it is obvious that the muslim religion is not a peaceful one, the world would be a safer place without it.

How is this obvious? Care to elaborate?

Or how about this....

If you were around back in the time when Christianity was launching war after war across Europe....would you have said the same thing about Christianity? If you say no, you're of course a major hypocrite. And look how Christianity changed.

I got another idea. Germany seems to have started a lot of problems recently, let's kill all of Germany. Hey, you know who else causes troubles? Israel. Let's destroy them.

How is this obvious? Care to elaborate?
Do I really need to? Look at through news headlines for the past 30 yrs and you tell me how many the have to do with the middle east.

would you have said the same thing about Christianity?
Your darn right I would, Christianity is pretty bad too.

And look how Christianity changed.
Was it worth it?

kill all of Germany
I never said anything about killing. I'm just saying if I had to eliminate one religion in the world it would be muslim religion. Better yet, lets get rid of them all or convert to buddism. Now they have a real philosophy.

"Do I really need to? Look at through news headlines for the past 30 yrs and you tell me how many the have to do with the middle east"

Hmmmmmm..........
Well the atrocities commited by the Soviet Union weren't Muslim. The majority of American-supported Nazi or extreme fascist leaders weren't Muslim. The two world Wars weren't caused by muslims. The muslims didn't buidl the atomic bomb. The war in Israel has as much to do with Jews and Americans as it does with Muslims. The problems in Africa certainly weren't Muslim created.

Yup, most of the atrocities of the last century seem to have a lack of Muslim-created ones. Except sept. 11th.



"Your darn right I would, Christianity is pretty bad too."

All major religions have inspired war. So what you end up calling for is a destruction of religion.



"I never said anything about killing. I'm just saying if I had to eliminate one religion in the world it would be muslim religion. Better yet, lets get rid of them all or convert to buddism. Now they have a real philosophy."

So what's the point of the post? Eliminating a religion either means mass genocide (in that case, can I call you Hitler II?) or disallowing the religion (which is an extreme left tactic, so can I call you Stalin II?).

know that I am not being literal, but hypothetical and theoretical.

So what you end up calling for is a destruction of religion.
Well I guess I am. Why not?

Eliminating a religion either means mass genocide (in that case, can I call you Hitler II?) or disallowing the religion (which is an extreme left tactic, so can I call you Stalin II?).
I'm not saying I'd take any action, it's obviously past anyone do anything. But I'm just saying from the start we'd be better off without religion. Think of all the time we was in church and in wars and jesuit school wasting thier time teaching religion.

Believe me, I would agree that the world would be a better place without religion. But we have to face the fact that there is no immediate way to get rid of religion. It'll disappear over time!

However, it is also my view that had there been no religions and myths from the beginning, man would have found other reasons to fight.

However, it is also my view that had there been no religions and myths from the beginning, man would have found other reasons to fight.

agreed, but i think it would be significantly lower.


let me ask you a question, do you think religion is losing it's grasp on people? I am from the US so that is what I base my question on. I see alot of people my age (19) who were brought up in a catholic or christain family and now are lashing out and resisting it. I believe there is a God, but that most organized religions are not a good idea.

i don't think religion well EVER disapear (and i hapen to think religion is good) because a lot of people NEED something bigger than themselves to belive

Humans LIKE to fight and will go out of there way to do so

physicsforums.com : please try to avoid generalities. I agree with your position on Islam, but please elaborate.

I have some good evidence of the violent nature of this religion just as I have evidence of this tendency in christianity. The Islamic religion is based on conflict. Muhammed, their prophet, was a warrior. The early Islamics converted by conquering their neighbors. They used convert or die tactics.

Christians as part of the Roman extension also commited acts of agression. The pope initiated the crusades, inviting the hordes of Western European Germanics to massacre Islamics. Just read the first book to have a feeling for the violent nature of these people.

People may say that they no longer act like those whose ideas they follow, but then why should they continue to follow? Most rational people would prefer to hold an ideal until it no longer fits their philosophy toward life. People of these relgions still cling to these savage ideals that have no relation to their life.

It'll disappear over time!

I wish I could believe that but we havent needed religion to explain anything since about the 1700s but its still going strong 300 yrs later. Mabey it just needs more time but im afraind thet humans are stuck with it forever.

The Jewish culture used to be as violent as any other. Back in the days of Babylon and Jerusalem and all, their armies fought and killed as much as anyone else. In fact every year they celebrate an occasion when their soldiers slaughtered a bunch of civilians, they call it Hannukah or something.

Islam learnt the concept of holy war from the christians of the Crusades.

God is apparently on George Bush's side in his "War On Terror (TM)".

What I'm seeing here is religion and war walking hand in hand. Not any one specific religion, but "religion". If you're gonna wipe out Islam, you might as well get rid of them all.

Sorry adam but how many wars came out of buddasim?

Originally posted by Asguard
Sorry adam but how many wars came out of buddasim?

I don't know much Asian history, I can't say. But I would be very surprised if Buddhism has never started any wars.

So what you end up calling for is a destruction of religion.


Well I guess I am. Why not?


Religion is nothing more than a set of beliefs, which are often more justified than any other belief. So what you're really calling for is the destruction of all beliefs, which could only be realized by lobotomizing the entire human population.

... I'm not saying that'd be a bad thing, but it's probably not what you intend.

Too simplistic.

it is obvious that the muslim religion is not a peaceful one, the world would be a safer place without it.

Well...what if I say...

It is obvious that the male sex is not a peaceful one, the world would be a safer place without them.

(There'd be less people, but the world *would* be safer...)

(to Physicsforum.co): Allright settle down. I'm not into the whole zero tolerance thing first off. Second only extremist groups of the religion commit violent and horrible acts, not the average, so just chill out. If you propose this then destroy the Christians for the crusades, or the Jews for holding Israel violently as their holy land.

I think destroying Islam is too extreme. Also too simplistic (I agree Cupric)

freedom of religion (in the USA)
crimes against humanity

Yeah.

Sounds like a discussion on holy war to me... Bring forth thy crusaders!:D

Uh oh....uh oh....did I just defend a religion?

*Sob*

I feel so, so, dirty.

*Sob* It had to be said.

It's okay sweetums...it happens sometimes.

*pats Xev on the back gently*

You're not to blame. You were TRICKED!!

Originally posted by physicsforums.com

Do I really need to? Look at through news headlines for the past 30 yrs and you tell me how many the have to do with the middle east.



Headlines from middle east?, Does your islam only limited to middle east? I think Islam goes all over the world. In far east there wasn't any war neither any major missionaries went there malaysia and Indonasia are the very good expample of most populated muslim countries, care you explain that?. Please don't put a limitation there :). There are as many headlines about Israeli's, IRAs, southeast Asia, Africa, Panama, Cuba, etc etc. Now it is upto our mind frame what we want to see?. And then boy o boy God bless our media, nothing but propaganda against muslims. Remember OKC bombing within an hour the tv presented a report that eye witnesses saw arabic men running away from locations. lol Now that was so pathetic same happened with 9/11, lots of fales propaganda. I guess that's part of our media, like any other country we like to ignite our public emotions as well. And please don't kill me I am a muslim convert also. :(







Originally posted by physicsforums.com

I never said anything about killing. I'm just saying if I had to eliminate one religion in the world it would be muslim religion. Better yet, lets get rid of them all or convert to buddism. Now they have a real philosophy.


I agree with another member here who mention that there are only few bad apples who like to justify every thing according to religion. In 1.25 billion muslims there are no more then 50,000 extremist or 100,000 maybe. Now please justify your statment in the light of these numbers. There are 8 million muslims here in USA, how many have you seen coming to your door and asking you to convert? or Causing problems for you raging wars against you? I don't think that you can even tell a difference who is muslim or not if the women not wearing head scarf, you can't tell if they are indians, pakistanis, arabic or any other country in the world. There are 1200 mosques in USA and average per Mosque conversion rate is 22/year converts, thats 26400, muslims every year. Just coming out of USA.

Now how do we convert them back?. What makes you so sure that world would be a better place without them?? We can't get rid of drug dealers from our society and you are talking about a religion?. It's sound funny to me. Believe me or not in our local church I remember an elder telling us that Islam is a cult. And I belived him. Untill I read about it in details. Well anyways I find your post amusing, it sounds very childesh but if that's what's your opinion then we can discuss it.
:cool:

Originally posted by Teg
physicsforums.com : please try to avoid generalities. I agree with your position on Islam, but please elaborate.

I have some good evidence of the violent nature of this religion just as I have evidence of this tendency in christianity. The Islamic religion is based on conflict. Muhammed, their prophet, was a warrior. The early Islamics converted by conquering their neighbors. They used convert or die tactics.

Where did you get your evidence? Im not a proponent of any one religion but if your going to talk about it get it right. When Mohammed recieved his revalation that would become the basis of Islam he was not a warrior he was a merchant basically a trader Early Muslims did not convert by conquering thier neighboors. Mohammed conquerd lands surrounding Mecca but they were not forced to convert as Mohammed taught there is no compulsion in religion, in many casses those who where not muslim might have had to pay an extra tax but Mohammed never forced those of conquered lands to convert, that came later long after Mohammed. As with all the major religions of the world.

Originally posted by The Metatron


Where did you get your evidence? Im not a proponent of any one religion but if your going to talk about it get it right. When Mohammed recieved his revalation that would become the basis of Islam he was not a warrior he was a merchant basically a trader Early Muslims did not convert by conquering thier neighboors. Mohammed conquerd lands surrounding Mecca but they were not forced to convert as Mohammed taught there is no compulsion in religion, in many casses those who where not muslim might have had to pay an extra tax but Mohammed never forced those of conquered lands to convert, that came later long after Mohammed. As with all the major religions of the world.



In addition to that Teg, please visit this website it may clear some of you concepts of early Islam.

http://www.pbs.org/empires/islam/

Thanks.

islam is the fastest growing religion, and although you may see it as hostile, that is one small division of islam, the Shites, that believe in the Jihad, Historically muslim are much more peaceful than any other monotheisic religion.

just thought you may like to know....

I have seen the documentary in question. Some of the opinions given by their "experts" are in direct opposition to what we know as an accurate description of events. One "expert" went so far as to say that Muhammed did not use convert or die methods. I suppose that his attack on Mecca was not a hostile act. And what about all those internal assassinations of his relatives that lead to the schism between the Sunni and Shi'ites. The Islamics were very aggressive when consolidating the region. Imagine what it must have taken for such a massive undertaking to be brought forth. The Roman Catholics and Islamics were equally responsible.

Originally posted by Xev
I'm a militant athiest, does that count? I mean, I refuse to kill or maim anyone unless they attack me or mine, but I still get to play defense, right?

Two of the ten commandments of Atheism:

Thou Shalt Win all debates with theists.

If all else fails Thou Shalt break them in half.

:cool:

So Jackie who wrote these Ten Commandments of Aethism?

Its Cactus, and I did because I can and no one has to follow them because we're atheists the only one they have to follow is:

Thou shalt not believe in the existance of God or gods.

Give away your real name did he:p

Hahahahaha, nope. For all those interested my real name is......... Jarrod. So no more shadow of doubt over who wrote the ancient commandments. :D

What are the other 7 commandments of atheism?

well Jacie no God or gods
so what about god or Gods
do you believe in them?

Originally posted by Neutrino_Albatross
What are the other 7 commandments of atheism?

On another post there's: Xev, thou art awesome.

Thou shalt except Sciforums into thine heart.

Thou shalt drink alcohol only for purposes other than religous and never in moderation

Thou shalt always make religous puns, especially the kind involving ridiculous French accents

Thou shalt take responsibility for thine own actions, for there is no afterlife.

Thou shalt reason logically, rationally.

Thou shalt not mess with Cactus Jack or any man that can quote Hitchiker's Guide to the Galaxy as well as Neutrino, for they will quickly end your life and there is no afterlife.

Originally posted by Teg
I have seen the documentary in question. Some of the opinions given by their "experts" are in direct opposition to what we know as an accurate description of events. One "expert" went so far as to say that Muhammed did not use convert or die methods. I suppose that his attack on Mecca was not a hostile act. And what about all those internal assassinations of his relatives that lead to the schism between the Sunni and Shi'ites. The Islamics were very aggressive when consolidating the region. Imagine what it must have taken for such a massive undertaking to be brought forth. The Roman Catholics and Islamics were equally responsible.

Teg,
Can you please explain accurate description? Interms of what? and how it is accurate? and why you said that? Any refernces would be nice too. Muhammad never used convert or die method. Killings internaly if you can provide more detail I am sure I can tell you more in detail but that wasn't in time of Prophet Mohammad. Must be after him. Still that won't justify what you mention. Also previously you claim that Mohammad was a warrior? That is totaly opposite to any known history. He may fought in a war but he was a merchant and married a merchant. If you can give some details or links regarding what are you mentioning, It would be great to study.

Also how can you decide what is accurate and what is not?. They are too many anti Islamic books out there with, mostly self made reasonings and description, it is really hard for me to believe that people would go to those limits just to degrade a religion, just because they don't like it. Solman rushide is a very good example of that.

Anyways I hope you can provide some help here. thanks.

Originally posted by Teg
I have seen the documentary in question. Some of the opinions given by their "experts" are in direct opposition to what we know as an accurate description of events. One "expert" went so far as to say that Muhammed did not use convert or die methods. I suppose that his attack on Mecca was not a hostile act. And what about all those internal assassinations of his relatives that lead to the schism between the Sunni and Shi'ites. The Islamics were very aggressive when consolidating the region. Imagine what it must have taken for such a massive undertaking to be brought forth. The Roman Catholics and Islamics were equally responsible.

Mohammed took over Mecca after he was forced out with the threat of death for spreading Islam and when Mecca was under his control the people were not forced to convert to Islam. And the internal strife that eventually led to the two divisions of Islam Shia and Sunni were due to the arguements about the origain of the caliphate, and again happened after the death of Mohammed and in effect were just men arguing over power which was not what was origanally intended for Islam. Like any other religion it can be tainted by man, but Islam is no more violent than Christianity Jewdeism or any other major religion.

Hey, physicsforum.com

heres some food for thought. The Q'ran says that No person/religion of the Book is condemned to hell per se. it also says, people who beleive in Christianity and Judaism are people of the Book. Hence, it accepts them as such.

As for violence in Islam, it is acceptable when you are bodily threatened or your property is stolen or you are exiled from your land. errrr, reminds me of those blasted Palestinians who JUST WONT SHUT UP AND PISS OFF MY HOLY LAND!!! For 30 years i have kept them quiet (quite easily by reporting jack in the media), now those meddling Palis are back and are actually threatnign to...to..to TAKE BACK MY HOLY LAND. MY BOOK GAVE IT TO ME, ITS MINE, MINE, MINE I SAY. YOU CANT HAVE IT. GO BLOW YOURSELF...

.... and so the 16 year old did, her family had died, they had stolen any chance of an education, any hope where she could have a life. for how could she, how could she when the greatest nation on earth, the greatest democracy, the greatest moralist and melting pot, had vowed to provide and continue to provide(as it had for the past 30 years) the weapons which killed her people, her hope, her life. Like a cornered animal she cried her last cry and heaved herself upon the people who would deny her, her own land. "perhaps the people of the great nation will hear me... perhaps now they'll see i had no choice..." no court to turn to, no Oprah to let her terror be heard. No CNN, the TRUTHSPEAKERS. noone. alone.

i'm not justifying suicide bombings... if you're not justifying cornering someone so tightly that they have no other way out.. In US case providing weapons to put the palistinians on the streets and out of their homes. whats the justification except that they need to sell their weapons/

....Lets not confuse religion with economics, greed, lust for power, or violence. Man preaches violence.. even the athiest did, so why blame God/Allah?

BTY: Teg,

get your facts straight, shiite and Sunni schism in Islam was do (as mentioned earlier) to power struggles as to who 'should have been the leader' the Caliph. nothing to do with Islam.

Any question, read the book, the Q'ran and see how often it tell you to ram into tall buildings, it spends most its time telling you to be fair and good to your neighbor.

It also says that it is the Word of God or Allah. It protects that word.. most of what the fanatics preach has no basis in Islam and the Q'ran. it rests in the explanations to the Q'ran as X,Y,Z thought it meant. or according to whats called Hadith,the supposed word of Mohammed.

if you want to know what islam says, go ahead and read THE BOOK, it wont bite.

Of course fanatical muslims are the minority, however this minority is obviously a threat to freedom and peace in the world. While it is easy to say, "Dont hold all muslims accountable for the deeds of a few" and such...It seems the muslim community has not been very proactive in denouncing these fanatical groups and separating themselves from the violence.

Whenever someone asks why fanatical muslims are screaming for world domination, the response from peaceful muslims is usually very defensive and resorts to quoting sections of the koran to try and demonstrate the religion's peaceful nature. This is irrelevant to someone who does not believe in the muslim religion as it is obvious islam can foster hatred and violence under certain circumstances.

Personally, I think theistic religion has been the cause of the majority of the worlds suffering. My only hope is the more this becomes painfully obvious, the more people realize it must end.

fc

F.C.........

What you've said holds true of all religions. If FoxMulder ends up reading this (or Nelson, or Loone).......would you, as a Christian, blow up an abortion clinic and kill the people inside? Most Christians would say no.

Tyler,

I agree. I am pointing out the muslims only because it is the most serious threat currently. Or do you not agree with that? Blowing up abortion clinics is one thing. Flying airliners into skyscrapers is another.

Some might say it the USA media brainwashing me, but I see far more muslims in streets calling for destruction and violence(not just in the middle east such as indonesia) than I see of any other religion. Islamic leaders should be speaking out in these countries preaching peace and the true Islamic way. Maybe they are, but I haven't seen anything to that effect.

Blowing up abortion clinics is one thing. Flying airliners into skyscrapers is another.

No, its not. Its the killing of innocent people regardless of the reasons behind the actions.

"I am pointing out the muslims only because it is the most serious threat currently. Or do you not agree with that?"

Not really. There's a Christian army in Israel. There's the radicals in America blowing up abortion clinics. There's the Protestants/Catholics. They are all serious threats.



"Some might say it the USA media brainwashing me, but I see far more muslims in streets calling for destruction and violence(not just in the middle east such as indonesia) than I see of any other religion. Islamic leaders should be speaking out in these countries preaching peace and the true Islamic way. Maybe they are, but I haven't seen anything to that effect."

Islam leaders have been saying this. Just, unfortunatly, not many leaders of nations.

And actually, in the U.S. of A. there's many more white Christians who call for violence than Moslems. Mainly in the south, from my experience.

Originally posted by fadingCaptain
Tyler,

I agree. I am pointing out the muslims only because it is the most serious threat currently. Or do you not agree with that? Blowing up abortion clinics is one thing. Flying airliners into skyscrapers is another.

Some might say it the USA media brainwashing me, but I see far more muslims in streets calling for destruction and violence(not just in the middle east such as indonesia) than I see of any other religion. Islamic leaders should be speaking out in these countries preaching peace and the true Islamic way. Maybe they are, but I haven't seen anything to that effect.


So am I a threat to you?? There is no difference if a plane goes into the builiding or blowing up a abortion center or a bombing in Ireland. I guess if you do differentiate between them, then you are simply taking sides here. There are more people die from drugs and other disease. Well thats different too. Millions dies every year in Iraq. They can think that most serious threat is USA since they are the ones who impose sanction on them correct?. Oh sorry they are muslims let them die.

Death is death. Human loss of life is not replacebale. Most serious threat is Islam? lol. You have got to be kidding me here.

You said " Some might say it the USA media brainwashing me, but I see far more muslims in streets calling for destruction and violence(not just in the middle east such as indonesia) than I see of any other religion. "

Now where do you see all that? TV = Media = can be use to brianwash. LOL. Sorry dude You just don't make sense. All religion can be violant and all relgion can be peacefull.

And well said strgrl.

Awww.... thanks Ty! :p

Hehe I think you may have misunderstood me there folks. The reason it is different is because over 3 thousand ppl were killed on 9/11. How many ppl have died in abortion clinic bombings? Of course, both are tragic and horrible and the killing of innocents. But you have to agree that the magnitude is different!

Mark,
You said "So am I a threat to you??"
- How did I imply that? I said religion can be threat not you personally. Get a grip.
Also "Oh sorry they are muslims let them die."
- You are just being defensive.
And "All religion can be violant and all relgion can be peacefull"
- Yes true, but it always seems to turn violent at some point. You offer up alot of talk but nothing really positive in terms of what to do about fanatical muslims. You can say 'yeah we have some bad apples but so does everybody else so screw you' all you want but it does no good.

As for the points by tyler about the other groups and even southern usa... I agree that fundies are disturbing no matter where they are. Perhaps you are saying fundies in general are the threat? I would agree with that.

fc

F.C....
Also, this thing is relative to the time. There were times when the Christians were the worst.....times when the Catholics were the worse......times when the Jews were the worse......

So it all depends on the time you're in.

But yes, I agree with your final statement.



And no prob strgrl ;)

"- How did I imply that? I said religion can be threat not you personally. Get a grip."


Hmm....Becuase I am a muslim. :p And you can say that I am fanatical becuase they all look the same?.:p

"Also "Oh sorry they are muslims let them die."
- You are just being defensive. ""

lol... Ok if you say so. But the fact remains the same. You don't CARE, or do you?? What is the magnitude of millions people dying every year?. It is not your problem or is it? I don't think you can think for both sides. It happens in home land so it's bad it happens to some one else it is not even notice able. What I am trying to tell you is all the anti american madeness in certain countries is limited to Policies no one hates american public only Goverments. If you watch and read news and media besides our own you will know what I am talking about.


And "All religion can be violant and all relgion can be peacefull"
- Yes true, but it always seems to turn violent at some point. You offer up alot of talk but nothing really positive in terms of what to do about fanatical muslims. You can say 'yeah we have some bad apples but so does everybody else so screw you' all you want but it does no good. ""

I don't need to defend any one. Every one knows what is going on in the world, it doesn't take rocket science to understand what eastern world is asking for. There are major problems in world today and religion is only a tool to get public favour. Most of the the time is un educated public. Now as far as you are concern that I didn't give u any solution to xtremism, I think only solution is education. You educate them. You educate them about their own religion and and the basic education.

I have met people like you. There is nothing wrong about what you think. But my advise is communicate with muslims in your area. It might help you understand a bit majority of muslims don't favour xtremism. No one can control xtremism in religion , it was always there and will always be. Either it is christians, jews hindus or any other religion. These are the draw backs of individual thinkings.

I think Tyler sums it up pretty good that it is about time. What time period we are in. Also please don't forget that we are in directly responsible for all the xtremism in the muslim world. However it doesn't give them right to attack us here but it did give them very nice breeding grounds. Now before you ask, I can tell you that Islamic xtremism starts witht the Russian Invasion of Afghanistan in 1977-79 till 1988. The word probably didn't even existed before that. We breed the best of those fanatics, we could have control them jbut we let them lose and now they are attacking us. So another thing we can do about siding that xtremism is to avoid repeating our own mistakes. That would help too.



:cool:

Hi,

fadingCaptain

...It seems the muslim community has not been very proactive in denouncing these fanatical groups and separating themselves from the violence.

You seem to think that there IS actually a community per se, that every one of the 1.8billiions muslims out there chat on the islamic telephone. Religios values are different to diff countries having same religion. the CIS states (ex-Russian) and Saudi are both muslim, tho in one women where skirts and are represented at all levels and in the other, not. In another arab state, UAE, women drive cars and party like animals, in its neighbor, Abu Dhabi, you cant. Just like in the states you can be reaaaally liberaral and see everything on t.v., thou you'd be shocked to see naked women posing for adds on bilboards and t.v in France and not allow it in the US.



what you seem to forget is that theydont necessarily think that these fanatics are muslims. Ask any moderate muslim, that is the majority, they denounce these acts. But what they do not condone either is the US govt's involvment with all these muslim based countries and their support for extremists. How can the US stand back and condemn a people who they've helped create and empower, and then expect everyone to sing their song. whether through direct training and weapons or through funding or proping up governments. you dont see moderate muslims screaming out in protest because its a problem they see america having created for americans through their foreign policies. When your frankenstein comes to kick you in the ass, its very cowardly to turn and blame a whole religion.

--> and to declare the cause of our worlds violence today to be a religion is so simplistic that you are falling for the very same religios zealousness that the fanatics fall for, you're just at the other end of hte spectrum. you are as brainwashed as the fanatics.


if you wish to judge all muslims by the acts of zealots fighting for their own interest, then all muslims should judge you according to your faith. That is, perhaps since Hitler was a nazi and CERTAINLY a zealot, then so must all christians be Nazis. He also used religion.

and dont be so moralistic that all muslims should speak out. the US never helped jews in germany until their own land was attacked. Most muslim nations did stand up against the "WARAGAINST TERROR", knowing from recent history, that once the US finds a new enemy, the partners in the alliance will face the problems this war will create alone.\america will slap on her sanctions, tighten the debt belt and say, "deal with it, its not our problem"

If terror is a world problem, then poverty is too, it is the breeding-ground of terror.


most muslim you speak of live in oppressive regimes where these very fanatics hold them hostage. you'll hardly see an afgani, arab, other muslim in his country vehemently denouncing these factions, truly for fear of their lives, something you wouldnt think twice upon in the US. who will protect them in their third world countries and faltering economies... America??? i think not.

think yourself what should be done. the moderate face of islam is more beneficial for everyone, like moderate Christianity and Judaism. the extreme factions only have power when they have a voice, and they do when there is no voice supporting moderation; their voice is heard on all the media, and thier words have convinced even you that they represent all muslims, all 1.8billion. And still, you ask for 1.8billion people to defend themselves against the actions of a few 1000, the few 1000 who more often then not, are using the training and the arms that the USA , herself, hasgiven them.

What about the fact that more inocent civillans died in the war on afgainastane than TWO WTC's?

Originally posted by Asguard
What about the fact that more inocent civillans died in the war on afgainastane than TWO WTC's?

Na! thats not important for FC, it is not of that magnitude. Since we didn't crash any planes in afghanistan it is DIFFERENT. Not the same. :o. And only the mighty Crusader king (BUSH) can stop them.:p

Sorry guys can't resist.

Mark,
"Na! thats not important for FC, it is not of that magnitude. Since we didn't crash any planes in afghanistan it is DIFFERENT. Not the same."
- Well, I guess we just disagree because I think it IS different. Civilian casualties are gonna happen when you use military force. It is an awful thing but a reality. The difference is the US is trying to eliminate threats that could cause more innocent civilians to be killed in the long run. They purposely killed thousands of innocent civilians. Civilians died in our retaliation but I think more were saved than killed in the long run.
"And only the mighty Crusader king (BUSH) can stop them."
- Ha! It is disturbing that he seems to fancy himself a crusader...
"I think only solution is education. You educate them. You educate them about their own religion and and the basic education. "
- Very good point. I agree 100%. All I was saying was I think muslims leaders should take a more active role in this education, but I admit they may be, I am just not aware of it.

As,
"What about the fact that more inocent civillans died in the war on afgainastane than TWO WTC's?"
-Is this a fact? Give me some numbers. At any rate, sure it is terrible that civilians died in the war(if you want to want to call it that). But what is your point? That we are bad too? That doesn't justify what happened on 9/11.

mostly,
" and to declare the cause of our worlds violence today to be a religion is so simplistic"
- I dont think the cause of the worlds violence is islam. Maybe I wasnt being clear. I think the cause of the violence is religious fanatism. And not just islamic fanatism.
"and dont be so moralistic that all muslims should speak out."
- We disagree here. I think they should. At least, I know if I was a muslim I would be speaking out against them every chance I got.
"think yourself what should be done. the moderate face of islam is more beneficial for everyone, like moderate Christianity and Judaism."
- I agree. I think education like Mark said is best option. However, it is too late to educate some. The Al-Queda arent going to sit in class hehe. I think the worlds major terror organizations need to be dismantled, then education can make an impact.

fc

Originally posted by Asguard
Sorry adam but how many wars came out of buddasim?

Originally posted by Asguard
Sorry adam but how many wars came out of buddasim?

Sorry moite, bo' Buda'izm izn' a relij'n, izza filosofi.

Sorry lah, Buddhism not is religion, is philosophy mah.

Sorry, Buddhism isn't a religion, but rather a philosophy.

Sorih m~æ, Buddha-ism i'n a reLIjin, izza a filosofhi.

With the expressly apologies of the establishment, I must establish with he who is not I that Buddhism is not a way in which one establishes the causes of unexplainable events which take place on the Earth firmly within one's shallow but reliable mind, but rather it is a way in which to carry out one's period between destiny and fate, or is it both neither.

koDDmen nasai, BUDDHISM ha «ririsiDDxyon» siDDxya nai, teDDmo «fuxirosofuxi-» teDDsu.

Xev, Ms. Slut with whom I almost unduly agree,

[B]Asguard:


A: Buddhism is an athiestic religion, not a theistic religion.

Correct. But the worship of the Boddhistava as a god seems to grow over the centuries, although it's supposed to be against religious code.

B: Shintoism did...kinda:
http://www.kimsoft.com/korea-j2.htm

Although many of the facts there are true, that is a propaganda site. That is like trusting the Israelis for whether the Palestinians are kind people are not. Although Korea and Japan are not currently quarelling, Korea is "eternally angry" with Japan for the things its militaristic leaders (NOT Hirohito) did during WWII to Korea.

Shintoism is a peaceful religion, and it does not preach the ethnic superiority of Japanese people. Even during WWII, the majority of Japanese people were either Buddhists or adhered to both religions. Contrary to the article, religious freedom was allowed in Japan before American occupation. Also, the motivations for dropping nuclear bombs on Hiroshima and Nagasaki (he-row-she-ma) (nah-gah-ski) were misconcieved, and can be directed to a news correspondent/translator in Toukyou. "mokusatsu" is Japanese for both "ignore" and "think about". So when the Japanese newspapers said that the cabinet (really the military government under a democratic mask) was going to mokusatsu the Allies' claims to having a superior weapon and their threat to use it incase the Japanese didn't surrender. The "cabinet" actually meant consider but, being anti-"jap" as he was, a news correspondent in Toukyou broadcasting in the English language to Pacific islands with the latest updates from the Japanese government said that the Japanese government had decided to ignore the claim/threat, and American newspapers published it that way. Kennedy, having a subscription to an American newspaper himself, made the decision based on what his newspaper said. Now, that's just dandy, isn't it? And what's with all these people who say "those damn japs, who never apologised for Pearl Harbour" WTF'ing h311? j00 id10t, 4m3rica never apologised for the MILLIONS that died from the NUCLEAR BOMBS it dropped on HIROSHIMA and NAGASAKI. If you don't apologise for millions that your father did, why should they apologise for thousands their fathers did?

Source (http://www.darkzen.com/Articles/zenholy.html)



Source (http://www.ubfellowship.org/archive/readers/601_shinto.htm)

3: The present situation in Sri Lanka



Source (http://www.c-r.org/accord/acc_sri/buddhism.htm)

Is that to do with Buddhism? I saw the issues in Sri Lanka having more to do with Tamils needing independence and Sindhs wanting the land the Tamils lived on to remain their own.

Source (http://www.foreignpolicy-infocus.org/briefs/vol5/v5n35srilanka_body.html)

Happy? Seems Buddhism has not only leant itself to militarism, but is exacerbating a war as we type.

I will only note that no war has ever been fought in the name of the Great Cthulhu. No-one has ever been killed in the name of the Great Cthulhu.

Are you sure? I though General Txlclthltlxnptlan killed a young woman in the name of the Great Cthulhu? Was she not raping an icon of the Great Cthulhu?

And no war has ever been fought in the name of athiesm. And the list of people killed in the name of athiesm - if such a list can be made - must be absurdly short.

I doubt there is a list at all. Actually, the ratio of Atheists killed in the name of Christianity to the amount of Christians killed in the name of Atheism is rediculous. Mrs. Su Kei Pu De of San Francisco actually killed a man out of annoyance from his constant claims that Christ was lord, as he continued to back his claim with empty arguements. Feel Mrs. Sukei's anger! (not God's, as he didn't kill anybody in the name of Atheism, and he is obviously not all powerful. if he was, he would've given me that deep skin massage I asked him for quite some time ago, or saved me from getting that painful scrape on my arm. did I sin for that?)

This most peacefull of all religions is athiestic - imagine that. I wonder if there is a connexion?

What about Agnosticism? That's the religion I adhere to, and I must say it certainly embodies general Athiest philosophies better than the dictated philosophies of the Atheist religion.

Originally posted by oedipus
islam is the fastest growing religion, and although you may see it as hostile, that is one small division of islam, the Shites, that believe in the Jihad, Historically muslim are much more peaceful than any other monotheisic religion.

just thought you may like to know....

Excuse me for defending a religious denomination, but as being (nearly) a card-toting member of the ACLU, I feel much obliged to tell the untruths in that post.

The Shi'ites are in no way more violent than the Sunnis.

Let me explain the division:
After Muhammad died, his descendants began to be caliphs.

The 4th caliph, Ali, was murdered by some opponents of the religion. After Ali died, Umayyad took the caliphship. Umayyad was not a descendant from Muhammad. The Shi'ites were those who thought that only descendants from Muhammad should be able to take the caliphship, and the Sunnis were those who thought that any devout Muslim worthy of the job should be able to take the caliphship. The Shi'ites are the majority only in Iran (and in Lebanon, I think), but Iran still makes up quite a bit of the populated Muslim world. The Sunnis consist of much of the rest of the Muslim world. Both the Sunnis and the Shi'ites traditionally believe in jihad, but only if it is provoked by a 3rd party.

Who provoked jihad in this case? Israel. Who assisted Israelis in crushing the jihad? USA. As most of the past presidents of the US see a large difference between being an innocent in poverty shot by official soldiers of an official army and being an innocent in wealth blown up by unofficial soldiers of an unofficial army, Palestinians have been punished for using their last hopes in jihad, both by Sharon's troops, and by Bush. If you look at daily deathcounts, even on the days of the most brutal suicide bombings, you will find that the official Israeli deathcounts are always far less than the official Palestinian deathcounts. One may argue that many Palestinians ask for it by throwing rocks at tanks. Well, consider this: if you're in a tank, can a rock hurt you? Can a Molotov cocktail? No. No. So what does it matter if somebody throws those at you? Do you shoot them to show them who's boss? You shouldn't. Do you scrawl hate graffitti on the walls of governmental establishments, as well as on private residences? You shouldn't. But do you? Yes. What % of the US supports the people you are damaging? 17. What percent supports you? 83.

Now, as most Israelis would argue with me, I feel I must reccomend a book I expect anybody to read before they argue.

"Palestinian Like Me" is what it's called, and it's by an Israeli Zionest reporter, undercover as a Palestinian in both official Israel and in the occupied territories. If you do not read this, I will not take your responses seriously if they are arguements against Palestinians.

--Mark (No, I'm not a Muslim. And no, the ACLU does not hate Christians. The ACLU just fights for the rights of those who are opressed. To many Christians, fighting for the rights of gays and against the public funding of racist organisations like BSA seems like it is done by Christian-haters. Actually, I'm not a Christian-hater. Most ACLU members aren't, but if we keep getting fu<king shit from Christians about why we should leave them alone (Even when they are depriving others to the right to the pursuit of happiness), we might change our minds.)

Religion is 'dying' out. But not that slowly. I except it will take hundreds of years more for it to be mostly gone. That's just a guess though, with only *some* thought.

If people need something bigger than themselves to believe in, they must be pretty weak. Believe in science! Fight cancer.. the list goes on.

why the fuck would you want to live forever

i can't think of anything worse

so the starter of this thread understands completely,
you dont know what your talking about.

GB-GIL Trans-global,

Palestenians may be in a bad situation now, and I would care and support Palestine, *if* they were more reasonable, and didn't call for the destruction of Israel entirely. Even an IRA member will go to a social event with Catholics (without a bomb strapped to him or a gun in his hand). The Palestinians are far more bent on Jewish destruction.

In the words of Palestinians:

"Have no mercy on the Jews, no matter where they are, in any country. Fight them, wherever you are. Wherever you meet them, kill them."

"We must remember that the main enemy of the Palestinian people, now and forever, is Israel. This is a truth that must never leave our minds."
--- Palestinian Authority Justice Minister Freih Abu Middein

"Whomever has occupied part of Palestine or Jerusalem faces jihad [holy war] until Judgment Day. Our destiny is jihad."
--- Sheikh Muhammad Hussein

"Whoever is found to have sold land to Jews, his punishment is death. It is forbidden to pray for him, it is forbidden to purify his body before burial, and it is forbidden to bury him in a Muslim cemetery."
--- Ikrama Sabri, Palestinian Authority mufti, Islamic religious leader, for Jerusalem

"Despite all the conspiracies, Jerusalem and Palestine from the River to the Sea will remain Islamic until judgment day...."
--- Ikrama Sabri

"Holy war is our path. My death will be martyrdom. I will knock on the gates of Paradise with the skulls of the sons of Zion."
--- Ayman Radi, a traffic policeman in the P.L.O. police force

"Our enemy is a lowly enemy. The Palestinian people know there is a state that was established through coercion and it must be destroyed. This is the Palestinian way."
--- Farouk Qaddumi, head of the P.L.O.'s Political Department

"As a Palestinian police officer, I will not hesitate to give my gun to anyone who approaches me and tells me he is going to commit an attack against the army or the settlers. I will even kiss the gun before and after the operation."
--- a P.L.O. recruit from Ramallah for the Palestinian police

"The goal of our struggle is the end of Israel, and there can be no compromise."
--- Yasser Arafat

"Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing for an all-out war, a war which will last for generations."
--- Yasser Arafat

"Slaughter the Jews!"
--- chant heard in mosques throughout Gaza on 25 November 1993

What's your point? There's plenty of people who would say the same about Blacks in America. Plenty of Jews that would say the same about Moslems in Israel.....

>GB-GIL Trans-global,

>Palestenians may be in a bad situation now, and I would care >and support Palestine, *if* they were more reasonable, and >didn't call for the destruction of Israel entirely. Even an IRA >member will go to a social event with Catholics (without a bomb >strapped to him or a gun in his hand). The Palestinians are far >more bent on Jewish destruction.

The Catholics didn't steal IRA land.

>In the words of Palestinians:

In the words of the Americans:

"At least they didn't grow up and have families" (talking on black girls killed in a church bombing, with a hint of remorse that they were children)

Now, does that sound like YOUR opinion? No.

> "Have no mercy on the Jews, no matter where they are, in any >country. Fight them, wherever you are. Wherever you meet >them, kill them."

Yes, kill those who immigrate to your country and then claim it as their own independent state and deny you your inalienable rights because of your race and religion. Show no mercy.

Now, although that still doesn't sound quite right, it's different from saying "The rich-ass Palestinians have vowed to kill Israelis for absolutely no reason at all besides the fact that they hate them, and they don't know why".

>"We must remember that the main enemy of the Palestinian >people, now and forever, is Israel. This is a truth that must >never leave our minds."
>--- Palestinian Authority Justice Minister Freih Abu Middein

Well, DUH. Now, wait patiently please for what comes at the end of this post, as that will reply ultimately to what you have to say here.

>"Whomever has occupied part of Palestine or Jerusalem faces >jihad [holy war] until Judgment Day. Our destiny is jihad."
>--- Sheikh Muhammad Hussein

...
If Polish immigrants occupied your land or, worse yet, claimed it as their own country, you would say the same thing.

>"Whoever is found to have sold land to Jews, his punishment is >death. It is forbidden to pray for him, it is forbidden to purify his >body before burial, and it is forbidden to bury him in a Muslim >cemetery."
>--- Ikrama Sabri, Palestinian Authority mufti, Islamic religious >leader, for Jerusalem

Same concept here. This is totally understandable under the circumstances.

>"Despite all the conspiracies, Jerusalem and Palestine from the >River to the Sea will remain Islamic until judgment day...."
>--- Ikrama Sabri

Uhh... and your point is? I could probably quote you or your loved ones as saying "...Washington D.C.... and the US... will remain American... until the end of the earth."

I'm not saying they've said that, but that's the way they feel. Does it make it any different if somebody steals their land? Does it suddenly become immoral?

>"Holy war is our path. My death will be martyrdom. I will knock >on the gates of Paradise with the skulls of the sons of Zion."
>--- Ayman Radi, a traffic policeman in the P.L.O. police force

Perhaps you haven't taken a trip to Palestine lately. If you had, you'd be grieving for the Palestinians, the impoverished Palestinians with almost no hope of a homeland, instead of the rich-ass Israelis with US funding.

Suicide bombers are basically the last attempt to win a hopeless war.

>"Our enemy is a lowly enemy. The Palestinian people know >there is a state that was established through coercion and it >must be destroyed. This is the Palestinian way."
>--- Farouk Qaddumi, head of the P.L.O.'s Political Department

Same concept here.

> "As a Palestinian police officer, I will not hesitate to give my gun >to anyone who approaches me and tells me he is going to >commit an attack against the army or the settlers. I will even >kiss the gun before and after the operation."
>--- a P.L.O. recruit from Ramallah for the Palestinian police

Same concept. From here onwards, instead of typing "same concept", I will simply type "SC".

>"The goal of our struggle is the end of Israel, and there can be >no compromise."
>--- Yasser Arafat

SC here.
Has Sharon not made statements similar to the above stated?

>"Peace for us means the destruction of Israel. We are preparing >for an all-out war, a war which will last for generations."
>--- Yasser Arafat

SC.

>"Slaughter the Jews!"
>--- chant heard in mosques throughout Gaza on 25 November >1993

*bored*
SC.

OK, now I finish the post with a long analogy. I am hoping this will make the non-Palestinian-backing 87% of the population change their minds from thinking that I am a sadistic freak.

-------
2095, USA
-------
Many immigrants are arriving from Kazakstan because of the crisis there. The Kazaks seem to think that the US is their promised land because Native Americans and them are pratically cousins. Sort of. 80% of Americans already living in the US, fearing a conflict, flee to Canada and surrounding islands, while a few flee to Europe. Now, as the Kazaks begin to flood the country and begin to become a sizable minority, fights begin to break out at Catalonian consulates, where the occupant governors are under attack because those under occupation are seeking a free state. Finally, the Kazaks make up half the population. They begin to act militantly for their claims of the land as their own, bombing Catalonian embassies and the like. While Americans are assisting them, they seem to be in disagreement about what will happen to the land after independence. When the Catalonian government decides to grant independence, they aren't sure which party to grant it to. Mild violence between Americans and Kazaks breaks out. The Catalonian government gives the land to the UN to decide what to do with it. The UN partitions the land, giving about half to an American homeland, and half to a Kazak homeland. Canada, however, is angered at the idea of Americans losing their land, and attacks a day after Kazaks declare independence. With the conflict in Kazakstan resolved, the wealthy and powerful Kazakstan steps in to aid the Kazaks in their war against the poorly-armed Canadians and Americans. The Kazaks end up occupying the land declared an American homeland, and they make settlements on them, claiming certain areas for housing. They even bulldoze a couple small American towns to put Kazak towns there. Many years later, the first suicide bomber attacks the Kazaks-- dan1123.

Originally posted by GB-GIL Trans-global



--Mark (No, I'm not a Muslim. And no, the ACLU does not hate Christians. The ACLU just fights for the rights of those who are opressed. To many Christians, fighting for the rights of gays and against the public funding of racist organisations like BSA seems like it is done by Christian-haters. Actually, I'm not a Christian-hater. Most ACLU members aren't, but if we keep getting fu<king shit from Christians about why we should leave them alone (Even when they are depriving others to the right to the pursuit of happiness), we might change our minds.)


Huh?? Why did you say that? Just curious.

:cool:

Originally posted by Markx



Huh?? Why did you say that? Just curious.

:cool:

Because I've had a lot of experience with Christians who think the ACLU is evil because they're against displaying the 10 Commandments in public schools, or against public funding of BSA, etc.

Hey Dan1123, heres some more quotes for you:


"I don't know something called International Principles. I vow that I'll burn every Palestinian child (that) will be born in this area.
The Palestinian woman and child is more dangerous than the man,because the Palestinian childs existence infers that generationswill go on, but the man causes limited danger. I vow that if I wasjust an Israeli civilian and I met a Palestinian I would burn him and I would make him suffer before killing him. With one hit I've killed 750 Palestinians (in Rafah in 1956). I wanted to encourage mysoldiers by raping Arabic girls as the Palestinian women is a slavefor Jews, and we do whatever we want to her and nobody tells us whatwe shall do but we tell others what they shall do." [Ariel Sharon, current Prime Minister, In an interview with General Ouze Merham, 1956]

1. "There is a huge gap between us (Jews) and our enemies -not just in ability but in morality, culture, sanctity of life, and
conscience. They are our neighbors here, but it seems as if at a
distance of a few hundred meters away, there are people who do not belong to our continent, to our world, but actually belong to a
different galaxy." Israeli president Moshe Katsav. The Jerusalem
Post, May 10, 2001

Things that make you go Hmmmm. CHeck out the next 2-7 quotes. THey'll give you a good indication of what exactly the Israelis have been promoting (of course none where on CNN--things that make you go...hmmmm)

2. "The Palestinians are like crocodiles, the more you give them meat, they want more".... Ehud Barak, Prime Minister of Israel at the time - August 28, 2000. Reported in the Jerusalem Post August 30, 2000


3. " [The Palestinians are] beasts walking on two legs." Menahim Begin, speech to the Knesset, quoted in Amnon Kapeliouk, "Begin and the Beasts". New Statesman, 25 June 1982.

4. "The Palestinians" would be crushed like grasshoppers ... heads smashed against the boulders and walls." " Isreali Prime Minister(at the time) in a speech to Jewish settlers New York Times April 1, 1988

5. "When we have settled the land, all the Arabs will be able to do about it will be to scurry around like drugged cockroaches in a bottle." Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defence Forces, New York Times, 14 April 1983.

6. "How can we return the occupied territories? There is nobody to return them to." Golda Meir, March 8, 1969.

7. "There was no such thing as Palestinians, they never existed." Golda Maier Israeli Prime Minister June 15, 1969

You think Israelies ever wanted a peaceful solution??? THey've been too busy paying huge amounts of cash (i wonder if that was poss. from the 5 bill they get from US) to hire US propeganda firms to push the Israeli side. THe reason why u dont hear the Palistinian, for that matter, any muslim countries views, is that they dont have a voice in america and certainly not the kind of cash needed to hire PR firms while their nations people are dying of hunger.

Read on:

8. "The thesis that the danger of genocide was hanging over us inJune 1967 and that Israel was fighting for its physical existence is only bluff, which was born and developed after the war." Israeli General Matityahu Peled, Ha'aretz, 19 March 1972.


9. David Ben Gurion (the first Israeli Prime Minister): "If I were an Arab leader, I would never sign an agreement with Israel. It is normal; we have taken their country. It is true God promised it to us, but how could that interest them? Our God is not theirs. There has been Anti- Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that their fault ?They see but one thing: we have come and we have stolen their country. Why would they accept that?" Quoted by Nahum Goldmann in Le Paraddoxe Juif (The Jewish Paradox), pp121.

Well, someone seems to have not only gotten it right, but managed to dupe the world (US) into believing otherwise. the Palestinians have already accepted Israel's existence on 78% of what was Palestine. Bible: God said to Abraham, "Unto thyseed, I will give thy land." Abraham had two sons. Ismael, the Arab son, and Isaac, the Jewish son. So even if one wants to go to the
Bible, the land would belong to both.

Frankly tho its the holy land for all three major religions, Islam, Christianity and Judaism. However, the issue here is not religion, its land grabbing, plain and simple economics.


9a. Ben Gurion also warned in 1948 : "We must do everything to insure they ( the Palestinians) never do return." Assuring his fellow Zionists that Palestinians will never come back to their homes. "The old will die and the young will forget."

10. "We have to kill all the Palestinians unless they are resigned to live here as slaves." Chairman Heilbrun of the Committee for the Re-election of General Shlomo Lahat, the mayor of Tel Aviv, October1983.

11. "Every time we do something you tell me America will do this and will do that . . . I want to tell you something very clear: Don't worry about American pressure on Israel. We, the Jewish people, control America, and the Americans know it." - Israeli Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, October 3, 2001, to Shimon Peres, as
reported on Kol Yisrael radio.

Please remeber, this is a quote from the country whom you give 5 BILLION dollars a year scott free, 3 of which is to buy US weapons. 5billion. more than what US gives to the entire starving African continent.


12. "We declare openly that the Arabs have no right to settle on even one centimeter of Eretz Israel... Force is all they do or everwill understand. We shall use the ultimate force until the Palestinians come crawling to us on all fours." Rafael Eitan, Chief of Staff of the Israeli Defense Forces - Gad Becker, Yediot Ahronot 13 April 1983, New York Times 14 April 1983.

13. "We must do everything to ensure they [the Palestinian refugees] never do return" David Ben-Gurion, in his diary, 18 July 1948, quoted in Michael Bar Zohar's Ben-Gurion: the Armed Prophet, Prentice-Hall, 1967, p. 157.

15. "We should prepare to go over to the offensive. Our aim is to smash Lebanon, Trans-Jordan, and Syria. The weak point is Lebanon, for the Moslem regime is artificial and easy for us to undermine. We shall establish a Christian state there, and then we will smash the Arab Legion, eliminate Trans-Jordan; Syria will fall to us. We then bomb and move on and take Port Said, Alexandria and Sinai." David Ben-Gurion, May 1948, to the General Staff. From Ben-Gurion, A Biography, by Michael Ben Zohar, Delacorte, New York 1978.

Were we talking about world domination earlier....?


16. "We must use terror, assassination, intimidation, land
confiscation, and the cutting of all social services to rid the
Galilee of its Arab population." Israel Koenig, "The Koenig
Memorandum"

hmmmm, sounds a bit terrorist like, no?


17. "Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population." Moshe Dayan, address to the Technion, Haifa, reported in Haaretz, April 4, 1969.

Genocide? Deprivation of land? Deprivation of history? whos to blame? Lets not forget the Israeli point of view.


18. "We walked outside, Ben-Gurion accompanying us. Allon repeated his question, What is to be done with the Palestinian population?'Ben-Gurion waved his hand in a gesture which said 'Drive them out!'" Yitzhak Rabin, leaked censored version of Rabin memoirs, published in the New York Times, 23 October 1979.

19. Rabin's description of the conquest of Lydda, after the completion of Plan Dalet. "We shall reduce the Arab population to a community of woodcutters and waiters" Uri Lubrani, PM Ben Gurion's special adviser on Arab Affairs, 1960. From "The Arabs in Israel" by Sabri Jiryas.

20. "There are some who believe that the non-Jewish population, even in a high percentage, within our borders will be more effectively under our surveillance; and there are some who believe the contrary, i.e., that it is easier to carry out surveillance over the activities of a neighbor than over those of a tenant. [I]tend to support the latter view and have an additional argument:...the need to sustain the character of the state which will henceforth be Jewish...with a non-Jewish minority limited to 15 percent. I had already reached this fundamental position as early as 1940 [and] it is entered in my diary." Joseph Weitz, head of the Jewish Agency's Colonization Department. From Israel: an Apartheid State by Uri Davis, p.5.

21. "Everybody has to move, run and grab as many hilltops as they can to enlarge the settlements because everything we take now will stay ours... Everything we don't grab will go to them." Ariel Sharon, Israeli Foreign Minister, addressing a meeting of militants from the extreme right-wing Tsomet Party, Agence France Presse, November 15, 1998.

WHat an admirable man, and what admirable values he imparts to his people. Which, of course the US stands by. I ask now, you say muslims dont stand up against extremist element. Where are the moderate jews?


22. "It is the duty of Israeli leaders to explain to public opinion, clearly and courageously, a certain number of facts that are forgotten with time. The first of these is that there is no Zionism,colonialization or Jewish State without the eviction of the Arabs and the expropriation of their lands." Yoram Bar Porath, Yediot Aahronot, of 14 July 1972.

23. "Spirit the penniless population across the frontier by denying it employment... Both the process of expropriation and the removal of the poor must be carried out discreetly and circumspectly." Theodore Herzl, founder of the World Zionist Organization, speaking of the Arabs of Palestine,Complete Diaries, June 12, 1895 ent


NOTE: Israel allots 85% of the water resources for Jews and the
remaining 15% is divided among all Palestinians in the territories?
For example in Hebron, 85% of the water is given to about 400
settlers, while 15% must be divided among Hebron's 120,000
Palestinians?
NOTE: 5 BILLION dollars a year scott free go to Israel from US govt, 3 of which is to buy US weapons. While they put sanctions on Palistine. $5billion. more than what US gives to the entire starving African continent. American tax dollars. so frankly americans are paying for israels war against Palistine, in that respect should the attack on WTC be catagorised as an act of war? and WTC "collateral damage?" Can you see now why the Palistinians would think so?

See both sides, that is the rule of law the US was created upon.
Let yourself think. For the fundemental point of democracy is that you, each tax payer, is responsible for your nations choices, eg foreign policy. And you will be held responsible eventually if you dont wake up (case in point WTC). Dont just rely on one source of info (eg CNN/Fox) all the time, you'll only get one side of the story. :eek:

By the way, i'm not supporting terrorist activities, that means, ANY nation involved, be it Saudi, be it USA. I support the right of man. Every man. Regardless of his religion, nation or creed. i just cant see soo much pain, so much suffering and a people having no voice

Originally posted by Mostly Harmless
Hey Dan1123, heres some more quotes for you:




I think he is just ignoring you now. :p Good research thou. It shows the world how wicked Israelis goverment it.

If Israelis are bent on Muslim destruction, then why does the dome of the rock stand on their holiest of holies? If Israel is so bad, then why did they back down and give land *back* after they were attacked, fought a war, and won? When the Muslims took over Jerusalem in the seventh century, they destroyed the Jewish temple, and put up their own temple. They made it their holy site, and disallowed any Jews from entering. That's real tolerance, right? And I suppose Israel is just as bad for wanting to protect its sliver of land in the middle east from people whose leaders have vowed to destroy it--and have tried to destroy Israel since the first year it began.

I suppose your solustion would be that Israel give up Jerusalem and a big chunk of land for a Palestinian state. Why would this be? Do they have any more right than Israel has to it? We have to be talking about rights too since Israel would win a battle for the land. If you say they both have an equal right, or you don't agree that their holy books should have any bearing, then why not carve out a piece of Jordan for the Palestinian state? There's a sizeable number of Palestinians there--and plenty of Palestinians in refugee camps in Jordan--you just never hear about those. Heck you could probably throw in a chunk of northern Israel to make sure each country gave a fair amount.

Of course the problem is that Palestinians want Jerusalem, and are willing to terrorize Israel to try and get it. So do we kick the Jews out then? And have a democracy fall to nothing in favor of a dictatorship? Or maybe the U.S. should create a state that dislikes them on purpose, to try and appease the people who were gleeful at 9/11. And where would we put the Jews then? They got a state after being burned by the millions under Hitler, so maybe we could remove a chunk of Germany, and make them migrate 1,000 miles away from their homes.

Maybe we could go door to door and slap some sense into each and every one of them and show them that the land that they want so badly isn't really that valuable--or that big.

You see, the U.S. may have been giving Israel money, but that has gained them power over there. The power is evidenced by Palestinian areas still existing under Israel, even after wars and attacks. The power is shown by Israel backing off land after it has won a war. If you take away the money, you take away U.S. influence. Then you have an Israel that appears weak to the arab nations around it which don't want Israel there anyway. So you start a war, that Israel--with well-trained soldiers and American weapons--will probably win. So what do you do then? Let Israel have the land they won? Or maybe start reinstating aid so that the influence can buy you another Israeli withdrawl? Do you force the Jews to keep the dome of the rock standing, or do you allow them to build their temple?

Or maybe some arab nation will attempt to win by sending a weapon of mass destruction. Do you think Israel would not retaliate? Then you get the U.S. involved because it is an ally of Israel. And sides are taken across the globe. You then have global thermonuclear war.

So there are your choices. Remove U.S. funding and you either return to the status quo or you get world war III. Keep U.S. funding, and you still have terrorist activities because neither side wants to give up that sliver of land. Don't be naive enough to think either side is an innocent victim. We have to judge by different means than a some black and white, right and wrong judgement. I think all the U.S. is doing is trying to prevent a global disaster.

Frankly, I think both sides are making a lot of mistakes and killing a lot of people unnecessarily. <b>But</b> if I had to pick, I'd support Isreal, since it is the only democracy in the area, and I think as a democratic country we have a duty to protect democracies. Save the arguments about how the U.S. shouldn't be getting involved or how the Palestinians (or Israelis for that matter) are justified in their attacks, the fact is I'd much rather support a country in which people are free to think and say over one that actively oppresses free speech and forces religion. And don't tell me that Israel doesn't practice free speech, they do within reason, similar to the U.S. And don't tell me that a Muslim country is not oppressive. Even "moderate" Muslim countries have rather large limits on free speech and many odd religious laws. (Such as the requiring a certain length of sleeves on a shirt, etc.)
Anyways, I'd really like to see both sides back the hell down, but if I <b>had</b> to pick, I'd support Israel.

? If Israel is so bad, then why did they back down and give land *back* after they were attacked, fought a war, and won? When the Muslims took over Jerusalem in the seventh century, they destroyed the Jewish temple, and put up their own temple. They made it their holy site, and disallowed any Jews from entering.

Isreal "gave" back land because of international pressure. i'm not getting into 7th century reasonings for the exixtence of Israel. By that regard USA should give ALLLLL of US back to the REd Indians?

As for solutions, Israel needs to get out of all occupied territories. do you know what "occupied" means.. it means you're occupying somthing that isnt yours.


Or maybe the U.S. should create a state that dislikes them on purpose, to try and appease the people who were gleeful at 9/11. And where would we put the Jews then? They got a state after being burned by the millions under Hitler, so maybe we could remove a chunk of Germany, and make them migrate 1,000 miles away from their homes.

Its not the Palistinians fault what the Germans did to the Jews, WHY i ask you, was not German land given to Jews? It wasnt conveniently enough, but it was ok to muscle out the Palistinians because they were poor. Once the Jews had israel, its not as if they are happy with that, they want more and more and more. THATS the problem. for Israel, even Palistine will not be enough. According to their PM, even America (see last post) is under their control.


The power is shown by Israel backing off land after it has won a war.

Yes, and it was also shown by the massacre of Jenin (just to state a recent example) where refugees were murdered, women and children raped, homes torched, and the whole thing hidden by raizing the ground and buring it all. Now if that doesnt sound a little Nazish, i dont know what does.


I dont say either party is innocent. i'm just saying that Israel has an undue advantage which it has been abusing for too long at the expense of human lives, for purely economic benefit. But why the US must stick its nose in, you'll have to ask the fund managers of Congress members.

Back to the Subject of religion, as i mentioned before, and Dan has proved, the issue is one of politics and economics, NOTHING to do wiht religion.

You cant hate 1,800,000,000 people because of a religion, it is not one of war but allows its members to fight for their property (as anyone in america too would do). If you bother to read it, the responsibilities it lays down are ones that the US fulfills for its nationals in the US(basic rights you take for granted), so the US cannot be "the EVIL WEST". But its policies have and will continue to get its own nationals (who most often dont have a clue why this is happening, exept by what they hear on t.v.), into situations of terror.


Solutions dont come from hatred but from finding the root of the problem. The problems isnt islam, its extremists who use the name of islam to rile the poor (age old, but successful story) for their economic ends. its happened in all religions.

Islam is a lot like socialism/communism. Techinically, communism does not mandate the genocide of millions of people. The <i>real</i> communism is good, right? But in practice it breaks down. Islam is similar. In Islam it's possible to be modern and have freedom, but in practice it never happens. It's not the <i>real</i> Islam, right?

Originally posted by SpyFox_the_KMeson
Islam is a lot like socialism/communism. Techinically, communism does not mandate the genocide of millions of people. The <i>real</i> communism is good, right? But in practice it breaks down. Islam is similar. In Islam it's possible to be modern and have freedom, but in practice it never happens. It's not the <i>real</i> Islam, right?


Does Islam mandate the genocide of millions of people?:p I think in practice it is very possible that people can be modren and free and be muslim. :p .

"Does Islam mandate the genocide of millions of people? I think in practice it is very possible that people can be modren and free and be muslim."

You can never truly be free if you belong to any religion.

Frankly, I think both sides are making a lot of mistakes and killing a lot of people unnecessarily.

Well, a war's a war. I'm not for violent death of anybody, but it's what happens.

<b>But</b> if I had to pick, I'd support Isreal, since it is the only democracy in the area, and I think as a democratic country we have a duty to protect democracies.

Well, apparently you're one of those closed-minded bitches who 1. thinks the US is a democracy 2. thinks that everybody on the Internet is from the US, otherwise they're 'international audiences'. World Wide Web, morons! Not "web that belongs mainly to the US but that the US has decided to share with other countries". Hah. http://wtbmttubttuhdtswoc.yahoo.com... rather long URLs...

The US is not a democracy. Simply having freedom of speech, of the press, and to the pursuit of happiness (as long as you dont infringe on that right of others) does not make a country a democracy. If it does, I can name some Mideastern democracies for you. Bahrain, Qatar. (Bahrain is a Constitutional Monarchy in real life, but you seem to think that democracy means those rights)

Now, US citizens are not allowed the right to the pursuit of happiness. If I wish to smoke marijuana, I can't, the law prevents it (one might argue that that is harmful to others, but they can wear surgical masks and protective wear, if marijuana is illegal, even for medical reasons, tobacco should be illegal too) I can't say "fuck" on my radio station. Probably not in my newspaper. Not on my liscence plate if I wish to drive into a school parking lot. Not on TV unless it's pay-per-view, premium, or cable/satellite exclusive.

What makes a democracy a democracy is that either THE PEOPLE REPRESENT THEMSELVES or THE PEOPLE ARE GIVEN EQUAL REPRESENTATION IN A PARLIAMENT/CABINET. EQUAL, NOT "ELECTORAL COLLEGIATE" OR SOME MESSED-UP SYSTEM LIKE THE US'. Also, they must be allowed freedom of everything. Are Palestinians represented equally in Israel's Knesset? What about Israeli Arabs? 15% of the Knesset should be Arab and Muslim if it is a democracy. There should be no ministries, and no Sharon. The right of return (making Palestinians the majority probably) would exist. Palestinians and Israelis would have equal amounts of water per person (not water altogether, as they aren't the same amount of people).

Save the arguments about how the U.S. shouldn't be getting involved or how the Palestinians (or Israelis for that matter) are justified in their attacks, the fact is I'd much rather support a country in which people are free to think and say over one that
actively oppresses free speech and forces religion.

Oh, please. Bahrain and Qatar allow people free speech (in Qatar, "within reason")

Also, although Israel does not force religion, you are rewarded extensively for being Jewish, and scolded for being Muslim.

And don't tell me that Israel doesn't practice free speech, they do within reason, similar to the U.S.

So? Actually, there are many countries where free speech is not allowed, but nobody knows as the government makes it secret (they go after articles secretly, etc.)

Within reason? Please, you're just like Western Esperantists. You seem to be able to look at the world only from your own point of view (bloated Americanist Federalist for Western values). Please note that I live in the US as well, and I have lived here all my life and have no sense of foreign identity.

And don't tell me that a Muslim country is not oppressive. Even "moderate" Muslim countries have rather large limits on free speech and many odd religious laws. (Such as the requiring a certain length of sleeves on a shirt, etc.)

Uhh... Bahrain. Qatar. Afghanistan (think "coalition gov't"). Bahrain and Qatar even have an official agreement that their flags will contain a zigzag-edged largest-portion color patch with two color patches total, signifying that they are "friendly" Arab countries.

Also, Malaysia. Indonesia. India (think "Hindu majority, sizable Muslim minority"). Azerbaijan. (many formerly Soviet "stans"). Turkey. Georgia. Bangladesh.

I've listed 2 Arab countries and a number of predominantly-Muslim countries for your pleasure (think "sexual stimulus").

Also, Lebanon (if I recall correctly) now has no Islamic laws in its official laws. Oh, and many non-Arab countries in Africa are predominantly Muslim. And Iran has a SAR off its coast, a little island experiment. Tourism encouraged!

Anyways, I'd really like to see both sides back the hell down, but if I <b>had</b> to pick, I'd support Israel.

Yes, because they won't give their land back to the Palestinians just like you won't to the Amerinds. Canada has done something to this affect. Why not follow suit? Oh, I forgot, this fucking country likes to meddle with other countries' business and end up messing large portions of the world up. Duh. (think "Vietnam": there were few non-Communists in South Vietnam. This was a fucking st00pid war, airlifts are OK I guess)

I dont know why u say technically, i've never heard of communism promoting genocide of any nature whatsoever? please elaborate? Islam certainly does not mandate the genocide of millions.


In Islam it's possible to be modern and have freedom, but in practice it never happens. It's not the real Islam, right?

Yes it is possible to be modern and have freedom in islam. Look at Turkey, the CIS -ex-russian states (eg azerbaijan ). in fact islamwas the first religion that gave women rights and in a time when no country/religion gave women the right to hold land, islam prevailed. you're somewhat right to say that modern islam is not practiced. the stories you hear aabout are of countries like afghanistan, which vere towards fundementalism. In such countries the problem rests in lack of education, poverty, lack of any opportunities whatsoever to move beyond the level of satisfying basic needs, such as feeding a family.

There is a very big difference bet. religion and culture. some countries calling themselves 'muslim' countries have a very oppressive culture esp. towards women. there are places where the girl-child is buried alive/at birth even today because of her gender. this is done in "muslim" countries, BUT this is not islam, in fact there is an entire para/verse dedicated to the infanticide and how that is a heinious crime. Women are to this day murdered and they call it "honour killing" (eg if a woman has an affair befor/after marrige w a man- she may be killed by her family). the justification given for this is based on a saying of the holy prophet and often the Q'ran too, which says"men have the duty to protect women".... What does that say to u??? i bet you'll never guess what it says to extremists.i.e.. "because a woman is under the protection of a man, if she does not listen to him, he cannot protect her, therefore he may kill her":bugeye:

Now the very people who practice such things then go off and terrorise nations (their own and ohters) and claim they do it in the name of islam. it is not only these people but these concepts that need to be cleared up.

and yes moderate muslims need to, and have been promoting a moderate and modern islam. as islam is, by its own account, a way of life, then it can not allow life to stagnate, but move forward with the times. for example, in the Q'ran it says 'women should dress modestly'. now modesty is a relative term. during a time of lawlessness, yes it meant to cover ones head because it protected women themselves (who did not have the freedoms we all take for granted today). certain cultures today have retained that not in spirit but as it was 500 yrs ago. that no matter what , a woman must cover herself top to bottom. can you blame them, after all, they're still living in that same era, no t.v., no radio, no progression, lack of education, a stagnant culture, poverty... .. these are the things that breed extremism. not islam... Economics.

Originally posted by Adam

Islam learnt the concept of holy war from the christians of the Crusades.
You need to read more history books, the Islamic sultans started Jihad against the rest of the world in 632AD. All non-Islamic lands & people are called "dar al-harb" (land of war, as opposed to "dar al-islam", land of Islam). Find out what happened in the Holy Land after the Turkish Sultan refused Christians entry into there. And what happened to them & the Christian minorities through his rule.

Originally posted by Adam


I don't know much Asian history, I can't say. But I would be very surprised if Buddhism has never started any wars.
I agree, read more books; Asia is full of wars, even before Europeans got there. Buddhists, Hindus, etc. No one is immune from anger and violence. Why do you think the Shaolin Temple monks, needed to develop a Kung Fu system?

Originally posted by Xev
I will only note that no war has ever been fought in the name of the Great Cthulhu. No-one has ever been killed in the name of the Great Cthulhu.
That's because it's still in it's infancy, another post states, the TGC' will kill some Christians.


And no war has ever been fought in the name of athiesm. And the list of people killed in the name of athiesm - if such a list can be made - must be absurdly short.
This most peacefull of all religions is athiestic - imagine that. I wonder if there is a connexion?

Only if you leave out the Communist belief system; they tried to wipe out Christianity in the old Soviet Union, Viet Nam, Laos, Cambodia, Korea & China. I think you could safety say millions died, check it out. They didn't even like free thinkers.
And I think that if any atheistic-system came into power, well it would want to wipe out those 'pesky' Christians and then start war, genocide, etc...

Randolfo:

That's because it's still in it's infancy, another post states, the TGC' will kill some Christians.

Only if they wake him up to hand him literature. :p

Seriously, Cthulhu kills everybody, regardless. Even his followers.

Cthulhu informs me that athiests are "yummiest", but he gave me that weird leering look when he said it, so I think that it was some lame attempt at a double-entendre.

So how many people have been killed in the name of BOB?

Only if you leave out the Communist belief system; they tried to wipe out Christianity in the old Soviet Union, Viet Nam, Laos, Cambodia, Korea & China. I think you could safety say millions died, check it out. They didn't even like free thinkers.

Umm, ah, I don't know what you've been concentrating and inhaling, but you are talking about a quasi-religious institution attacking another religion.

And I think that if any atheistic-system came into power, well it would want to wipe out those 'pesky' Christians and then start war, genocide, etc...

Ah, but a quasi-athiestic one is in power - in the US of A.

Funny thing, I don't see many Christians being persecuted.

"Only if you leave out the Communist belief system; they tried to wipe out Christianity in the old Soviet Union, Viet Nam, Laos, Cambodia, Korea & China. I think you could safety say millions died, check it out. They didn't even like free thinkers.
And I think that if any atheistic-system came into power, well it would want to wipe out those 'pesky' Christians and then start war, genocide, etc..."

They killed in the name of Communism. Not atheism. Atheism was just an important part of communism.

Originally posted by Tyler
They killed in the name of Communism. Not atheism. Atheism was just an important part of communism.
Thanks for the distinction, I'm sure it really made a differance to the victims.

I'm beginning to think we should have an intelligence screening for getting into this board......


"Thanks for the distinction, I'm sure it really made a differance to the victims."

Youuuuuuuuu idiot. We're discussing killing in the name of theism/atheism. You say that the example of 'killing in the name of atheism' was the CCCP. I point out that they didn't kill in the name of atheism. Now you're telling me that it doesn't matter.

People just get dumber and dumber.



"And I think that if any atheistic-system came into power, well it would want to wipe out those 'pesky' Christians and then start war, genocide, etc..."

Do you have anything to suggest this? Or is just a guess that you're making because it supports your side? Please go back to grade 8 and learn how to write arguementative papers.

Hmmmm, let's look at some nations run by atheists. Canada is a good one. Incredibly diversified. Majority of people are either agnostic, atheistic or very thinly religious. How many wars have we started? How many genocides?

Hey, I got an idea. Let's look at a list of genocides and see which ones were religion driven. Sound fair?


1450-1792; Christians murdering 'Satan Worshipers' - Religion Driven
1492-1800's; Christian Europeans murdering Native Americans for being Native Americans - Commited by theists, commited because of religion....same thing happened in Australia
1915-1916; In Turkey the Moslem government effectively wiped out Christians in the nation - Religion Driven
1917-1987; The CCCP killed millions of it's citizens through work camps mainly. I, along with many other people would argue Marxist-Leninist Communism is DEFINETLY a religion
1939-1945; Germans slaughter over eight million Jews/Gypsies/Gays/Commies. Many more are tortured - You'd have to be an idiot to not call this Religion Driven
1949-1987; Chinese Communist government slaughters many of it's citizens. Not unlike CCCP. Again, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Communism is DEFINETLY a religion. If you don't know why, feel free to ask.
1975-1999; In East Timor the Moslems slaughter the Catholics. - Religion Driven
1994; Rwanda ethnic cleansing - Religion Driven
1995-1999; Bosnia-Herzgovenia sees a bunch of Serbian Orthodox Christians slaughter a bunch of Moslems. - Religion Driven
1998-1999; Kosovo holds another Orthodox-Christian-slaughtering-Moslems war. - Religion Driven

How about the Crusades? Inquisitions?

Originally posted by dan1123
If Israelis are bent on Muslim destruction, then why does the dome of the rock stand on their holiest of holies?
Because if they tore it down, it would unleash the First World War of Jihad, with the armies of over 20 Muslim countries and citizens of all the rest volunteering to kill every Jew and Jew-lover, by any means necessary. Could Israel stand 20 9-11's and an army of millions? Even the US was initially pushed back, when the Chinese hordes were sent to rescue the N. Koreans during that war. God better be on their side when that day comes.

When the Muslims took over Jerusalem in the seventh century, they destroyed the Jewish temple, and put up their own temple. They made it their holy site, and disallowed any Jews from entering.
You need to read more history, the Romans tore down the temple after the 70AD Jewish revolt against their rule. They also deported most Jews in two waves; after 70AD and after the Bar Kochba revolt.
And I don't think any one rebuilt it, until the Muslims invaded after 632AD, when they put their Mosque there to cement their ownership of the site, which they claimed was where Mohammad rode his horse up to heaven. By the way, Islam wanted to convert the Jews initially, even having the direction of prayer be to Jerusalem at first. But when they didn't convert, the sword was the answer, many Jewish Arab tribes were killed and their possessions taken.

Originally posted by Xev
*Xev rolls her eyes*

Gawd, his head is so far up his ass he fellates his liver! Thanks for the anatomy lesson Xev, and I suppose you are quite the contortionist to have accomplished that feat! You have such an active imagination!!!

The distinction may not have made a difference to the victims, but it does affect the validity of athiesm and government. Really?

Of course this is obvious to anyone with more than two neurons. Really? And I suppose both of yours are firing right now? It must be hard work for you, why don't you take a break from all this hard work, and have a little nappy time?

What's the problem Randol? Not man enough to reply my post?

Oh I get it. Two neurons, so only two posts. Of course, any half intelligent person would have just done all their replying in a single post.

Tyler:
This is beginning to scare me - are all theists stupid? Not the normal ones, but the ones that actually try to defend their veiws - they're all utter morons!

What's the problem Randol? Not man enough to reply my post?

I don't think he knows the concept of which you speak. Perhaps you should define "man".

Oh I get it. Two neurons, so only two posts. Of course, any half intelligent person would have just done all their replying in a single post.

Oh, he has two neurons - only one is inhibitory. ;)

Randy:
Really?

Wow, I am stunned by the force of your rebuttel. I think I'm going to lobotomize myself and get religion now.

Now where'd I put that icepick?

Edit to add:

Oookay, let's see how many people were killed by religion:

9/11: ~3900 people (Americans and Afghans killed by accident)

Witch hunts: 600,000 to as high as 9,000,000 - I'm using a middle figure of 1 million.

Spanish Inquisition: 3,000 conservative

Thirty Years War - 6 million at the lowest

Ulster Rebellion of 1641 - ~100,000 - conservative

St.Bartholomew's day massacre: ~4000, conservative

Crusades: ~9 million people

Persecution of Pagans: Unknown, possibly 50,000 - 2 million. I'm going with 30,000 to be extremely conservative.

Persecution of Jews by Romans: ~100,000

Spontaneous Christian Pogrom in 1374: ~10,000

French Wars of Religion: 100,000 Protestants

Currrent Sudenese Civil War: 1 million

Religious tribal wars in Lebanon: 150,000

Battle of Antwerp, 1576: Civilian death toll: 8,000

People killed by India's Thugs: ~1 Million

Buddhist Sinhalese vs. Hindu Tamils: 20,000

Sikhs vs. Punjabs, 1992: 3,800

Arian Schism: 1,000,000

Holy Wars against Netherlands, Albigenses, Waldenses, and Huguenots: 1,000,000

Various people slaughtered by Isrealites: ~976,000 if you accept Biblical sources

Japanese Christians killed in Shimnaburu rebellion: 36,895

Timurlane slaughters 100,000 Hindu prisoners.

Selim the Grim massacres 40,000 Anatolian Shi'ites

Christians persecuted by Roman Pagans: 2,000

Suttee: 2,400 in one century. Extrapolating for 500 years = 12,000

Aztec sacrificial victims: 136,000 at the lowest.

Addin' em up:

≅ 21,835,595 people.

And you left out a damn lot.

Damn, I forgot that I had posted on this thread a while back, I should get back into it... though all of the people against me seem to be using the "you're a fat american lazy person who doesn't know what you're doing and shouldn't meddle in others' affairs" argument. :)

I especially like the person who said the US isn't a democracy because of the electoral college... :) Here's a little secret that we don't ever tell to foreigners here in the US... we're actually a radical fascist country, and we're preparing to nuke you right now.

Originally posted by SpyFox_the_KMeson
Damn, I forgot that I had posted on this thread a while back, I should get back into it... though all of the people against me seem to be using the "you're a fat american lazy person who doesn't know what you're doing and shouldn't meddle in others' affairs" argument. :)

I especially like the person who said the US isn't a democracy because of the electoral college... :) Here's a little secret that we don't ever tell to foreigners here in the US... we're actually a radical fascist country, and we're preparing to nuke you right now.

Guess what? I have a surprise for you myself. I am an ethnic caucasian born in the US, lived in the US all my life, and never ventured out of the US. Just goes to show you...

Well, that doesn't suprise me too much. There's no shortage of American-born America haters in America. (How many times can you use America in a sentence? :) )
But you seriously don't think America is democratic? I find that surprising. What do you think it is then? Socialist? Fascist? Communist? Well, I'll grant that America is part socialist, it was founded that way, but only a little bit. And hey, I for the record I am against the censorship laws. I don't believe in censorship.
So I take it from your arguments that you are isolationist, Trans-global?

Originally posted by SpyFox_the_KMeson
Well, that doesn't suprise me too much. There's no shortage of American-born America haters in America. (How many times can you use America in a sentence? :) )
But you seriously don't think America is democratic? I find that surprising. What do you think it is then? Socialist? Fascist? Communist? Well, I'll grant that America is part socialist, it was founded that way, but only a little bit. And hey, I for the record I am against the censorship laws. I don't believe in censorship.
So I take it from your arguments that you are isolationist, Trans-global?

LoL. Yeah, but most criticise not foreign policy, violations of signed treaties/international laws, and the nonsensical teachings of how the US is a democracy (see, i think that Democracy is good. dont get me wrong there. but the US isnt a democracy...), but rather on internal affairs, such as the corruptness of Bush.

I don't THINK the US is a different type of state than a Democracy, I know it and am supported by the FBI, CIA, State Department, the UN, and most major almanacs published inside and outside of the US. Maybe you've heard mostly of socialism, fascism, and communism because the government has preached their "evils" (fascism, i must say, is pretty evil unless the dictator actually has the people in mind. a rare, 1-in-a-million, dr. king-type person. bush would probably do all sorts of dumb stuff like making pretzels the official snacks of all team sports, mandating that each citizen must watch at least 1 hour of sports a day, etc etc). However, there are many OTHER types of governments, many of which are implemented by quite a large number of countries.

REPUBLIC-- not totally sure, but this seems to be a general label for hybrid and bipartisan (or multiparty) countries in which the government type is part of each major party.

FEDERALIST REPUBLIC-- UNequal representitives of at least political denominations to vote for each thing. Usually, these representatives are chosen by another branch of government, and in a few there are systems to make it either seem like it is really a democracy or to come closer to equal representation. Generally seen as between a democracy and a monarchy.

DEMOCRACY-- generally regarded by capitalists as the ideal government type. There is equal representation for each political denomination (often in other things as well, for example if there are harsh disagreements between religions in a country, the representatives may be equal to the population in religion as well, but political preference is usually priority). A democracy isn't nessecarily a free country, however. There may be many laws limiting freedoms (generally laws that violate the general right to the pursuit of happiness, ie not allowing people to smoke weed whenever they want, not allowing suicide or mercy killings, not allowing the consumption of drugs such as heroin, cocaine, various narcotics, stimulants, etc). However, a democracy built on the backbone ideal that everybody has the ultimate right to the pursuit of happiness (as long as they don't infringe on that right of others. yes, this does make saying "fuck" over the airwaves ok, as this may hinder somebody's happiness, but not their right to the pursuit of it. they can change the station or power off the radio if this so concerns them. smokers don't infringe on that right, you can wear a mask if you want. making them stop because of 2nd hand smoke is a crime, if you don't want the smoke, go ahead and mask up. also, pollution can be solved by those who dont like it-- air filters, greenery, etc.) There would be regularly held elections for new parliamentary members to represent portions of the population (for example, if there are 51% republicans and 49% democrats, then there would be a set amount of seats for each-- 51% of the seats in parliament would go to republicans, 49% to democrats. however, republicans and democrats would be able to vote on these. it is also generally agreed that the representatives should be equally voted on by districts based on either population or area) Also, there is the style of democracy where each person votes for everything that a parliament would vote for, yet this is better for very very very small countries than for large countries.





OK, now the Palestine-Israel arguement--
Why is it that Arab actions and organizations to the same degree and nature and extent of Pro-Israel/Jewish actions/organizations are frowned upon, and generally thought of as nasty/evil/horrible/unthinkable/why-does-israel-let-them-do-that, while it's fine if the Israel org does the same thing?

For example: IRAN sends weapons to Palestine, US sends weapons to Israel. IRANIAN weapons transfer is seen as immoral, evil, and not-ok, while US weapons transfer is totally ok.

In the US, propaganda organisations pushing Arab ideals are seen by the government as terrorist organisations, and by the general population as not-ok organisations that aren't worthy of the good name of not-for-profit orgs. However, pro-Israel ones are allowed-- FLAME (the so-called FACTS and LOGIC ABOUT the MIDDLE EAST, apparently proper to capitalise it) is a propaganda centre that actually claims to stomp out propaganda. But if one looks at their material, if he is not vulnerable he will realise that this is in fact propaganda. All the material here is pro-Israel, presented totally from only one side. While one may argue this is the same way much of the US media is presented, the US media isn't this blatantly pro-Israel anti-Arab.

I stumbled upon an Arabic-language book a while back about a short verse in the Quu'ran that talks of the defeat of an ultimate enemy to Islam-- one that invades holy lands/Islamic lands-- will be defeated forever in the year 2027 AD (by the Roman calendar, at least. I don't remember the date for sure, but I think it was in the 2020s, the late 2020s to be exact). Interesting, eh?

Also, on the Dar Al-harb/Dar Al-Islam thing, that's not what it is supposed to mean. Dar Al-harb means the land at war with itself-- from a religious viewpoint, this makes much sense. Dar Al-Islam is the Islamic land-- the land that is at peace with itself.

Originally posted by Tyler
I'm beginning to think we should have an intelligence screening for getting into this board......
You're lucky they don't, you'd be off in a second, Youuuuuuuuu idiot.
Plus, if you're such a genius, why aren't you on the MIT or Caltech Nerd sites, instead of with all us common joes?

Do you have anything to suggest this? Or is just a guess that you're making because it supports your side? Please go back to grade 8 and learn how to write arguementative papers.
I don't know what they taught you in 8th grade, but logical, linear thinking was not one of them. Also, Sciforums has no rules about how you discuss, argue or share info, so no matter what you think, I or anyone else, don't need to do anything but what we want, including ignoring you if I want to, you little brat!!!

Youuuuuuuuu idiot. We're discussing killing in the name of theism/atheism. You say that the example of 'killing in the name of atheism' was the CCCP. I point out that they didn't kill in the name of atheism. Now you're telling me that it doesn't matter.

"And I think that if any atheistic-system came into power, well it would want to wipe out those 'pesky' Christians and then start war, genocide, etc..."

The CCCP killed millions of it's citizens through work camps mainly. I, along with many other people would argue Marxist-Leninist Communism is DEFINETLY a religion
1939-1945; Germans slaughter over eight million Jews/Gypsies/Gays/Commies. Many more are tortured - You'd have to be an idiot to not call this Religion Driven
1949-1987; Chinese Communist government slaughters many of it's citizens. Not unlike CCCP. Again, Marxist-Leninist-Maoist Communism is DEFINETLY a religion. If you don't know why, feel free to ask.
Youuuuuuuuu idiot, you just reaffirmed my statement, that the Soviet Union was officially atheistic and killed millions. You need to lay off the drugs!! Youuuuuuuuu idiot.

People just get dumber and dumber.
What are you? A 15 year old or something? Does your mommy know you spend a wee bit too much time on the 'net?

What's the problem Randol? Not man enough to reply my post?

Oh I get it. Two neurons, so only two posts. Of course, any half intelligent person would have just done all their replying in a sin