Many thanks for your enlightening info’, Goodthief, so much needed in our OLO's right now.

First, you ask me why I regard America as evil?
I must say we have friends in America, visiting them after our youngest son stayed there, where he graduated in 1972.

American history and politics is also part of my political science major. Later in Political Philosophy, it was where I learnt how, like others of our major Western nations, there is a tendency towards what some philosophers term, two-faced politics.

Unfortunately, such has happened more so in our Christian politics, as occurred not so far back in history, with the rack, etc, like torturing even to force a liberal Christian to be more faithful.

It was Thomas Jefferson, who in the early American colonies, accused the Pilgrim Fathers of carrying out religious punishments.

The truth is that political philosophers are saying that the way the Bush government has been carrying on, may not be evil, but to chastise other nations by calling them evil, is not good political sense.

The way Bush moved into Iraq illegally, was also not democratic, America acting like it did when it grabbed Texas from the Mexicans.

My main annoyance with Paull, is that he seems to believe that the US as global top dog, can get away with anything bad as long it is promoting the good, more like the Old Testament than what the young Jesus expressed in the Sermon on the Mount.

Also letting Condoleeza Rice jump into Israel and unlawfully speak for the United Nations, does prove that Immanuel Kant was right when he said that in a true democracy one nation alone has not the right to speak for the world, only a Federation of Nations - which our present United Nations, is not, because it is subjugated by the US with its freedom to arm itself as Global Supremist.

Finally, Goodthief, from the above you might more easily understand why I have been desperate to promote – Sharing the Blame - as a means for future world peace even between Muslims and Christians.

Good old Boazy:

" I would hate to think that a person could be so gullable as to embrace a religion which permits what we describe as 'child abuse'.. Of one thing you can be utterly sure- No Imam or Muslim 'evangelist' will tell a propsective convert:

.....[a selectively poisonous interpretation of a few cherry-picked verses from Muslim myths and legends] ......

In my case, rather than seeking to stir up animosity against Muslims, I'm hoping that 'would be' converts are informed of what they would NOT be informed about by Muslim missionaries. "

Yeah right, Boazy. And where are all these "Muslim missionaries", do tell? The only people who have ever been silly enough to try and "convert" me to their religious fantasies have been various versions of frootloop Christians, Scientologists etc. My doorstep has never been darkened by fervent emissaries from Mohammed, clutching their Q'urans and hadiths.

Are there actually Muslim missionaries out there proselytising in the benighted McMansion suburbs? Somehow I think that our Boazy is exaggerating just a little bit again...

Wasn't Boazy a missionary once?

A new low - even for BOAZy.

An ongoing "nudge-nudge-wink-wink" suggestion that Muslims are somehow all latent pedophiles and mysogynistic wife-beaters - all the classic hallmarks of a conclusion desperately looking for facts to justify itself.

If he's right then they may have to line up behind some Christian priests to wait their turn and I think they missed their chance in South Australia, according to the recent news.

Oh that's right, those unsaved devils are going to take over and rewrite our laws so they can get their evil hands on our white women and babies and we're just going to stand by and let it all happen.

I think we all get the point but after this problem is solved, who is next on the hate list I wonder?

Considering the offensive and provocative nature of these allegations, where is the extremism coming from now?

Thanks bb, but I’m now a bit perplexed. I know you mean it when you speak of Sharing the Blame. And I agree with it, not just to be diplomatic but because it’s accurate. However, the way you distribute criticism is different: you criticise only the US and Christianity, and this is helping to keep the discussion skewed and adversarial.

CJ Morgan and Wobbles, I’m not familiar enough with Islam’s scriptures to know if B_D has “cherry picked”, but I understand that countries that live under Sharia law are subject to the list in B_D’s post. So, it’s what we would have to look forward to if, perchance, we found ourselves in an Islamic theocracy, which we know is the ambition of some Muslims.

Where I see conflict is about the likelihood of this happening. However, there may not even be any conflict about this. See the last para in B_D’s post:

<Regarding the 'danger level'? Practically speaking I'm probably pretty close to Pericles believe it or not, but let’s KEEP it that low.>

For me, the questions are –

i) Besides issuing these necessary warnings, what else should we do to keep the likelihood low – eg behave in a very neighbourly way, if possible, towards Muslims in Australia.

ii) What other issues should occupy us (climate change etc)?

Pax,

Thanks for the compliment about sharing the blame, Goodthief, but you must know by know, as far as the US is concerned, taking the point of view of most political philosophers, America is powerful and strong enough to bear its own blame.

Possibly like a rich and powerful parent, whom a studious philosophical son or daughter, though the love is still there, sees the parent maybe as needing to be more humble, possibly needing to come down to size, somewhat, mentally, anyhow.

You must admit, GT, if I may now abbreviate, that the neo-con White House backers have come out with some outlandish statements about potential power, such as predicting an American 21st Century with Regime Change for many problem nations, Saddam's Iraq only the first, possibly Iran the next.

Such rhetoric on behalf of democratic leadership certainly does not please philosophical academics, even if it pleases many of the public.

America, possibly through George Bush, has now lost the former political support of two of its main leader allies, Blair and Howard, but with Bush lately shooting his mouth off about America having now pretty well won in Iraq.

I guess Paull will call all the above from myself, just Left Wing Hogwash, GT, so I guess you have your choice?

Still heartfelt thanks for your agreement on political blame-sharing, Cobber, Cheers, BB

goodthief: "CJ Morgan and Wobbles, I’m not familiar enough with Islam’s scriptures to know if B_D has “cherry picked”, but I understand that countries that live under Sharia law are subject to the list in B_D’s post. So, it’s what we would have to look forward to if, perchance, we found ourselves in an Islamic theocracy, which we know is the ambition of some Muslims.

Where I see conflict is about the likelihood of this happening. However, there may not even be any conflict about this. See the last para in B_D’s post:"

Goodthief, I appreciate that you're trying to mediate but the main problem I have with Boazy's continual vilification of Islam (and by implication all Muslims) is precisely that even he doesn't really believe that Australian society is in the slightest danger of being influenced significantly by Islamic values - let alone Sharia law.

However, he persists in slurring even moderate Muslims on the basis of his very biased interpretation of a few passages from their sacred texts. That would be like somebody cherry-picking the most violent and salacious aspects of the Bible and endlessly warning of the dangers of Christianity.

Surely you can see that?