 masbury says: Juan Cole: Islamic means from the religion. Muslim describes the believer. One would think the Muslims would be more angry with those that sully their faith rather than those commenting from a standpoint of, perhaps, ignorance. I can certainly see the distinction Cole is making. I just happen to think it is a sorry attempt to inspire guilt. I, for one, would not object if the terrorists were Christian and labeled Christofascists if, in fact, their goals were similar to the Muslim Fascists. It would be an accurate description. Anger is not an appropriate response from Muslims or Christians. Sorrow, compassion and faith that the immaterial spirit shines within darkness are more characteristic of those millions of Christians and Muslims to the foolishness and barbarity of humanity. Politically, love dominates revenge, peace overcomes violence, humility comforts pride. Foolish too, but a different kind of absurdity, Perhaps a more apt demonstration of Cole's meaning would be one in which Timothy McVeigh were called, by Muslims, Biblical fascists. We would be concerned, for it would suggest that our faith was the source of such abomination, rather than a misguided individual. Abailart, again, you see more clearly than us all. Reminds me of "Do not be overcome with evil, but overcome evil with good." Perhaps we sometimes see good as merely the absence of noteworthy evil. But I think they are like light and darkness, darkness being nothing but the absence of light. Light is the energy, darkness can't dispel it. I suspect good is actually a more powerful "weapon" for change than is evil. But we are afraid, and revert to evil to overcome evil. Think so? Masbury, the source of the extremism is not debatable. Extremism and distortion can come from any faction or source. Even the Bible. Let's not pretend the source is not what it is. So if some groups, like the God Hates Fags group, decided to further their cause and ideology in violent ways similar to the Islamists and their goals were to force a fascist, religious social order on the rest of the World using the Bible, then let's call them bible-fascists. Why not? My friend, a Muslima, says that terror can't be Islamic. Knowing her way she's embracing Islam, I believe her. But I also know that there are parts in the sources of Islam which I must reckon as shady and bloody. Regarding the Torah (containing dreadful deflections of the political into the religious) as one of these sources, certain Muslims seem not to be more beyond religiously motivated terroristic actions than certain Christians and certain Jews. Insofar, the terms "Islamic terrorism", "Judaistic terrorism" and "Christian terrorism" are not completely deceptive. BUT - to honour the philanthropic and peaceful among the Jews, Christians and Muslims, I prefer the term "terrorism of crusader... Sure, I'll buy that. "Terror cannot be Islamic" These games of semantics are quite inane. However, it just so happens that all the terrorists are Islamists. Afghanistan under the Taliban was an Islamo-facist, terrorist state whether you want to face that fact or not. all the terrorists are IslamistsSay what? What about Rwanda, Uganda, Serbia? What about the KKK, still threatening when I was a boy, a terrorist outfit, nominally Christian, with a long life. What about the Nichols and McVeigh crowds? What about the Basque separatists? What about the FARC in Colombia? What about the Japanese subway gassing? Perhaps the best-known terrorists of the hour in American consciousness are Muslims, but this is not historically so. Unbelievable! I cannot understand why one would choose to fan the flames of hatred. You can blindfold yourself with partisanship all you want. This is 2008. The terrorists are religious and they are Islamic. They have killed thousands in the US, thousands in Asia, thousands in Europe, hundred of thousands in Africa, thousands in Iraq alone, thousands in the rest of the Middle East, and thousands in Southeast Asia. They have assassinated politicians, they have obstructed peace in Israel, they oppress women and children, they do not allow freedom or democracy in their countries, and they love people like you that are easily used to gain sympathy for their vile hatred. You may be a pacifist and that is fine.... Wow, facts drive Willie loony! willhelm said:1. My friend and the likes of her do not play lousy "games of semantics" when the topic of their speech is their innermost. Would you, please, (consider to) treat that with respect? 2. I have knowledge of rogue Muslims and bedlam Muslims who, with a dubious idea of peace as their mental background, overstrain the lexemic association between Islam and Salām ( سلام ) just to try to pull the wool over the Muslim and the non-Muslim world's eyes. 3. I have knowledge of rogue non-Muslims and bedlam non-Muslims who, with dubious ideas of human dignity and freedom as the... Would you, please, (consider to) treat that with respect?No! Not when intellectual dishonesty is so prevalent as to be sickening and clearly self-serving. 3. I have knowledge of rogue non-Muslims and bedlam non-Muslims who, with dubious ideas of human dignity and freedomBeautiful and quite disturbed. I suspect your "knowledge" is nothing but a trap of subjective bias where your communication with your "friend" is the source of all your knowledge and the facts of the World are inconvenient nuisances. What... Accusing other of your own behavior Willie? How are Masbury or Johanna G's statements are racist or bigoted when it is you who makes wide generalizations about a faith and its people? But never you mean, the Willhelm is incapable of such petty things as "respect" when somebody dares to contradict him. So sad... willhelm said:Aha. Sounds commonsensible, willhelm. But your words have turned out to be a "game of semantics" only. Good grief, willhelm! The drawers you seem to use to pigeon-hole people, are so stuck! Aren't you ashamed of yourself? Yes, I have knowledge of rogue and bedlam people with the preference idea of participating in the clash of idiots full of fear and hate - and tight drawers... The drawers you seem to use to pigeon-hole people, are so stuck! Aren't you ashamed of yourself?No, I'm not ashamed. I was reflecting your own pigeon-hole-ing which was quite masterful, and racist, and xenophobic, etc... I might add.. You cannot get out of your box, can you? Astonishing, this continual proof of lust for misunderstanding... Inexcusable, this carelessness with attributions like "racist" and other verbal bombs... Astonishing, inexcusable, and disgusting. Merely troll like behavior. First lesson of the interwebs, DO NOT FEED THE TROLLS!  Quite, Rasmus. A heightened sense of awareness must lack in you being a resident of Germany where we know tolerance is subjective, for show, and intolerant. I'm guessing. Only the Left can make such charges? That must be your paradigm due to years of education and indoctrination in an environment that "lusts for misunderstanding" and ignorance. Hey, Did you know Winston Churchill was a real person? Astonishing, inexcusable, and disgusting. They have killed thousands ... in Asia, thousands inIf this were Jeopardy, I'd say the question was "What is the CIA?" It is interesting that you can make a punch-line out of the murder of millions of people. it is not a punch line, it is a reality if you wish to reflect in your objectivity. Or lack thereof. We already know how you are with facts and your reliance on propaganda given your contention that 1,000,000 + civilians have been killed in Iraq. We have seen this many times from Masbury. He's not very well-versed in the truth of things. More bent on his own paradigm than objective love. As for your common refrain to bash the US, it is all too familiar and, quite frankly, it has run it's course. your contention that 1,000,000Sorry, that is not my contention, I gave you the source of that figure, you haven't been able to counter it with any proof. That source by the way has been drowned out in mainstream media in US, I don't see much about it anywhere in the US. As for your common refrain to bash the USSo now based on above comments of mine, you're going to treat your objectivity of mine as anti-US. Apparently people don't like to counter facts in US That source by the way has been drowned out in mainstream media in US, I don't see much about it anywhere in the US.Arif, you poor soul. That is because it is a freakin' lie. For goodness sake, dude. I already told you the number is about 84, 000 and that is a fact. It is not my job to post my research to these comments. Do your own. I do not have to prove myself in every instance. God knows no one else does. Besides when I do, it is casually discounted. That is why I encourage YOU to be objective and do your digging rather than buying all that garbage on propaganda sites. 84k sounds like the Iraq Body Count number, and even they admit it is low, due to the limits of the way they gather data. At least two widely-respected studies put the number over a million now. And yes, I know, I'm lying again (yawn). Even this lowest number surpasses the total American dead in Vietnam by about 20k-30k. Considering that in that conflict the estimates of Vietnamese losses (across the board) are as high as 3.5 million a million plus in Iraq is not out of the question. 84k sounds like the Iraq Body Count number, and even they admit it is low,The UN numbers considered by many "official" are lower. |
View the Top Clips from February 2, 2008
Embed This Clip In Your Site...
|
|
|
|
