First Aclu, Not Pat Robertson

[Mike AI]

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20021126...26-14786718.htm

I think Pat Robertson is right on the money. Time to stop being politically correct - the koran teaches and demands muslims to kill non-beleivers. It is time we stop kidding outselves and the world it is a peaceful religion. I think he is right saying that many millions of Muslims, probably a majority of them are peaceful - but the Koran and religion dues advocate death an mayhem!

I also find it ironic that he is against all the new powers that the federal gov't is seizing, especially in the snooping issues. He is right on the money there too!

PD, Cal, I think even you guys can agree with Pat on these issues.

I think if I ever publicly agreed with Pat Robertson vessels in my eye and forehead would burst.

I have read the first few parts of the Quran myself, and while it's boring (I'm nowhere near a theologist) there were some parts I did agree with. In the translation I read it DID say that muslims should treat Christians and Jews as brethren since they are monotheists. It also had some good things to say about charity; I wouldn't give away a large porition of my income to the poor, but the Quran says you're supposed to if you are a muslim.

HOWEVER, after reading the first section (called 'the cow' in English, which some people say is one of the more important passages) I came away with the feeling that it was a very angry book. There is lots of talk about who you should kill, when you should kill them, and why you should kill them. The old testament is somewhat cut and dried, the new testament slightly less so, but the Quran is VERY open to interpretation in this sense. I don't see too many people debating whether or not it's okay to commit genocide based on Sodom and Gomorrah. The Quran talks a lot about infidels, killing, and sort of ruling with an iron fist. So it does not surprise me that many muslims misinterpret this, just like Christians interpret many bibilical issues in their own favor (gays, abortion, etc).

In short, I have read some of the Quran and from the 70 or so pages I got through I could plainly see why devout muslims are so violent. Does it surprise me that they're the most homicidal religion? No. Should we do something about it and help promote moderate muslim governments and religious leaders? Definitely. There are SO many muslims in this world if we don't keep this in check we could be in a lot of trouble.

As for the privacy thing, I was smiling sadly to myself watching GWB sign the biggest of the 'big government' bills probably to ever come out of a modern Repub administration, and he couldn't have been happier. There are a lot of things that worry me about the state of the union right now, but in true Jew style the biggest one is my own bank account. Let Allah and the SEC sort em out!



C.

[sextoyking]

Shalom to that Cal

Mike,

yeh it would be hard for me to agree anytime with Pat, but in a wierd way I have always liked that guy.

Seen him many times on larry king, hannity / colmes and others. nice enough fellow for the far right.

What Cal said, man oh man, what bush signed today, looks good today and mabey tomorow, but might come back to bite us all.

Privacy issues I hold close to my heart......

God Bless America, A country where I belive it's almost Un American to not ever question your own goverment!

i think about this quite a bit recently. is it fair to say that Islam is violent by quoting passages from it? or say it is violent by virtue of the fact that Muhammed was a warrior and Jesus was a pacifist.

the bible says we should kill homosexuals
we should all keep slaves etc etc.

would it be a fair comparison to say that more people have fought, killed, murdered or died for Islam than for Christianity. Islam was spread by violence and war. Wasn't Christianity? werent most religions?

These terrorists are mostly poor people from shitty lives that are bitter, angry and have no hope that are searching for some sort of meaning in thier lives... when they cant find it in life, they try to find it in death. I think they gravitate towards these extremist views because of who they are as people... not because those views exist and corrupt people.

the thing that bothers me is that terrorists say they are doing it in the name of Islam.. and Islamic leaders do VERY little to speak out against or condemn it or otherwise seperate that extremist view from Islam today.

[Edd]

You're bang on about the fact that Christianity has had its share of violence JR, and that literal translation has to be taken with a grain of salt in modern times. But I'll hand it to the Christians in that they have progressed along with the society and culture in which they thrive. Islam has NOT changed - not fundamentally as Christianity did. And while the Inquisition STILL exits in Rome (yes, it does), they just don't call it the Holy Office of the Inquisition anymore - it has a new face and a new job.

Islam is still Islam. It is still the destruction of the Infidel in the name of Allah to bring him (and yourself in the afterlife) glory. Talk to a Catholic priest about the Bible and he'll tell you the STORIES are parables about morality and life. Rabbis will say much the same. But Imams will state categorically the Koran IS the word of ALLAH. PERIOD.

[Almighty Colin]

Christianity is less central in western society than Islam is in middle-eastern society. The people that live in "Christian" countries are every bit as violent as those that live in the middle-east [ WWI, WWII, countless others ]. We just don't point out that they are the Christians because Christianity is not the unifying theme of western culture anymore.

Muslims.
Communists.
Nazis.
Japs.
Blacks.
Redcoats.

[Mike AI]

Well another important issue is Christianity is older, and has gone through thousands of years of change.... there was reformation, counter reformation, great schism, etc... Christianity has grown and become melow - it was Christian based countries that came up with whole ideas of seperation of church and State, democracy, free market economics, etc...

Islam is still stuck where Chritianity was in the middle ages.... and it will probably get worse because there does not appear to be any enlightenment period on the horizon for the largest groups of Muslima.... ( unless you count hellfire missles going up their asses frm drones)

The life for the average person in the middle east is pretty pathetic, very similiar to those of srufs during the fuedal ages. So misery leads to agression, and the leaders both spiritial and gov't haveto have a scape goat for thei poor living conditions so they blame the west, and of course the #1 Satan - the USA.

Mike, i am not trying to be a smart ass here like all other posts before and after this one. so bear with me.

i started thinking about this the other day quite a bit and my mind changed totally.

We are equating the Middle East to Islam. Islam is 1.5 Billion people. Those people are in EVERY country.. US, Canada, Western Europe etc etc etc. They are in Seattle, they are in Orlando, they are in New Orleans.

there is only (relative to population) a few small spots in the world where people are distorting the Koran and have real extremist views. relative to the number of Muslims (1.5 billion).. the number of terrorists or extremists is almost statistically non-existent.

what i am saying is that Islam does not necessarily = terrorists, extremism or a bunch of poor, goat fucking villagers in the mountains of Afghanistan shooting at each other for something ones great great great great great grandfather did to the others.

Pat Roberton is trying to say Islam is a violent religion by quoting the Koran. I am saying that arguement is completely ignrant because the Bible itself has its own share of rape, murder, slavery and crusading. We are trying to point out how fucked up the Middle East is by showing it is predominately Muslim and fucked up... or that all terrrorists start there so we can say "haha... i told you so"

i think there is just as much a connection of extremism to poverty as there is to religion. i think the first cause is poverty... not "Allah told me to do it". I personally think that if Islam did not exist in those regions, they would be killing in the name of a Prophet named Bob or the "Mystical Talking Rock" or a school of porpoises... or over some other grievence which would become the catalyst for them to vent their frustrations from being poor and fucked up and living in misery.

i think that their devotion to Islam and Fundamentalists certainly does its its part to perpetuate poverty and ignorance. but i dont beleive that Islam itself causes violence by virtue of the fact that the Koran has violent passages or that Muhammed was a warrior.

violence and extremism historically, has thrived in poverty first. right now, they are called rebels, communist rebels, fundamentalists, extremists... in the middle east "terrorists" etc etc... depends on where they are in the world. basically, they are all people killing for what they believe in and those beliefs and rationales vary widely and are often interchangeable.

if "Islam" itself was the problem then we would have 1.5 Billion people trying to kill us. as it is,.... there is just thousands.

This is America... We could pave over a few thousand people in an afternoon and be eating a Happy Meal for dinner, at the new McDonalds built that day on their bones.

[Mike AI]

JR I understand your point, of coure there are not billions of people trynig to kill US, it is a small sect of Islamic Fundemantalist who are doing all the terrorist. However, if you look at polls there is a majority of Muslims who support these people. The State Reglion of Saudi Arabia is based on the strict, fundementalis very of Islam... and while they are not all picking up weapons, they do support these clowns. Look at the Madrases through out parts of the middle east, and central asia....


Ironicly Iraq is NOT a fundamentalist State, however Saddam is a pragmatist and is more then willing to use the terrorist as it favors his policies.

I keep saying our real issue and problem in the world right now is Saudi Arabia - they are the muscle, the brains, and the financing of the Islamic Fundementalist movement.

There are also strong movements in Pakistan, and in Iran.... though in Iran I understand it is wainging somewhat, and the younger generations are tiring of being led by old bitter religious men.

It is still a major threat to the world, I remember a college professor telling me in 1990 that Fundementalist Islam is going to be the biggest challenge to the world. One reason the Russians went into Afganistan was to put down these threats. The Russians are still fighting the same people, just in other parts of the region.

It is a complex picture, and to brush all people who worship Allah as a threat is defiantely wrong, but for our leaders to tell us Islam is great and a peaceful religion, that Saudi Arabai is our friend, Pakistan is doing everythng it can against terrorists - well this is ALL BULLSHIT!!!

but for our leaders to tell us Islam is great and a peaceful religion, that Saudi Arabai is our friend, Pakistan is doing everythng it can against terrorists - well this is ALL BULLSHIT!!!
==============================================

this is another issue that is more complicated than it seems.

its all about diplomacy.

these places are also fragile politically and the whackos all have AK-47's hanging over the door and nothing to shoot at. Saudi Arabia is a poor country by world standards... but the monarchy in place is better than a new Saddam Hussein. Pakistan is the same Musharrif (sp) is barely hanging on and is in a difficult situation. the choice is between him as a leader and a list certified maniacs who will get access to the Nuclear Button.

dimplomacy is not always cut and dry. Russia for example went through a difficult economic transformation led by people who today could not manage a lemonaide stand without borrowing 7 million dollars in start up capital and being bankrupt the next week. IMF, World Bank and other sources gave Russia billions over the course of the 90's. Hundreds of Billions. They did it knowing that Billions were being stolen, that they had no hope of becoming fiscally responsible anytime soon. But the alternative to chaos and Yeltsin was Zhugonov who was inches away from winning the second presidential election and turning back the clock. It is estimated that the 6 richest people in Russia at the time, spent more than $150,000,000.00 in a few months to raise Yeltsins ratings from 3% to over 50%. To take an open stance that they were just a bunch of lying thieves, raping, stealing and robbing the world blind in some of the largest pyrmid scams the world ever saw.. like GKO government bonds where they were at some points paying 100% interest on 6 months... just to raise money to pay the interest on the previous bonds would have put Zhugonov in power.

but though it could be looked at as irresponsible in retrospect, that addiction to cash through the 90's, is what also prevented communism from coming back.

I would not doubt for a second that Yeltsin did not have a few drunken conversations with his buddy Bill asking questions like "gee Billy, do you ever wonder who might end up with the Nuclear briefcase if we lose power? there could be another Cold War... or worse. What do you think Bill? Personally, i think we just need 6 Billion more dollars for that to never happen"

to abondon Musharrif in Pakistan would put some scary people in power and it would put nuclear weapons in their hands. Each criticism of him for example, weakens him in many ways politically... puts more distance between them and the West and threatens to undermine his own fragile government. So, though it may not be right to say that they are perfect allies... to do otherwise and criticize them just weakens him politically, which is not a good thing either.

We buy oil from Saudi Arabia. They are some of the bigger fucking hypocrites on earth. They too are just hanging by a thread in terms of their own political power... as are most governments in the Middle East. I dont think the world will be better off if we denounce them or break ties with them. If we feel there is problems there today.. what will there be when the Monarchy is overthrown and real bad people are running that country? what effect can it have on the region? on neighbor governments? the whole Middle East is on pretty fragile political ground.

the world works better when money is a part of the equation. money = dependence and thus, influence. thats part of politics. Honesty however is not. North Korea agreed not to make nuclear weapons. why? because they were offered oil imports, food aid etc. We could also correctly say that his government is just a financially and idealogically bankrupt bunch of power hungry dickheads trying to black mail the world out of desperation.... but that would not take us closer to getting them to stop making nuclear war heads.

i think we should do anything and everything that is in our best interest. thats how Darwin would have wanted it. Frequently, it will include lying and stealing and shooting dictators in the head from 1500 yards out, while they are eating dinner with their family. Thats just life.

most people who assume the morally high ground in conflicts end up dead.... shot in the face while holding a flower in their hand.

[PornoDoggy]

Mikey, if you think the drivel quoted in that article is going to convince me to agree with Pat Robertson, you're sadly mistaked.

First, I would NEVER take the word of a fundamentalist Christian on what the Holy Book of another religion taught, any more than I would accept the interpretation of a Mulah on what the bible taught. You are correct in that Islam is a religion that is in a later stage of development than Christianity, but it's only +/- 500 years.

As I said in another thread yesterday, I've been worried about Islamic fundamentalism since before the embassy takeover in Iran. The reasons for the increase are wide and varied, and don't always have a lot to do with religion as such. Some of it is rooted in nationalism and anti-colonialism. Some of it is based on the oppressive governments under which it develops - blatant political activity is squashed immediately, whereas it can often hide under the guise of religion.

So, it just isn't as simple as some folks would like to believe. And we could expand this war to include the Pakistanis and the Saudis, I suppose, and radicalize millions more of them; that would certainly help our position right now, wouldn't it?

Oh yeah, and

Ironicly Iraq is NOT a fundamentalist State, however Saddam is a pragmatist and is more then willing to use the terrorist as it favors his policies.

Are you saying he is, or might? If you think he is, Where's the beef?

[Almighty Colin]

It's funny how at first you hear a lot of "Islam is a violent religion" and then the reaction "Islam is a peaceful religion" and then "No it's not".

In fact, and it sounds like we all agree, neither of these statements is true. The definition of a label like "Islam" or "Christian" or "Communist" is very broad. I have known people that call themselves Christian that do not believe in Christ as savior (that is another issue entirely). I know Christians that believe in karma and reincarnation. There are many people that do not "fit in"/ We try to further categorize the religion Christian with subcategories "Catholic", "Baptist", "Lutheran", and so on. We do the same with Islam. It helps some in our understanding but not entirely. We never quite grasp the full picture with these labels.

We are trying to categorize billions of people in this world so we can discuss things and think about them. Otherwise, it's a damned mess.

I don't quite know the word for it but "those people over there" are dangerous. The probem with many of the middle eastern governments is that they don't have control over that minority of people that are dangerous to US. Worldviews are colliding. Different strategies for life and empire.

JR said "Frequently it will including lying and shooting dictators in the head from 1500 yards out ... That's just life."

I agree with THAT!

Yep I wasn't saying that Islam as a whole was more violent since I did read passages of the Quran that were peaceful and caring, and it DOES state that they should coexist peacefully with all other monotheistic religions who read the old/new testament, but apparently people aren't really listening.

The Quran is a very angry and violent piece of scripture, and to base a religion on it is a little more dangerous than say, Christianity. Potentially dangerous, of course, plenty of muslims live in peace and tranquility. It's the hard-liners we have to worry about, but they're dangerous in any religion.

C.

[Almighty Colin]

BAH! The Bible deathtoll is WAY higher than in the Koran.

50,070 1 Samuel 6:19
3,000 Exodus 32:26-28
24,000 Numbers 25:6-9
500,000 2 Chronicles 13:15-18
120,000 2 Chronicles 28:6-8
1,000,000 2 Chronicles 14:8-12
--------------
1.7 million in those 6 passages alone including such classics as 50,070 people killed by God for looking into the ark. Remember Sunday school? God killed the first born son in every house in Egypt because he was mad at Pharaoh. Sorry, I don't know the dead babies count.

The early Christians should have had the sense to not package the Old Testament with the New. They were probably afraid the book would appear too small without it.

[Mike AI]

Colin, I think you are comapiring Jews to Muslims.... the Old Tesitment is all about ass kicking, raping, piliging, slaughtering....

The NEW Testiment, which si the basis for Christianity is centered around peace, and turing the other cheek.

One reason many Jews did not beleive Christ was the Messiah is because they have been told that the Messiah would be a warrior King.

[sarettah]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Nov 26 2002, 03:35 PM
The NEW Testiment, which si the basis for Christianity is centered around peace, and turing the other cheek.

The way I learned it...way back in Sunday school was that Christianity is based on both the Old and New Testament.....

The Old is the Christian History prior to Christ......

The New is the story of Christ and the early Christian church and of course, what is to come......

The history of the world is violent.

The 3 religions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam) that we are speaking of all use the same history as their base. Therefore the 3 religions that we are speaking of are all based in violence.

To interpret a history (what has happened in the past) as being the guide for how things should be handled in the future makes good common sense, learn from your mistakes etc.

To interpret the history as being a "literal" truth demanding that you use the methods used throughout that history as the "only" ways to handle the present and future is where "ALL" fundamentalist religions make their mistakes. There are fundamentalist Jews in the states and Israel that advocate violence as an means to an end, there are fundamentalist Muslims that advocate violence as a means to and end and there are most certainly plenty of fundamentalist Christians that advocate violence as a means to an end.

They are all wrong.

[PornoDoggy]

Originally posted by Mike AI@Nov 26 2002, 03:35 PM
Colin, I think you are comapiring Jews to Muslims.... the Old Tesitment is all about ass kicking, raping, piliging, slaughtering....

The NEW Testiment, which si the basis for Christianity is centered around peace, and turing the other cheek.

One reason many Jews did not beleive Christ was the Messiah is because they have been told that the Messiah would be a warrior King.

That may be what the book says, but the people reading it didn't catch on to that for a while, Mikey ... and a great many folks wonder if they have yet. Was it Graham's son quoted on CNN after 9/11 that talked about nuking cities? Robertson's buddy Falwell claimed that God allowed 9/11 because of abortion and gays in America, and while he may have issued a retraction, it still looks like a big footprint on his tounge to me.

There are fundamentalist Jews in the states and Israel that advocate violence as an means to an end, there are fundamentalist Muslims that advocate violence as a means to and end and there are most certainly plenty of fundamentalist Christians that advocate violence as a means to an end.
====================
how many of them today proclaim the duty to kill anyone who does not believe what they believe?



Last edited by -= JR =- at Nov 26 2002, 05:07 PM

[sarettah]

Originally posted by -= JR =-@Nov 26 2002, 05:06 PM
how many of them today proclaim the duty to kill anyone who does not believe what they believe?

lol...I do not have an exact count.... but:

There are several right wing fundamentalist Christian groups that have advocated (successfully) the bombing of abortion clinics and the killing of abortion performing doctors...

They have been vocal about it to the point of even having the wanted posters on the net

Fred Phelps advocates violence towards gays...in the name of the bible....

Several groups use the "literal" interpretation of the bible as the basis of their belief in "white supremacy" and advocate violence towards minority races as what god would want....

I will post more later, gotta go to my "day job"

i think you are right.

if we were in Iceland or somewhere more or less objective and were reading about those things in the US or local press, we would form the same opinions and perceptions about Christians in the US as radical Muslims in the Middle East.

and that would probably be a more or less, fair assessment.

but Torone would happily dismiss it is some type of Norse/Liberal/whaling community Media propaganda

[Torone]

Jr,
Torone don't give a damn what the denizens of other countries think. America is unique. I think that, instead of criticizing us, they should be trying to emulate us. Where else can one speak one's mind on a public board without fear of gov't reprisal? What other country has a member of an "oppressed" minority as a secretary of state? We change our gov't regularly with no more that a lot of name-calling and a few voting irregularities...who else can say that?

BTW, the people who are allowed to immigrate from ANY other country to the US (or who manage to do so illegally, in some cases) come here for the freedom and the opportunity to better themselves.

[sarettah]

At work now............

I don't think the danger is so much in fundamentalism...although any form of exremism can be dangerous if it involves "true believers". I think the danger comes when the religous is combined with the government. In my humble opinion, most of the places where trouble is currently arising have governments that are based in religion. Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran are all absed on the muslim religion and all seem to take a fundamentalist view. Israel is based on religion, but swings back and forth between the fundamentalist conservatives and the moderates.

When we take religion, which is generally unyielding in it'as opinion of it's own righteousness and combine it with the government, who's objective is "law and order" we end up with a dangerous combination, A government that is not open to question and reports to "God", not to the people. A government that is "right" no matter what, because they are following the "truth" in their governance.

[Almighty Colin]

Originally posted by Torone@Nov 27 2002, 10:41 AM
Where else can one speak one's mind on a public board without fear of gov't reprisal?

You need to get out more ;-)

[sarettah]

Quote:

Originally posted by Colin+Nov 27 2002, 10:58 AM-->

Linear Mode

Switch to Hybrid Mode

Switch to Threaded Mode

Posting Rules You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts BB code is On Smilies are On [IMG] code is On HTML code is On

Forum Jump User Control Panel Private Messages Subscriptions Who's Online Search Forums Forums Home Main Board Rebooted The Business Of Porn - Closed For Posting     Legacy Archived Main Board     Vesuvio

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:59 PM..