Muhammad Reveals...

[MMMMMM]

This is the first I've heard about the supposedly melded photo/story.

Re. illegal immigration: I think the U.S. already has enough people. As I've said before, just look at the traffic.

[Chris Alger]

An ad hominem attack is one made against the person rather than his argument. My characterization of M's views as racist is not that.

[sourwhiskystrait]

Why argue with a man that has been quoted as suggesting castration is a better alternative than Judaism?

Alger is a known radical anti-Semite and National Security risk.

[sourwhiskystrait]

No, you simply said that you support suicide bombing of Jews, and blamed 9-11 on the victims. I'm surprised that you haven't been arrested yet.

[Chris Alger]

So with Colombia we consider the circumstances peculiar to the conflict but in the Middle East we tend to ascribe the violence to Islam or Arab culture because to consider what Arabic opponents of the U.S. actually say would invite a critical examination of U.S. policy, which is verboten. That's my beef. There is no "jihad" to promote violence against "the West" that most Muslims support nor any Muslim "plot" to take over the world.

"it might have something to do with their religion"

On this point of course I agree. I think it has a lot to do with their religion, just as the European Christian heritage of anti-Semitism laid much of the groundwork for Nazi ideology. But attacking the spiritual lives of hundreds of millions of peaceful, law-abiding Muslims as a "cause" of terrorism, while ignoring any postive aspect (an extremely popular pastime these days, particularly on the net and particularly from the Zionist-Christian right) is sheer bigotry. Attacking a religion that obviously is here to stay is not a means of intelligently combatting the causes of terrorism.

I offer no defense for the issuence of fatwas calling for murder. They're bad and fortunately rare.

[brad]

uh, thats homeland security risk sir.

get with the times.

[brad]

yes well israel is getting like an extra 15 billion in aid because of the war on terrorism.

it was israelis who were trying to float the idea of a linkage between al kida, iran, iraq, etc.

honsestly i think at least (!) half of everything for public consumption is pure propaganda.

[MMMMMM]

Well, I think the internal conflict in Columbia is something of a special case. The entire country is being ripped apart by big-money drug wars and the politics are corrupt as hell. It really is a lot like a very dirty civil war, although I condemn terror attacks upon innocents there too just as everywhere else.

One reason I ascribe to ideology a significant portion of the anti-Western violence in the world today is because many Muslim religious leaders are calling for such violence on religious grounds. Lots of them are calling for holy war against the West, in their sermons and in their schools. And while there may be many socio-economic and other factors at work, the religious component is very significant...and much of that goes back to the absolutist nature of the Koran itself.

I don't think attacking the religious views of anyone who believes in archaic, harmful ideas is bigotry. Also, I did quite strongly condemn the institution of the Catholic Church on this forum.

In order for the world to make it through the dangerous times ahead, as weapons of mass destruction proliferate, and the potential for individuals to cause great destruction increases, it is essential that most of mankind become more rational than at present. Religion is not typically something that guides people towards thinking more rationally. That's not to say that religions cannot also have their good points.

The religions which insist more on faith rather than reason are generally the least helpful in this area. Just because something is believed by a great many people doesn't mean that it is true, or that it is even a good thing. While it may have some good aspects, certainly, the net overall effect may be either good or bad. In today's world, the stifling of free thought, free speech, and the imposition of draconian punishments for archaic "crimes" are harmful practices, even if a great number of people support such things.

Religion may be here to stay--surely, at least for the foreseeable future. That doesn't necessarily mean that it's a good thing in balance. To the degree that any ideology or religion preaches intolerance and incites violence, I would say it is pernicious. And while faith may in some ways (or circumstances) be a good thing, faith to the exclusion of reason is not a good thing. Unfortunately, Islam is and has been called "An Empire of Faith." Well, that wouldn't be so bad if it were also an Empire of Reason. However when faith is mixed with calls to holy war, etc., there are major problems brewing. And holy war is a concept which unfortunately cannot be divorced from essential Islam.

[MMMMMM]

Your characterization of my views as racist is inaccurate at best however. I hold no racist views.

Race is not culture, and race is not religion.

If you want to call me a bigot, I would dispute that too, but whether someone is bigoted is not at all the same thing as whether someone is a racist. Racism and bigotry are not identical. All racists are bigots, but not all bigots are racists. I don't believe I'm either, but at least let's be clear about what it is you're calling me.

My criticisms revolve around what I see as flaws in ideologies, or cultures, or practices...not around skin colors or who someone's ancestors might have been.

[MMMMMM]

I would suspect that it's far less than half. Also the media today often seem to have ways of somehow getting at information the government would apparently rather not see released.

Maybe Israel was initially responsible for floating that idea. Maybe they're right, too--they've always had the best intelligence service in the world. That idea doesn't strike me as being all that farfetched anyway (at least it's probably partially true).