Multiculturalism. Is it suicide?

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
Only one faith on earth may be more messianic than Islam: multiculturalism. Without it — without its fanatics who believe all civilizations are the same — the engine that projects Islam into the unprotected heart of Western civilization would stall and fail. It's as simple as that. To live among the believers — the multiculturalists — is to watch the assault, the jihad, take place, unrepulsed by our suicidal societies. These societies are not doomed to submit; rather, they are eager to do so in the name of a masochistic brand of tolerance that, short of drastic measures, is surely terminal.

[/ QUOTE ]

Read entire article ... (http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/007165.php#comments)

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Only one faith on earth may be more messianic than Islam: multiculturalism. Without it — without its fanatics who believe all civilizations are the same — the engine that projects Islam into the unprotected heart of Western civilization would stall and fail. It's as simple as that.

[/ QUOTE ]

Read entire article ... (http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/archives/007165.php#comments)

[/ QUOTE ]

The text, cited above, is coming from a Washington Times writer, which should be warning enough. Nonetheless, the points expressed in the text can be summarily dismissed.

The claim "All cultures are the same" must always be qualified. What is it supposed to mean ?

If it means that every culture has value, in the moral values it is based on and imparts, the claim is correct. If it means that those values are the same in every culture and that, therefore, all moral values are the same, then it is wrong. (People who support leaving alone or condoning barbaric practices, eg clit-cutting, on the grounds that we must respect the customs of others are simply being idiots.)

But multiculturalism stands, generally, for something more easy to understand : Tolerance for the Other, for the Different-than-us, for the Stranger. Accepting as equal in worthiness of respect any custom followed by aliens that's otherwise harmless, eg wearing a turban in Lahore, beads-for-tits in New Orleans, etc.

I'm all for combatting moral relativism, a deviant form of political correctness, yes. But those who are quick to badmouth multiculturalism are usually the folks who are the most prone to intolerance. It's a very reliable call.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
But multiculturalism stands, generally, for something more easy to understand : Tolerance for the Other, for the Different-than-us, for the Stranger. Accepting as equal in worthiness of respect any custom followed by aliens that's otherwise harmless, eg wearing a turban in Lahore, beads-for-tits in New Orleans, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Cyrus, the point and the problem is that many of the customs and philosophies of Islam are NOT harmless--especially to others (and to women).

What's more, Islam is ANTI-tolerance.

Get it now?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
The point and the problem is that many of the customs and philosophies of Islam are NOT harmless--especially to others (and to women). What's more, Islam is ANTI-tolerance. Get it now?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are referring to Radical Islam, I trust.

Otherwise, we should be after the followers of the Jewish Faith with equal ferocity. I mean, better get 'em now, when they are comatose, right?

The resident Jewish expert explains why, after Judaism, Islam is the organized religion that is closest to the truth (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2865341&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1)

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The point and the problem is that many of the customs and philosophies of Islam are NOT harmless--especially to others (and to women). What's more, Islam is ANTI-tolerance. Get it now?

[/ QUOTE ]



You are referring to Radical Islam, I trust.

[/ QUOTE ]

No, Cyrus.

Islam ITSELF is intolerant towards others. The *ideological basis* of Islam is intolerant towards others.

The Koran is, literally, intolerant towards others.

"Radical" Islam is a term used to describe the beliefs of those who take the Koran completely literally and seriously, and attempt to put its instructions into practice.

Among those instructions are many, many passages in which the Koran enjoins Muslims to fight unbelievers, to subjugate them, to kill them, to terrorize them.

The Koran calls for personal submission to Allah, AND FOR FORCING THE REST OF THE WORLD TO SUBMIT TO ALLAH TOO.

That is why the Koranic choices to be given to infidels is: to convert to Islam, to submit to Islamic rule and pay a special tax, or to be killed. The goal of Islam is not only personal submission to the will of Allah, but also to rule the entire world by Islamic law (by force where needed). Then the whole world will be at peace, following the will of Allah.

Radical Islamists just take all of this (and more) literally, and try to do it, because they are trying to follow the will of Allah as spelled out for them in the Koran.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
That is why the Koranic choices to be given to infidels is: to convert to Islam, to submit to Islamic rule and pay a special tax, or to be killed. T

[/ QUOTE ]

This is AN interpretation of the Koran for "infidels" living in Islamic states. The Koran clearly requires that living in peace with peaceful neighbours be practiced, that war was to by undertaken only to defend Islam. The Koran also clearly protects societies and people that are of the book.

Your information sources pick and choose quotes, and interpret them in order to reach predefined conclusions. You reliance of sources like MEMRI is one example (your other linked sources are no less propagandist in nature) of tainted sources.

Militant and extremist Islam are, like all fundamentalists, a danger to free societies.

Some day, perhaps, just perhaps, you will open your mind.

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]

Islam ITSELF is intolerant towards others. The *ideological basis* of Islam is intolerant towards others.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, and the Bible says you can sell your daughter, whores should be stoned, and when "God" tells you to off someone you'd damned well better do it.

I seem to recall something about glass houses that seems particularly relevant in this thread.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Islam ITSELF is intolerant towards others. The *ideological basis* of Islam is intolerant towards others.


[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah, yeah, yeah, and the Bible says you can sell your daughter, whores should be stoned, and when "God" tells you to off someone you'd damned well better do it.

I seem to recall something about glass houses that seems particularly relevant in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

That would be relevent if there were a series of stonings against women, offings and selling of daughters in the western world all which was supported by a large segment of the bible following religions. However there isn't. There is a growing number of violent attacks originating in the Islamic world against the non Islamic world.

There may be other interpretations possible but currently this particular intrepretation is a problem and it is naive to pretend that the Islamic religion itself is not a part of that problem.

I don't think it is out of line to A) indentify these teachings as being out there B) identify that they are being used to justify terrorist attacks and C) tell the Islamic world that if they do not take it upon themselves "clean up" their religion on their own then we the rest of society will at somepoint pose the question is culture of Islam as tought in the muslem world compatible with our culture.

That being said I think if the illegitimate governments were in some way removed power and the people had basic freedoms things would be much different.

[MMMMMM]

ACPlayer, I remember I once posted three alternate translations of certain disturbing Koranic verses, in order to satisfy your objections rgarding "interpretation" or "translation". All three translations were by Islamic scholars, who were also Muslims. All three translations corroborated the plain, literal verses of the Koran, just as I had stated.

You then objected further that you couldn't speak Arabic. Well if Muslim scholars and imams agree on the general thrust of the translation, that ought to be good enough for you, since you know nothing about it.

The "protection" of which you speak only applies to those Christians and Jews WHO AGREE TO LIVE SUBSERVIENTLY UNDER ISLAMIC LAW. Hence my claims are correct.

It has been proven to you but you won't accept it because that would force you to revamp your premises and conclusions.

In other words, it is you who are both highly ignorant and dogmatically close-minded about these issues. But the Muslim scholars and imams disagree with you about Islam. And all you have to do is listen to what they say. But you won't even do that.

Talk about close-minded; you are the very definition of close-minded.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

If you believe that we are influenced by moslems coming here (as we clearly are) how do you figure that they are not influenced by the society they arrive to?

Saw a documentary here a about a school with about 60 different nationalities. They make a large group and discuss multiculturalism. A Norwegian girl says: "Soon there will be no point in travelling anymore since all cultures are here". A Pakistani boy answers: "Have you ever traveled? Have you been to Pakistan? I feel like a foreigner every time I go there. Everything is so different from how Pakistanis live here."

Think it sums it up, the strength and nature of the human race is to constantly adjust to different conditions. Culture and traditions changes every decade.

[MMMMMM]

The ideological basis of the Old Testament is NOT based on forcing OTHERS (non-Jews) to submit to God's law. The Bible does not instruct Jews to force others, by military means if necessary, to live under Jewish law. And the Jews didn't try to do this, either.

The New Testament repudiates the ideas of stoning, etc., and essentially renounces fighting or resisting evil deeds done against one's self.

The ideological basis of the Koran, however, IS based on religious/political/military conquest, and on forcing the entire world to live under Islamic law.

Clear difference.

[spoohunter]

CNN really warps your minds doesn't it?

I sure hope you guys don't start hating us Canadians next.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
That would be relevent if there were a series of stonings against women, offings and selling of daughters in the western world all which was supported by a large segment of the bible following religions. However there isn't. There is a growing number of violent attacks originating in the Islamic world against the non Islamic world.

[/ QUOTE ]

However, it is relevant in that it should cause you to look for other reasons for terrorism(and there are many obvious reason). Understanding that fundamentalism exploits tensions caused by other factors will lead you to the answer.

Fundamentalists today exploit tensions within our society to push intelligent design, to bash gays etc. These are tensions created by a large secular trend over the past couple of decades. If the christian fundamentalist wants to send young ment to their deaths on a mission and the underlying tensions exist that make this possible, then the fundamentalist will find the quotes in the Bible. Hence the glass house comment is apropos.

Fundamentalists today exploit tensions created in their societies by other factors. We need to understand and work to relieve those tensions. The Bush administration has exacerbated these tensins and thus made us less safe.

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]

That would be relevent if there were a series of stonings against women, offings and selling of daughters in the western world all which was supported by a large segment of the bible following religions. However there isn't. There is a growing number of violent attacks originating in the Islamic world against the non Islamic world.

[/ QUOTE ]

It is ridiculous to say that Islam is somehow more violent.

What about IRA bombings over the past 100 years in London? (I'm sure that this is somehow different since it's white Catholics doing the bombing to repel an occupying force, eh.)

What about fundamentalists killing doctors that perform abortions?

What about, say, the Matthew Shephard killing? If that had happened in Mecca we'd somehow try to tie it to "Muslim" intolerance of homosexuality.

Religious radicalism is, was, and always will be inherent in any society to more or less the same degree. The only degree to which it varies is within our own outside and inside perceptions of a society. Islam seems more violent because we, the west, choose to see it as more violent and therefore portray it as such.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
It is ridiculous to say that Islam is somehow more violent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to say, but this shows your deep ignorance of the subject.

[[censored]]

i think if you look at my very last paragraph you will see I don't disagree with you as much as it looks upon first glance.

[ACPlayer]

Verses out of context can be taken from anything to prove anything.

Until YOU understand that the reason we are under attack is NOT Islam but the use of Islam by extremists you will continue to miss the real reason you are feeling unsafe. You have to understand why the extremists use their extremist interpretation AND why those who practice but dont understand Islam are willing to commit the ultimate sin in Islam (suicide).

The terrorist trends are NOT about Islam. Extremist interpretations are tool used by the extremists. You can accept that it is possible for some to have this view of Islam AND there be no terrorist attack in London like we had last week.

Open the mind, it is refreshing.

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]


The ideological basis of the Koran, however, IS based on religious/political/military conquest, and on forcing the entire world to live under Islamic law.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny, then, that every Islamic scholar in the western world would disagree with you. Islam, as much as I've ever heard, says you must only declare war on those who would seek to oppress Islam. Not those who would live in peace as your neighbor.

Your view that Islam is somehow at the heart of the problem is why we will never achieve a lasting peace in the middle east. In essence, intolerance towards Islam creates Islamic intolerance of others and is thereby a self fulfilling prohpecy.

Me? I'm equally intolerant of all religions.

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is ridiculous to say that Islam is somehow more violent.

[/ QUOTE ]

Sorry to say, but this shows your deep ignorance of the subject.

[/ QUOTE ]

In America we back up our assertions with facts. Why do you hate America?

[ACPlayer]

Yep. Missed that.

[[censored]]

Perhaps not inherently but in practice currently yes Islam is much more violent than western religions. I don't really see how this can be disputed. And I don't think we should have to interpret their religion for them, Muslems made their current practice of Islam a violent one and until they change that we should not pretend otherwise.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


The ideological basis of the Koran, however, IS based on religious/political/military conquest, and on forcing the entire world to live under Islamic law.

[/ QUOTE ]

Funny, then, that every Islamic scholar in the western world would disagree with you.

[/ QUOTE ]

Islam as practiced in the western world is not the problem.

[ptmusic]

[ QUOTE ]
Muslems made their current practice of Islam a violent one and until they change that we should not pretend otherwise.

[/ QUOTE ]

Very few muslims make their current practice of Islam a violent one, just as very few Christians make their current practice of Christianity a violent one.

We should be equally outraged at the actions of both of these small groups of violent people, and we should be equally tolerant (or intolerant) of their somewhat flawed religions.

Otherwise our thinking is ethnocentric and more flawed than either religion.

-ptmusic

[fluxrad]

[ QUOTE ]

Islam as practiced in the western world is not the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? If Islam is an inherently violent religion then shouldn't we be worried about the other several-hundred-million that practice it who don't live in the Middle East? Why do they get a pass?

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
ew Global Attitude project
Percentages represent:
(1) Confidence in Osamam Bin Laden
(2) Supports suicide bombings and other violent methods to further Islam

Jordan 60% 57% (up 14% from 2002)
Lebanon 2% 39% (down 34%)
Pakistan 51% 25% (down 8%)
Indonesia 37% 15% (down 12%)
Turkety 7% 13% (up 1%)
Morocco 25% 13% (down 27%)

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you accept the validity of this poll? If so while very few choose to act violently would you disagree that a significant portion support violence and violence specifically against the western world.

Do you think if you conducted a poll in the western world which asked A)confidence in the KKK or some other hate group and B) support of abortion bombings you would see anywhere near these numbers.

Islam may not be the root cause but currently in the middle east it is being used to justify and prompt such action and this use is not being rejected in the same manner similar actions would be here.

I don't think we should condem the entire religion but I also don't think we should also pretend that it is in no way related.

[spoohunter]

I wonder if as much violence, bloodshed, and death has occured in islamic nations in the last hundred years as it has in europe. Let's see... fifty million violent deaths in world war two... sixteen million world war one... thirty million murdered in russia after world war two... And let's not forget the deaths we imported to vietnam, korea, afghanistan (the first time), iraq (the first time), afghanistan (the second time), iraq (the second time)...

Maybe christianity is inherently unsafe.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Islam as practiced in the western world is not the problem.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why? If Islam is an inherently violent religion then shouldn't we be worried about the other several-hundred-million that practice it who don't live in the Middle East? Why do they get a pass?

[/ QUOTE ]

I've already stated somewhere that Islam is not inherently more violent but that currently in practice it is much more so. Lumping the two (western and nonwestern) as one religion would the same as lumping all bible following religions into one. When I post about the problems of Islam I am specifically talking about Islam as practiced and taught in the non western (mostly middle eastern) world.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
I wonder if as much violence, bloodshed, and death has occured in islamic nations in the last hundred years as it has in europe. Let's see... fifty million violent deaths in world war two... sixteen million world war one... thirty million murdered in russia after world war two... And let's not forget the deaths we imported to vietnam, korea, afghanistan (the first time), iraq (the first time), afghanistan (the second time), iraq (the second time)...

Maybe christianity is inherently unsafe.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not living in that time so really I don't give a [censored]. If you want to agrue that western religion has kept pace the advancements of society while Islam has not that is probably valid.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
Verses out of context can be taken from anything to prove anything.

[/ QUOTE ]

The verses are hardly taken out of context; it might even be more accurate to say that they ARE the context.

[ QUOTE ]
Until YOU understand that the reason we are under attack is NOT Islam but the use of Islam by extremists you will continue to miss the real reason you are feeling unsafe. You have to understand why the extremists use their extremist interpretation AND why those who practice but dont understand Islam are willing to commit the ultimate sin in Islam (suicide).

[/ QUOTE ]

Islam has a rich and ancient history of attacking non-Muslims, especially neighboring non-Muslims.

[ QUOTE ]
The terrorist trends are NOT about Islam. Extremist interpretations are tool used by the extremists. You can accept that it is possible for some to have this view of Islam AND there be no terrorist attack in London like we had last week.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree that SOME reasons for terrorist attacks are not because of Islam, but you are dogmatically stating that the attacks have NOTHING to do with Islam. Given that the Koran in many places advocates attacking infidels, and many imams second that notion, I don't see how you can claim that Islam has NOTHING to do with the attacks.

I think the attacks are due to a combination of factors, of which Islam itself is a factor. You claim Islam itself is entirely a non-factor. It seems to me that my view is the more balanced than yours, especially as my view that Islam has SOMETHING to do with SOME of the attacks is supported both by scripture and by the pronouncements of many imams (and bin-Laden and Zarqawi themselves have listed the religious component in their demands and rationales, among other factors).

I think you just don't want to admit the possibility that the religion itself is inherently ideologically incompatible with the entire non-Muslim world. But that is the actual ideological basis of it. And that is a CONTRIBUTING factor, though not the sole factor, to jihads and to many terrorist attacks.

[spoohunter]

60 years ago is not ancient history. And you ARE living in the time of the last three conflicts.

My minutes at the library are up.

[SheetWise]

ACPlayer-

I posted a number of Qur’an verses and teachings yesterday -- here they are again. See if you can provide a reasonable 'context', or a 'non-extremist interpretation'.

Good luck.

[ QUOTE ]

Qur’an 2:191 “And kill them wherever you find and catch them. Drive them out from where they have turned you out; for Al-Fitnah (polytheism, disbelief, oppression) is worse than slaughter.”


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Qur’an 9:5 “When the sacred forbidden months for fighting are past, fight and kill the disbelievers wherever you find them, take them captive, torture them, and lie in wait and ambush them using every stratagem of war.”


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Qur’an 8:12 “Your Lord inspired the angels with the message: ‘I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.”


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Qur’an 66:1 “Allah has already sanctioned for you the dissolution of your vows.”


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Qur’an 8:59 “The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them.”


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Qur’an 5:51 “Believers, take not Jews and Christians for your friends.”


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Qur’an 72:15 “The disbelievers are the firewood of hell.”


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Qur’an 2:64 “But you [Jews] went back on your word and were lost losers. So become apes, despised and hated. We made an example out of you.”


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Tabari IX:69 “Killing disbelievers is a small matter to us.”


[/ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Tabari VIII:130 “The Messenger said, ‘Two religions cannot coexist in the Arabian Peninsula.’ Umar investigated the matter, then sent to the Jews, saying: ‘Allah has given permission for you to be expelled.”


[/ QUOTE ]

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
60 years ago is not ancient history. And you ARE living in the time of the last three conflicts.

My minutes at the library are up.

[/ QUOTE ]

I assumed you were not really trying to link wars like WW1, WW2 & veitnam to Christianitity. I don't mind debating with people who do not share my beliefs but I prefer to keep it within the realms of reality.

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
I seem to recall something about glass houses that seems particularly relevant in this thread.


[/ QUOTE ]

Except that people who practice Christianity and Judaism have assimilated into the modern world, and condemn many of the practices in their history. As I recall, the Bible reports many atrocities -- I don't recall it advocating them.

[MMMMMM]

fluxrad, I have provided numerous posts on this board, showing that that Islam is inherently more aggressive, violent and intolerant towards others than are any other major religions.

I am not going to do it all again right NOW.

However I probably will try to summarize things in a future new thread at some point.

Part of the problem (not a bad problem) is that new people continually come to this board and get into discussions, whereas I have posted here since at least 1999. Not saying that to call seniority, but rather to point out the difficulty of trying to summarize things long since discussed, especially complex things.

All you have to do is read the Koran yourself and you will see the numerous injunctions to Muslims to attack, subjugate, kill and terrorize non-Muslims. Also you might try looking at the history of Mohammed's life, then comparing it to Jesus' life.

Night and day.

That is not to say that both Muslims and Christians have not both done some terribly evil things in the names of their religions. However Islam literally enjoins them to violence whereas Christianity (the teachings of Jesus) espouses non-violence.

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
Islam, as much as I've ever heard, says you must only declare war on those who would seek to oppress Islam. Not those who would live in peace as your neighbor.


[/ QUOTE ]

Those who would live in peace must live in Dhimmitude (http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/) . You can see Europe adapting already ...

[SheetWise]

It is a problem in the western world, and has been a problem all over the world. You're just not going to see it unless you follow it.

They've done a great job of promoting the 'religion of peace'. And nazis wanted to 'help' the jews ...

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
Funny, then, that every Islamic scholar in the western world would disagree with you. Islam, as much as I've ever heard, says you must only declare war on those who would seek to oppress Islam. Not those who would live in peace as your neighbor.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK--you must try to understand, the Islamic definition of certain terms is quite different than the Western definition. I will give you an example:

The Islamic definition of "peace" is living under the laws of Islam with your neighhbor, both submitting to Allah's will.

Under Islamic ideology, the world is divided into Dar al-Islam (the House of Peace) and Dar al-Harb (the House of War). The part of the world living under Islamic rule is considered at peace, while the rest of the world is considered at war (against Allah's will).

Dar al-Islam is in constant struggle with Dar al-Harb, until the day that Dar al-Harb will also submit to Allah's will, and the entire world will then be at peace, under Allah, living as He commanded men to live in the Koran.

Another example: the Islamic definition of oppressing Islam is resisting its spread or its preeminence as the only true religion.

If you read more about Islam, what *Muslim* scholars or imams have to say, you will get a better perspective on things like this.

Or you might try www.secularislam.org (http://www.secularislam.org) , which is a very interesting and informative site.

[Arnfinn Madsen]

Multiple cultures exist on the globe and will continue to do so. Many of the cultures will claim moral superiority. What is most dangerous? The cultures blending together or staying on eachothers turf?

I think blending is healthier, if Bush and Osama would grow up in the same street I think both 9/11 and Iraq war would be much less unlikely. Comments?

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
Islam may not be the root cause but currently in the middle east it is being used to justify and prompt such action

[/ QUOTE ]

Islam is not the root cause. Once we get beyond that we need to dif to find why its use in some parts of the world is being bought into by otherwise, apparently, intelligent young people. What emotion, what desires are allowing the extremists like Bin Ladin to find college educated young men in their prime of their lives to commit suicide. Why citizens of these lands (we now recognize that their being muslim is ancillary to the analysis) are willing to support the suicide bombers in these large numbers.

Bigots have made Islam the root cause of the suicide bombers. With this comment you have shown that you are on the right track now take the next step. The emotions of these people would be the same even if they were not muslim and they would likely have been willing act if given some cover by their extremist leaders.

Islam is NOT the problem (even if it were a violent, intolerant religion which of course it is not) that leads to the terrorist attacks.

[ACPlayer]

The door is now ajar (perhaps).

You seem to atleast accept that Islam is not the root of terrorist attacks. Now you need to understand that extremist interpreations of Islam is being used as a tool.

We need to focus on the cause not the tool. Focus on the tool leads us down the path of irrational and intolerant behaviours on our path.

I hope you keep trying to open that (now partially ajar) door in your mind. Attagirl! You have my blessing -- may Allah be with you in this endeavour.

[[censored]]

[ QUOTE ]
Attagirl!

[/ QUOTE ]

huh?

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
If you believe that we are influenced by moslems coming here (as we clearly are) how do you figure that they are not influenced by the society they arrive to?

[/ QUOTE ]

Its got something to do with the content of the book they carry with them. Something about how sacred they consider it, and the fact they face Mecca and pray five times a day ... something about that makes me feel they believe it.

[ACPlayer]

Like I said, versus dont impress me.

I can find versus that show Islam as a model religion.

The important question is why are we under attack from these terrorists. Why did they bomb london, 9/11 etc. Is it because of these quotes or is it for another reason. If you say it these versus are the cause you are not understanding.

[MMMMMM]

I'm saying that Islam is a component (often among several) in many terrorist attacks. You're saying it is a non-factor. I think I have made my brief case better than your pure and absolute assertion.

I do agree that radical Islam is a tool of the extremists. HOWEVER, the extremists have much better support and basis in the scripture of the Koran itself than do the moderates. Hence this is all a somewhat insoluble problem.

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
I think blending is healthier, if Bush and Osama would grow up in the same street I think both 9/11 and Iraq war would be much less unlikely. Comments?

[/ QUOTE ]

Much less unlikely?

Well, they did both grow up as children of privilege.
Reading about the suicide bombers in London, I don't think growing up on the same street has anything to do with it.

[ACPlayer]

There is a third house under that Fiqh that you choose to ignore as you put forth crap.

That is the house where you live in harmony with nations of other faith. According to this if the other faith is monotheist (like Christians and Jews) then a conforming Islamic nation can live in harmony with these nations.

If however, the neighbour attacks (and only if they attack), like for example building walls on your land, then it is your duty to defend.

THis post is an excellent example of half truths presented earnestly by those who have an understanding by reading too much propaganda.

[ACPlayer]

I have long suspected that MMMMMM is a woman as he likes to get the last word in.

My apologies to any women who may find this stereotype offensive.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
There is a third house under that Fiqh that you choose to ignore as you put forth crap.

That is the house where you live in harmony with nations of other faith. According to this if the other faith is monotheist (like Christians and Jews) then a conforming Islamic nation can live in harmony with these nations.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only if they submit to Islamic law and live as second class citizens, OR if the time is not yet strategically ripe to force them to do so (if they are more powerful militarily, for instance).

[ QUOTE ]
If however, the neighbour attacks (and only if they attack), like for example building walls on your land, then it is your duty to defend.

[/ QUOTE ]

You have been reading too much Western interpretation of Islam and not enough of the writings of imams and *Muslim* scholars--or the scriptures themselves.

[ QUOTE ]
THis post is an excellent example of half truths presented earnestly by those who have an understanding by reading too much propaganda.

[/ QUOTE ]

Er, no.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
I'm saying that Islam is a component (often among several) in many terrorist attacks

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, and so are backpacks.

For analysis of causes of terrorism, consider Islam like the backpack.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
I have long suspected that MMMMMM is a woman as he likes to get the last word in.


[/ QUOTE ]

I have suspected the same of you for different reasons.

Separate note: you like to not answer points you cannot answer, as where you were asked to support your claim that those passages must have been taken out of context.

Point won by Sheetwind.

[ACPlayer]

Dar al-Sulh

[ QUOTE ]
Dar al-Sulh (“house of treaty”) is a place that is not under Muslim control, but that has friendly relations with Islamic territories. In Islamic tradition, the precedent for Dar al-Sulh is a treaty that the Prophet Muhammad entered into with the Christian city state of Najran.

[/ QUOTE ]

Various houses in Koran (http://mediaguidetoislam.sfsu.edu/religion/03e_concepts.htm)
Another set of classifications (http://www.bismikaallahuma.org/History/dar_islam-harb.htm)

Like I said in reference to your post on the two houses:

[ QUOTE ]
THis post is an excellent example of half truths presented earnestly by those who have an understanding by reading too much propaganda.

[/ QUOTE ]

er Yes, Yes, Yes.

[ACPlayer]

Comparing quotations from religious versus is like a whizzing contest.

I concede that sheetwind can whizz further.

[SheetWise]

[ QUOTE ]
For analysis of causes of terrorism, consider Islam like the backpack.

[/ QUOTE ]

I really think I'm begining to get it. I'll bet you also believe that people don't kill -- guns do.

[ACPlayer]

I think you got the analogy backward.

I say that people kill not the tools -- not the guns, the backpacks or Islam. Understand the emotions and reasons for those emotions of the people.

Extremist interpretations of Islam, backpacks and guns are not the tools of terrorists war against us.

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
For analysis of causes of terrorism, consider Islam like the backpack.

[/ QUOTE ]

Why do you think this is the case? Do the instruction manuals for backpacks have suggested uses like hauling explosives to your enemies?

I understand that you think that Islam is just a tool used by extremists, but why do you think it is the current tool of choice?

There must be something intinsic to Islam that allows for irrational and violent behavior to be brought to the fore more easily than without Islam.

What other explanation can you offer for the prevalence of Muslims among terrorist groups? Clearly they make up the largest portion of those engaged in terrorism.

[ACPlayer]

Was there something intrinsic about catholics and protestants that led the IRA led violence? Is there something intrinsic about Hindus that led to the Tamil Tiger? Is there something intrinsic about Judaism than drove the Israeli terrorists (lets just talk about the time of the King David bombins and not the current Israeli led terrorism, to keep the thread clean)? Is thare something about Christianity that led Hitler to rid his lands of heathens?

THe underlying causes of each was not the religion. In some cases religion was used to whip up hysteria in the troops.

So, it is the tool of choice because that is the religion practiced there. It is the tool of choice because Islamic people (moderates and extremists) believe (rightly I think) that Islam is under attack.

The more we make Islam the scape goat the more we drive those on the moderate fringes into the arms of the extremists to be used as fodder.

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
The more we make Islam the scape goat the more we drive those on the moderate fringes into the arms of the extremists to be used as fodder.

[/ QUOTE ]

The more time it takes for what you call peaceful Islam to meaningfully crack down on fundamentalist terrorists, the weaker your position will become.

[ACPlayer]

Certainly Islamic organizations in England have extended a helping hand to the police.

However, we make it that much harder by doing dumb things that continue to hurt the Arab and Muslim societies (specially in the middle east). We attack a country causing much death and pain; we continue to support represssive middle eastern regimes like Saudi; we continue to allow Israel to run rough shod over 3 million palestinian muslims with our active support; we continue to refer the Iran as the Axis of Evil; we talk tough with Syria about interferring in Iraq while we interfere in Iraq; we exclude Turkey from the EU; the list of grievances is long.

Our response to the grievance is basically "up yours -- its not our problem", well that sets the stage for the fundamentalists. We essentially built the power base for Iranian Ayatollahs by training and supporting SAVAK and the Shah -- which directly led to the Embassy fiasco in 79.

Is it all very surprising the fundamentalist mullah's messages fall on easily moldable ears?

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
However, we make it that much harder by doing dumb things that continue to hurt the Arab and Muslim societies (specially in the middle east). We attack a country causing much death and pain; we continue to support represssive middle eastern regimes like Saudi; we continue to allow Israel to run rough shod over 3 million palestinian muslims with our active support; we continue to refer the Iran as the Axis of Evil; we talk tough with Syria about interferring in Iraq while we interfere in Iraq; we exclude Turkey from the EU; the list of grievances is long.

Our response to the grievance is basically "up yours -- its not our problem", well that sets the stage for the fundamentalists. We essentially built the power base for Iranian Ayatollahs by training and supporting SAVAK and the Shah -- which directly led to the Embassy fiasco in 79.

Is it all very surprising the fundamentalist mullah's messages fall on easily moldable ears?

[/ QUOTE ]

You could just as easily be writing this about women's fashion designers and sex offenders. It's not their fault, it's someone else's. They were driven to it by what everyone else does.

This is the same thing as blaming fast food restaurants for making people fat and gun manufacturers for violent crime. The bottom line is that people make choices and those choices have consequences.

If the Islamic world does not see terrorism as a viable option, then it will become apparent very soon. Their failure to act as their understanding of the situation improves will be very telling.

By the way, do you think that the US has done anything good for the world?

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Multiple cultures exist on the globe and will continue to do so. Many of the cultures will claim moral superiority. What is most dangerous? The cultures blending together or staying on eachothers turf?

I think blending is healthier,

[/ QUOTE ]

There's another word for blending and it's called assimilation which is in conflict with multiculturalism in my mind. The lines are blurry no doubt though. The meanings of the words are not the same for all.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
If you believe that we are influenced by moslems coming here (as we clearly are) how do you figure that they are not influenced by the society they arrive to?

[/ QUOTE ]

Its got something to do with the content of the book they carry with them. Something about how sacred they consider it, and the fact they face Mecca and pray five times a day ... something about that makes me feel they believe it.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's ok to believe it. The question is whether or not their allegiance is to the country they live in and the leaders of that country or to leaders of their religion that are in viloent opposition to the country that they live and are citizens of. To me multiculturalism actually tolerates the allegiance to religous leaders that are in violent opposition of the country that they live in and are citizens of. To me that's insane.

[ACPlayer]

[ QUOTE ]
The bottom line is that people make choices and those choices have consequences.

[/ QUOTE ]

Exactly correct. We chose to eat at the fast food counter and got attacked by transfatty acids. We chose to implement unfair foreign policy ideas for short term profit and got attacked by backpacks with bombs.

It is arrogant and stupid to analyze and point fingers at what is wrong with Islam (and there is plenty) without first understanding our own culpability and role in this mess. The reason I take issue with the attackers of Islam is not because I am fond of it (actually, I am not fond of any religion) but because it is not the main issue, ir is an easy emotionally attractive red herring.

Remember it is far easier to change ourselves than to get others to change. If the net result is the same (in this case we become increase our safety) then should be not do all we can to change ourselves too?

This is a common mistake. We blame the other guy and not consider our own failings and the opportunities we have to improve ourselves.

[Dov]

[ QUOTE ]
arrogant and stupid to analyze and point fingers at what is wrong with Islam (and there is plenty) without first understanding our own culpability and role in this mess.

...

Remember it is far easier to change ourselves than to get others to change. If the net result is the same (in this case we become increase our safety) then should be not do all we can to change ourselves too?

This is a common mistake. We blame the other guy and not consider our own failings and the opportunities we have to improve ourselves.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you hear any process in Islam today that resembles the discussion going on in western countries? I mean things along the lines of them trying to understand us and accomodate us as well.

They aren't asking "Why do the Americans do what they do?"

They are starting with a conclusion and working backward into it, using the Koran to justify their flawed logic.

When this is a 2 way discussion, with both sides trying to improve, then your approach will become more correct.

In the meantime, changing for its own sake is simply appeasement and will not result in any meaningful gains.

It's like saying that since a 2 year old is less likely to change than you are, then you should buy him the toy that he is screaming about in the store, even though you can't afford it.

Just because he is inflexible doesn't make him correct, and doesn't mean that we should be flexible enough to make up the difference.

When they start having the "Why do they hate us?" discussion, then we will have room to grow.

[ACPlayer]

They dont have to have the discussion with us.

We can have the discussion internally and see what policies may have been harmful, and what we can do about changing them.

Excellence is about enhancing the self, it includes being able to criticize oneself and in fact demands that you CONSTANTLY look for places you can improve to bring about desired change. The desired change here is to counter the influence of militant islam amongst the moderate muslims around the world. Appointing Karen Hughes as special ambassador and dispatching Laura Bush for a debacle tour of the Middle East is not enough. We have to review and, perhaps, change policy. We are in control of our own ability to change and have to wait for no one. This should not be about them, but us.

So, the question should be are there policies that we can review and aggressively implement to make our lives safer. To give the moderate muslim something to look forward to and to once again see the USA as giving to the world community.

Trade, the Palestinian question, support of the middle east dictators should all be up for review.

Leaving our security to the moderate muslim to police the extremist is an extremely passive strategy. Not a winning one.

[Bez]

Turkey aren't in the EU due to their appalling record on human rights, not because they are Muslim. Are there any Muslim countries that don't have appalling records on human rights?

[Cyrus]

I return from a short vacation and what do I find?

Your post about Martingale (which misses the point by a mile -- but I will maybe respond to that pap another time) and this silly little evasiveness!

Who said anything about Islam being good or bad? I thought I was quite specific : Even if we accept your position that Islam itself (and not "radical Islam") is guilty as charged for intolerance etc, what say you to the claim that Islam is closest most of all other religions to Judaism?

Doesn't that make all Jews followers of an equally horrible religion, practitioners of intolerance, etc?

This, my good man, is the question, and not the chaff you put out. And, I should warn you, that the claim about Judaism and Islam was made by a poster who seems pretty informed about Judaism! (Read all about it!) (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2865341&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1)

And why were you notably absent when bossJJ run riot all over yer Christian tenets in the Philosophy Forum?

Busy studying the Koran? /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[MMMMMM]

Cyrus, I guess you missed the post where I swore off arguing with nitwits.

I may still comment from time to time, but I'm all done arguing.

Martingale that.

[ACPlayer]

Good idea.

You need a leg to stand on before you can argue -- or two or four or eight.

Enjoy your retirement.

[bholdr]

[ QUOTE ]
Your information sources pick and choose quotes, and interpret them in order to reach predefined conclusions. You reliance of sources like MEMRI is one example (your other linked sources are no less propagandist in nature) of tainted sources.


[/ QUOTE ]

aggreed. nh ac

[Olof]

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y280/keithtalent/05.gif

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Cyrus, I guess you missed the post where I swore off arguing with nitwits.


[/ QUOTE ]

Hah!

I was not even arguing!

I am accepting your premise that Islam is bad, for discussion's sake. But, I am saying that if we accept that, weasel boy, then we have to examine if Judaism is bad as well!

Because, as claimed a poster who has forgotten more about Judaism than you will ever know, "Islam is closest most of all other religions to Judaism"!

Bible that! (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2865341&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1)

[MMMMMM]

As usual, the question that really most matters is: which is WORSE--not whether something is "bad" or "good" in the absolute sense.

[SheetWise]

Amen.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
As usual, the question that really most matters is: which is WORSE--not whether something is "bad" or "good" in the absolute sense.

[/ QUOTE ]

You are buzzed - again.

Read the relevant words, carefully this time: "Islam is closest most of all other religions to Judaism." linky (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2865341&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1)

So, whatever one accuses Islam to be (ie intolerant, hateful, bad, etc), one also accuses Judaism as being, at least more than any religion.

So, even "comparatively", bro, you lose out. /images/graemlins/grin.gif


I'd suggest you keep mum. The man knows his Bible...

[MMMMMM]

Comparatively speaking, Islam is the LEAST tolerant of all major religions, and the most aggressive.

[IQ89]

[ QUOTE ]
Linky (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2865341&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1)

[/ QUOTE ]

You keep drawing that 'Linky' like a gun.

http://www.fastdraw.org/graphics/fd-xgun.jpg

[ACPlayer]

Kind of like comparing different flavors of excrement.

[Cyrus]

Did you just say that Judaism is the least tolerant of all major religions, and the most aggressive.

For shame, you anti-semite, you!..

[ QUOTE ]
BossJJ (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2865341&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1) : "Islam is closest most of all other religions to Judaism."

[/ QUOTE ]If A = B and B > C, then A > C.

You dirty anti-semite, you!.. /images/graemlins/smile.gif

[Peter666]

Just guarantee me 72 virgins (and not fat ugly ones either) and I will blow myself up for any cause at any place and at any time.

[MMMMMM]

Islam is FAR LESS TOLERANT than Judaism.

And Cyrus: why don't you actually study the religions a little bit before making your very misinformed claims.

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
Islam is FAR LESS TOLERANT than Judaism.
Why don't you actually study the religions a little bit before making your very misinformed claims?

[/ QUOTE ]

You are completely wrong here !

I am not the one making any of these assertions ! BossJJ does -- and he is backing them up as strongly as anyone I've seen backing non-poker assertions in this forum. Your argument is with him! And, believe you me (you know it but pretend you don't read 'im!), BossJJ can be devastating in references and sources.

So, BossJJ flat out claims that "Islam is closest most of all other religions to Judaism." Therefore, whatever you are saying about mainstream Islam applies to Judaism as well! linky (http://forumserver.twoplustwo.com/showthreaded.php?Cat=&Number=2865341&page=&view=&s b=5&o=&vc=1)

Have fun fighting it over with 'im. I already have my tickets front row, center. /images/graemlins/grin.gif

[MMMMMM]

According to you, Cyrus, BossJJ claims that Judaism is the religion most similar to Islam--not that Judaism has the same level of tolerance for other religious views, or for practitionaers of other religions.

Please, Cyrus, think straight before offering such a nonsensical argument: do you really think that "most similar" implies equivalence between all elements of the two things being compared? (this OBVIOUS fallacy illustrates why I keep swearing off arguing with nitwits: Cyrus take note).

It is a fact that Islam is the least tolerant of all major religions. That you dispute this shows your immense ignorance of the subject (which was already apparent).

[SheetWise]

What does closest have to do with it?

1,2,3,5000

3 is closest to 5000. So, what?

[Cyrus]

[ QUOTE ]
According to you, Cyrus, BossJJ claims that Judaism is the religion most similar to Islam--not that Judaism has the same level of tolerance for other religious views, or for practitionaers of other religions.

[/ QUOTE ]

"According to me" ?!

Start Dictation:

TAKE IT UP WITH BOSSJJ.

...IF YOU DARE.

End Dictation.

/images/graemlins/tongue.gif

[Cosimo]

[ QUOTE ]
Was there something intrinsic about catholics and protestants that led the IRA led violence?

[/ QUOTE ]

For those of use that don't believe in spirits, ghosts, and supernatural forces, this is an easy yes.

[ QUOTE ]
The underlying causes of each was not the religion.

[/ QUOTE ]

Maybe the sort of mind that embraces belief without proof isn't critical in its acceptance of other ideas?

A friend of mine has a very religious wife. She has described a shirt with some kind of "praise god" phrasing on it as "beautiful." It is actually a very ugly shirt; poor color choices and typography, with a stock photo of the earth. Her usage of the term destroys the concept of beauty. She tries to break cats up when they sniff each other's butts because that's "rude." These are cats! She is systemically irrational; her belief in random religious ideas is intimately tied to this irrationality.

Maybe religion isn't the cause of irrationality in other parts of her life, but it is all tied together. If Hitler said God told him to exterminate the Jews, who are you to disagree? How can you disprove such a claim? If you believe there's some supernatural hoobie-joobie that's out there talking to people, why couldn't that creature tell Hitler to go ahead and get rid of those pesky Jews?

I think the Koran compels those of weak mind to take it literally; to seek out and destroy infidels. I don't blame the book for this -- the point is, it is a source of evil ideas. As is the Christian Bible.

I would say that the true enemy isn't Islam, but irrationality, and by definition, anyone that believes in Islam is irrational. (As are all you other Jesus-worshippers out there, even if you vote Republican or don't go to church every Sunday.)