Bosco

I read this book before it was discovered to be a fraud. I didn't think the book was that great, and while I had not questioned it while reading it, I also wasn't surprised when I read it was all made up. She sounds like a very troubled woman.

Choumicha is the one of the top TV chefs in Morocco. She has a show on 2M.

Some of the episodes can be watched here and here and other sites have them up as well. She has several books, most in Arabic/French. If you google her, you can find more recipes (most need to be translated).

and here Moroccan Culinary Magazine

My husband calls our dog "hazak kbir" when he has gotten into something he shouldn't and is stinking things up

Inquring minds want to know.

and the cabal theories resurface

I could pull out the quotes later, but don't have the time now. I equate terrorism with a war against Islam rather than merely a brother/sister who is wronging. My views about terrorists therefore are more consistent with ahadith and ayat that deal with how we treat those who make war against us.

I find it implausible that anyone can think of many things that have crossed greater harm to the faith, and thus why I think terrorists have taken war against Islam, despite any pleas they may make that it is for or in the name of Islam.

To me, my brother/my sister indicates more than a shared religion, it is a term of respect/fellowship. I don't extend those feelings to terrorists.

What the heck is the problem with saying muslims are brothers and sisters? Are those of you against that terminology even muslim in the first place????

I am a member of three Islamic message boards and it is customary to address each post with "assalam alaykum sister" or "assalam alaykum brother"

My muslim friends that I correspond with via email here in Boston address the emails "assalam alaykum sister bridget".

The objection was to referring to "Muslim" terrorists as brothers and sisters. My husband does not even consider terrorists to be Muslims. So why would he refer to them as his brothers and sisters?

"muslims who speak out against some of the atrocities their fellow brothers and sisters are doing! "

Although the brothers and sisters who are committing atrocities are terrorists, they are also muslim. If my sister in my biological family committs a crime is she all of a sudden not my sister?

ETA: My brother/sister denotes respect, fellowship, etc. I don't feel any of that with a terrorist.

I think you all are picking her apart and I totally understand why she's done with this thread.

I think you just see this different. If I was to meet one of the Muslim women from this board, I may refer to her as my sister; however, if I was to some how run into Osama Bin Laden, I NO WAY IN HELL would greet him my brother.

I used it. No problems at all!

Peezy, challenging is not what often happens here. True challenging is done as a means to educate, not to humiliate. What happens here, more often than not, is blood sport, piling on, trading insult for insult, and it's a real turn off. It educates no one.

Thank goodness we have you as our constant reminder of all our shortcomings

I don't think giving verbal condemnations of terrorism does much than to try to convince people with prejudices we are not all the same. That really shouldn't even need to be stated. Even when it is done ad nauseum, Muslims are criticized for not speaking out more.

Terrorism is not really about religion. People have agendas, often political, that they are trying to push and they mask it in the name of religion to gain appeal with people who are feeling frustrated, disenfranchised, etc. I feel the most important thing Muslims can do is to reach out to fellow Muslims who are vulnerable and at risk to falling into the hands of these people who only seek to manipulate them for their own sick plans by promising them martyrdom, etc.

We can talk until we are blue in the face how we don't condemn terrorism, and it will still go on and the prejudiced people are unlikely to have their minds changed.

btw i was using her as an example regarding this topic, and this topic alone. muslims who speak out against some of the atrocities their fellow brothers and sisters are doing!

talking about what is and who is and who is not moderate islam is another topic.

Our "fellow brothers and sisters"? What kind of vitriol is this? People associating terrorism with every Muslim in the world, calling terrorists "our brothers and sisters". Seriously, this kind of talk makes me sick to my stomach. Who are you to call a terrorist my brother, my sister, because they claim to share the same religion I practice?

You labeled Manji moderate; I addressed it. Now it is another topic. Fill me in on the rest of the rules while you are at it. But given your new restrictions on the topic at hand, there have been petitions signed by darn near a million Muslims in this country alone and prominent Muslims from every end of the spectrum that have spoken out against terrorism.

Hmm thats how I feel about this board! Being a conservative (but not a Bush supporter), I really don't see myself being able to fit in when we have political conversations. I think after this topic I really should keep my trap shut about politics because we're never going to agree and I didn't come here to fight. Or certaintly not to get called arrogant or a stupid American. I can do that without logging in!!!!!!!! Arguing on the internet seems really pointless because I've noticed so many people misinterpreting each other's intentions and words (not just my own)... Then the back and forth fight occurs and .........here we are, 10 pages later... I totally see what GEG was trying to say, why can't some of you? I think you all totally misinterpreted her as well. Is it because of your resentment towards her and I'm too new feel it? Anyway............

You nit picked each thing I said and then totally misinterpret again! I didn't imply that there was a 100% absence at anger towards the terrorists. Look at moderate muslims like Irshad Manji and others who speak out against them. Can anyone be confident enough to say ANYTHING is 100%? Or like Bush says, "For us or against us...."?

Of course its not impossible to be angry at terrorists but still think the polices are wrong! But I do believe you all were complaining about profiling at airports and wonder why anyone would do such a thing. That its such a crime. So then whats the solution?

Btw, Aquol I totally agree with your latest comment. Who knows where it ends. I do understand that..... But again, what is the solution? Maybe we just need to hire more staff and search each and every person. Would you all prefer that? The standard waiting at the airport for your flight would be searches, background checks before you even step in the airport, all your luggage scrutinized, and asked an hour of intense questions? Or do you prefer we stop all this and let everyone in? Or do we only do this to randomly chosen

people of all backgrounds? What IS the solution?

Do you actual consider Irshad Manji a moderate Muslim? This would probably come out sounding harsh, but if you think she is moderate, you are far, far out of touch with mainstream Islam and the Muslim community. While not impossible, you would be hard pressed to find Muslims that consider her a moderate voice (perhaps GEG does). Even some of the most liberal, progressive Muslims who feel alcohol should be permissible, women should lead prayer, and that Muslims can be atheist find her to be nothing but a basher of Islam. She is hardly considered a moderate voice by *most* (not all) Muslims and is chalked up to be the kind of person that makes Islamophobes feel secure in their prejudice. Of course since she says Israel is a model nation for the Middle East, she has her appeal for many.

You say "But I do believe you all were complaining about profiling at airports and wonder why anyone would do such a thing." Since you say you are not understood, what were you trying to imply other than you think the women in tihs forum are stupid with this statement?

I think its a shame the good Muslims are profiled and many have to undergo searches, questioning, etc. But please, it isn't just the Arabs going through this. I'VE experienced it and I've seen little old white ladies experiencing it! .......Muslims should be angry at the actual terrorists for causing this to happen, not the airlines or TSA. Of course there are officers who take this too far. Asking questions about someone's sex life at the airport really is shocking and completely inappropriate. Its unfortunate.

You are implying that anger at the TSA/airline policies indicates an absence of anger at the terrorists, and this is the second time basically stated as such.

Why do you feel that frustration/anger with the policies indicates an absence of anger at the terrorists? Is it impossible to absolutely condemn what the terrorists have done but still think the policies are wrong? This type of language sounds like Bush rhetoric to me -- You are either with us (the policies) or with the terrorists.

When it got to discussing el al, it was about both.

People have every right to be bigoted. It goes along with freedom of speech. However, flaming is not a solution for it, it simply pits empty rhetoric against empty rhetoric. Do you have anything against enlightenment? If not, is flaming the road to enlightenment?

Your post sounds like rhetoric to me. Change it up. People have every right to be flamed. It goes along with freedom of speech. However, bigotry is not a solution for it, it simply pits rherotic against empty rhetoric. Do you have anything against enlightenment? If not, is bigotry the road to enlightenment?

Fact is, no real problems are going to be solved on this forum and probably little real enlightenment will be found.

Although I am neither Arab nor Muslim, I *have* experienced racism first hand. Profiling isn't limited to Arab Muslims. I think the issue extends beyond a single group. People of all colors and religions have experiences and ideas to share that relate to the subject at hand.

No doubt, that's true, and I don't deny it. Would anyone admit to be prejudiced against Jews when it comes to the Arab/Israeli conflict and that's why we can't discuss it without flaming anyone who says something not pc toward Arabs and Muslims?

I think most of us are capable of making a distinction between Jews and Zionists.

What white western woman has proclaimed to be the voice of Arab people?

And that is the way it should be.

So, the next time the issue of Israel is raised, there should be SEVERAL voices constituting a diversity of opinions on the subject of Arab/Israeli relations without pulling out the "poor oppressed Arabs" piling on card, so that flaming is kept to a minimum and we can learn from each other.

I look forward to it.

What if their own researched, thought out opinion is that Israel is an oppressor? And so what if multiple people hold the same view? It doesn't mean they are taking on what they feel is the Arab or Muslim opinion or that their opinions are less valid. If a view has been expressed, others should not express agreement lest it be "piling on"?

I also don't think that a person feeling that Palestinians are oppressed by Israel means thinking all Arabs are oppressed or "poor" Arabs. It is *my* opinion that certain Arab countries have done their share of letting down the Palestinians.

There cannot be a discussion because you have dismissed anyone who is non Arab or not born Muslim as having inferior and experience lacking opinions, of being incapable of real understanding. However, I think it is presumptous for you to think that your voice is anything more just one individual's opinion or that it is somehow representative of a broader Arab/Muslim experience. I know more than one Arab Muslim who has read this board and come to the conclusion that they cannot relate to your views at all, and a few have gone as far to question if you are who you say you are. My point being, no one is a voice for a race/religion/etc. and even people of the same race/religion can have very different life experiences and perspectives.

That's not what I've done, but that is the way you are taking it. I have said that it would be refreshing to have a different point of view other than the western non-Arab one, and if that comment is what you are objecting too, well, it still needed to be said.

I know I am only one voice, but I also think it is presumptuous for a western white woman to think she is representative of the Arab voice. I know lots of Arab Muslims who read this board and think the same thing. I know that there are rumors that good Muslim women like you spread, but I'm not interested in mindless gossip. My point is, there aren't many Arabs on this board, and for you to imply that the lack of them constitutes a vaccuum that you and the other married in can fill is awfully presumptuous as well.

What white western woman has proclaimed to be the voice of Arab people?

ETA: I think when women here post an opinion, it is just that, their opinion. I don't think anyone has EVER claimed or implied they were attempting to speak for Arabs or Muslims.

No, I'm escuing victimhood. I have from the beginning.

What I'm getting at has been lost, no doubt. I appreciate that you are trying to understand it. I'm not discounting anyone as I'm wondering why it's been difficult to allow more viewpoints to expand before they are shut down, and they are usually shut down because of preconceived notions. I asked what is the basis upon which these preconceived notions are formed? First hand experience is a valuable component of that.

Whose voices have been shut down? None of can stop another person from posting. If anyone doesn't speak up, it is by choice or a lack of conviction.

If there was discussion, that would be a breakthru. And, no, I can't equate the experience to being married to an Arab/Muslim to being an Arab/Muslim, because being Arab/Muslim is not an ancillary experience, as is being married to one. I'm not saying your humilation is not real and has no place in the equation. I'm saying it's not something that derives from your own being. It is something you choose and something you can escape from.

There cannot be a discussion because you have dismissed anyone who is non Arab or not born Muslim as having inferior and experience lacking opinions, of being incapable of real understanding. However, I think it is presumptous for you to think that your voice is anything more just one individual's opinion or that it is somehow representative of a broader Arab/Muslim experience. I know more than one Arab Muslim who has read this board and come to the conclusion that they cannot relate to your views at all, and a few have gone as far to question if you are who you say you are. My point being, no one is a voice for a race/religion/etc. and even people of the same race/religion can have very different life experiences and perspectives.

Well, many of us don't like to hear you nadder on all day either. Comes with the territory.

Maybe you should start an all-Arab board if you don't want to hear non-Arab commentary. Find your refreshment elsewhere.

I didn't say I didn't want to hear it. I said I wanted to know what the foundation for the overly one-sided views are since most of you are commenting on something you have not experienced first hand. I also said it would be nice to have other views expressed. Nothing wrong with either of those.

Experienced what first hand? What exactly is it that you are referring to?

nobody said they were

I'm not real comfortable with the idea that all Arabs and Muslims are victims either, being "Arab looking" and Muslim myself. It's not the way I want to gain sympathy.

Oh, yes they did. It is the entire premise of Aquol's argument that some are agreeing with.

I didn't take read the argument the same way, and I venture to say, the others agreeing did not as well.

Ok, well here's the thing. You non-Arab women love to validate your arguments by using your Arab Muslim SOs and what they might think, since they aren't here. I'm here and I have a thought as an Arab Muslim and I think that there is a lot of pc knee jerk reaction around Israel and Arab Muslims. You tend to agree with anything that supports the notion of racism, bigotry and exclusion, making us look like victims. I don't see much depth to the approach.

I also asked how many of you have first hand experience with racism as an Arab Muslim?

Where have I validated my argument by stating what my husband *might* think? Besides, my husband is here, and has been here for over a year so he what he thinks is based on his actual experiences, and he doesn't consider himself a victim although he has faced some nasty things in his time here. You said "You tend to agree with anything that supports the notion of racism, bigotry and exlusion, making us look like victims"? Are you referring to me specifically?

Why are you assuming that whoever is replying is a non-Arab muslim woman? Why is it assumed that whoever is replying is using what their arab SO thinks?Why is it assumed that we understood Aquol's argument to mean that muslims are victims?

I am wondering the same thing and don't know how it headed in this direction.

I think people have admitted that aquol is/was rude. I would bet that aquol might admit that him/herself. I believe that he/she has a valid point despite the rudeness. And of course, yes, I think it is valid because I agree with it.

If you don't agree, then of course you'd view it as just rude and not at all valid.

I haven't characterized it as valid nor invalid. I'm just trying to determine the nuances of group dynamics about when rudeness invalidates a point and when it doesn't, just for my own future reference and so I can use it when the tables turn.

I'm also curious about how many here have flown Israel's airline, gone to Israel or "looked Arab" while doing so. Just trying to determine who has first hand experience to buttress their agreement.

I think Aqoul was stating the security policy is three-tiered and not "grills everyone" as was claimed initially. What is the argument that is supposed to be buttressed?

nobody said they were

I'm not real comfortable with the idea that all Arabs and Muslims are victims either, being "Arab looking" and Muslim myself. It's not the way I want to gain sympathy.

Oh, yes they did. It is the entire premise of Aquol's argument that some are agreeing with.

I didn't take read the argument the same way, and I venture to say, the others agreeing did not as well.

Aqoul didn't call all Americans dumb, only ones using "habibi" incorrectly. Based on the amount of jokes about non-native English speakers that are posted on VJ, or the amount of times people get laughs posting about their own spouses incorrect usage of English, I don't know why it is such an issue when the tables are turned.

What he/she said was this:

I have to roll my eyes whenever dumb Americans say or write "my habibi". The "i" at the end of the word already denotes possession. Tacking on "my" is just irritatingly redundant.

It was not, those that say "my habibi" are dumb. The dumb came before the statement.

As far as Private, I think the post was a harsh, but an apology was offered, and it would be disingeuous for people (not necessarily you) to proclaim they haven't had similar thoughts when reading her posts. Those thoughts may not have been stated publically before, but they were certainly not new or unique to Aqoul.

"In all your blithering and misfired attempts to be clever or witty, you miss the point entirely. It goes well beyond "grammar", but rather the content of her posts and piss-poor ability to articulate, and the arrogance and audacity contained therein. Clearly the irony of her proclaiming to be above needing to learn anything from her fiance, or any of his family, in light of her being a sub-literate cretin, is completely lost on you.

It's a bloody legitimate question. Reading her posts, I was just curious about what exactly I was dealing with here. If that of a native speaker, then my conclusions that she's an ignorant, sub-literate cretin based on the content of her posts and piss-poor ability to articulate would be well warranted. If not, then maybe something was being lost in translation."

Sorry but apology aside this was uncalled for.

Whatever though. I"ll drop it if everyone agrees with this type of delivery. I'll just ignore him/her from now on because I think that although some points are valid, the way it is conveyed leaves a LOT to be desired.

The adjective coming before the action indicates that the ones performing the action are the ones the adjective describes, IMO.

i.e. - I hate it when rude people cut me off on the road.