit into the above two models. the african-americans decended from slaves are oppressed and displaced, but unlike jews or armenians, when they arrived, whatever unique identity was there was tortured out of them until all that was left was a skin color (even that was diluted through rape). several have accepted the new reality and moved on.... and the palestinians, they too are an oppressed, and displaced group, but i think Sharon may be on to something. they do have a Jordon, a Lebanon/Syria. don't get me wrong, i think if your home is taken, you fight, regroup, fight, regroup, and fight again (three times sunnah). but if you lose that war, and a whole generation of the conquerors establish themselves on that land, you move on. i don't think you want your decendants to be like the jews or armenians, wandering the land. like a small group of muslims dreaming of what was and will be again some day when a mahdi comes to the rescue. i say integrate into the host country (which should allow you to integrate in the first place) or move to Jordon to be with your 3-generation removed cousin. Of course, i understand that some segments of Lebanese and Jordonian society don't allow the refugees to intigrate. That is a definately an issue that must be dealt with because it does not allow for progress. ...in india, my mom's mamo(uncle) a major north indian scholar, told me that he went to baghdad for some meeting. the arab religious scholars were going on about how palestine should be liberated. he (a hanafi/qadiri shaikh) said to them, yes i feel for the palestinian people, but you know i think we should liberate Mecca and Madina first. After those bastards who prevent little girls from escaping burning buildings are overthrown, the decendent of the Hashimi Shareefs of Hijaz (the current king of Jordon) can come rule in his grandfathers old territory. and the Palestinains can have their state in Jordon. wow, i thought it was a pretty good solution. everyone wins. the wahhabis would no longer be there to whip women at the Sacred Masjid, the King of Jordon should be happy, he now has a higher status and a more developed country. and the palestinians get to control the land they should rule. (through Lawrence of Arabia i learned how everything got mucked up, and its entertaining too). you know what, our liberal Muslim leaders lack the cohonez to do it on our own, and we don't demand such an overthrow of the tyrants over Mecca. instead we cry. instead we wait until Israel or the US offers us a similar solution and we will not accept it then because that will mean we are selling out the West or to the Jews. why the ---k does Mubarak come and humiliate himself at the white house? if we can't take care of our own business and must let Bush decide what we can or can't do, shame on us! we deserve to have bastards who allow girls to burn to death ruling over us. i've managed to become confused all over again.

grab a marshmellow

the following is an argument regarding the allowablity of eating gelatin derived from a pig, i think its weak: "...it is impossible to differentiate between a chemical derived from an animal source and the same chemical derived from a plant source or formed synthetically. What used to be animal fat, possibly even lard, is now a chemical compound that could have been made in a laboratory or derived from vegetable oil." ...this takes us out of the realm of unlawful things being lawful in times of necessity... with all the advances in science, if we know that the same chemical is available through something halal, why intentionally use it from something haram. or, after finding out that an ingredient came from a WILLFULL use of the haram, why continue to eat it, or make an argument to justify wanting to eat it. (its like placing the dead carrion in that lake yourself, pee in the lake yourself, and then offering me a glass, saying to me "hey bro, it got diluted." well, no thank you! i like my water filtered. some people say that we need to keep things simple, that islam is not about making things complicated. well, i think going to the level of chemical compounds in order to say that derivatives of pig (or alcohol) are ok is also guilty of getting into technicalities. hamza yusuf's tapes of "Food for Thought" are excellent. he describes the eating habits of the prophet and the companions. eat healthy, eat natural, eat pure. if folks want to make lists of things they found to be pork derived, more power to them, do whatever you want in your struggle to attain allah's pleasure, and if others want to ignore those lists, and instead go to the chemical level to justify eating skittles or starburst or marshmellows, i hope its not based on whim, hiding behind a common slogan: "islam says no hardship." peace.