The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > General Discussion > Why has Islamic fundamentalism intensified?

Why has Islamic fundamentalism intensified?

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 29
  7. 30
  8. 31
  9. All
Over the past decade, religious fervor has
erupted in the Islamic world in general and
in the Middle East in particular. Recently
we've seen suicide bombers determined not only
to kill themselves but take as many victims as
they possibly can. A recent attempt was made by
the young man keen to blow up the Delta flight
to the US.

Why has Islamic fundamentalism intensified at all -
especially at a time when we might expect the
societies involved to be moving forward, toward
modernization, rather than backward?

Is it because these Islamic societies resent the
influence the West is exerting in their territories,
especially the US?

Do the fundamentalists regard the West's economic,
technological, and military influence as a threat
to the integrity of Muslim societies and traditions?

Should the West be involved in the Islamic world?

I would appreciate your thoughts - but no
anti-Islamic tirades please.
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 30 December 2009 5:58:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
It seems that many Middle-Eastern Islamic upbringings and values are so distant to Western culture (in particular Wahabi- as the traditionally Islamic cultures near Europe, and primarily far east are moderate and of no noticable difference) that Islamists would feel bombarded both literally and culturally via television, media etc (although there are always pockets in other countries too).

If the upbringing and values stay the same, there truly isn't any evolution- just a seemingly hostile 'colonisation' by the west introducing technological mediums for their less moral western culture to penetrate and jeapardize Islamic customs- which I imagine would be the attitude.

And personally, no- the West should have less to do with the Islamic world- they don't like it, and we're harming ourselves be injecting ourselves into it. After all, it's not like we'd benefit from a cultural transaction with the wahabi world either- so I say best to keep them apart.

If they want to adopt a different culture more compatible to interact with our own, THEN we can interact.
Posted by King Hazza, Thursday, 31 December 2009 11:07:34 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear King Hazza,

I'm trying to make sense of why a young man
would want to kill not only himself - but
take innocent people with him, as happened
recently in the attempt on the Delta flight
to the US.

Usually fundamentalist revivals, in whatever
religion, take place at times when social
changes have led to turmoil, uncertainty,
and the erosion of familiar values. When
people find themselves confused, threatened,
or even appalled at changing conditions -
they may see a "return to basics" as a solution.

From what I've witnessed on the news it seems
that the principal foreign enemy of the
Islamic fundamentalists is the United States.
And, I suppose part of the reason may be due to
the fact that the
fundamentalists find it politically helpful to
have an alien enemy. The solidarity of any
group is enhanced if it perceives a common
outside threat.

Islam is one of the world's major religions,
it claims the allegiance of a fifth of the
entire human population. Trends in Islamic
societies, therefore, are potentially of
global importance. My concern is - how
involved should the West be in their affairs?
And, is it time to profile Muslim passengers
on flights?
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 31 December 2009 11:36:40 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
King Hazza,

what utter nonsense.

The world is now a 'smaller' place not as it was in the 1100's.

But should I disagree with my brothers in the east is it my place to try and KILL them because I have a differing view on life....NO

How to stop this madness should be the major topic throughout this small world - peace be with you.
Posted by JMCC, Thursday, 31 December 2009 11:38:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Islamic fundamentalism is the storm before the calm.
They know their religion is nonsense and those in charge are trying to hang on.
Iran is next to escape.The shah was not as bad as the nuts now in gov.
See how rich is the western world?.
You can have a share of that.
Dump the imams.
The internet will show you the way.
Posted by undidly, Thursday, 31 December 2009 11:47:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,

Mohammed set the groundwork for permanent antipathy between Muslims and non-Muslims until all submit to Allah's will.
This has waxed and waned over the centuries.
Why then has this apparently dormant impulse recently been re-awakened?
How about globalization (including instantaneous communication, mass international transport, mass migration) and advanced technological capabilities (including warfare)?
Think what Mohammed could have achieved given these opportunities for the expansion of his “religion”.
The “fundamentalists” are doing what Mohammed would have done, if able.
Mohammed killed the unbelievers with a sword within the limits of his territorial capability.
His followers have more effective firepower at hand (a sachet of semtex on a passenger plane) and virtually limitless territorial capability.
They also have the advantage of an enemy which is hamstrung by its own failure to recognise the fundamental nature of Islam and that it is at war with them (courtesy multicultural relativism).
You’d better believe that Mohammed’s enemies recognised him as such,
whereas “guardians of the freeworld” such as Obama and Janet Napolitano can’t even bring themselves to admit that these most recent outrages (Fort Hood and Flight 253) involved terrorism, let alone Islam.
Many of these perpetrators have tasted both Islam and the western lifestyle and, unable to reconcile them, have made their choice.
It’s all very well to blame Iraq and Afghanistan until we remember that 9/11 pre-dates US involvement there.

Victor Davis Hanson has his own take on it:

“…the answer to "Why do they hate us?" does not entail poverty, Western imperialism or colonialism, support for Israel, past provocations, etc. Rather, radical Islam encourages in an Hasan or Mutallab age-old passions like pride, envy, and a sense of inferiority — all accelerated by instantaneous communications and abetted by continual Western apologetics that on a global level blame Westerners for self-induced misery in many Islamic countries. "They did it" is far easier than looking inward to address tribalism, gender apartheid, statism, autocracy, religious intolerance, and fundamentalism, which in perfect-storm fashion ensure an impoverished — and resentful and angry — radical Islamic community while the rest of the world moves merrily on.”
http://www.victorhanson.com/articles/hanson122909.html
Posted by HermanYutic, Thursday, 31 December 2009 12:33:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy “religious fervor has erupted in the Islamic world in general and in the Middle East in particular”

No it has not…. It has always been there…
There is nothing new,

except

a few more politicians trying to make their political names on finding a justification for the intolerance of fundamentalists

as far as tolerance is concerned, we have two choices

surrender to it or deal with it, as harshly as it would seek to deal with us.

Imho I have no intentions of surrendering to the intolerance of Islamists as I would surrender to the intolerance of Christian or Jewish fundamentalists by any name.

Like dearest Margaret said

“All attempts to destroy democracy by terrorism will fail. It must be business as usual.”

In the final analysis

a dead fundamentalist/terrorist represents

a good result.
Posted by Col Rouge, Thursday, 31 December 2009 12:36:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Herman
"Western imperialism or colonialism, support for Israel, past provocations"

+ plus end of cold war.

Left a vacancy though didn't we? Add that to oil money. Power vacuum plus $$ = oooops.
Posted by TheMissus, Thursday, 31 December 2009 12:40:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree with the word 'intensified' only because the opportunity for that to happen has 'exploded' - 'cuse the pun - since we began invading the M.E. I think it's fairly obvious that that has given many devotees motivation to join the cause because of the duty they feel in being a Muslim, but I don't think the intensity they feel for their faith has altered since Mohammed was playing 'Cowboys and Indians' ... so to speak.

Do you think it's any different for us?. I think we only label it another way. How has the numbers changed for us and the amount of people joining the armed forces since the wars began. Really, I think you'd see a sharp rise.

Islam has had Jihad's and Fatwa's for ever. Last century they were mostly aimed at the Israeli's but now that focus has merely spread to a larger spotlight.
Posted by StG, Thursday, 31 December 2009 1:39:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy, to answer your question, there are a number of reasons.

The interesting thing is however, if you examine various Islamic societies
a bit more closely, you land up with what we have, ie a small
proportion are fundamenalist-fanatical, the majority kind of go
along with the crowd and follow their customs, then a significant
amount are basically secular. You can apply that to Jews, Christians
and Muslims. Its the fanatics in all three, that are the problem.

Wahabi Islam used to be the most extreme and when Saudi Arabia was
formed, the Sauds did a deal with the Wahabs. The net result of this
has been that mega billions of petro Dollars have been spent on
spreading Wahabi Islam around the world.

At the same time an even more militant form of Islam was formed,
based on the interpretations of Sayed Qutb, an Egyptian who lived
in the 60s, went to America and was shocked by the culture.
He was jailed, but wrote alot of stuff, like "Milestones", which
you can download on the net for free. It gives you an insight into
his thinking and his influence on radical Islam, bin Laden,
Zawahiri and all the rest, has been enormous. He calls for
the overthrow of the West.

The thing is, anyone can claim to be a Muslim and their interpretation
is as valid as the followers they have.

So to sum it up, I'd say that petrodollars and the teachings of
Sayed Qutb, have been what has turned some parts of the Islamic
world, far more militant.
Posted by Yabby, Thursday, 31 December 2009 2:04:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,

< is it time to profile Muslim passengers on flights?>

Taking aside an elderly white grandmother for special screening because her number came up,
while ignoring an Islamic male immediately following her is a criminal waste of time and resources.
It is obviously driven by political correctness gone mad but to do otherwise would be discrimination,
so it’s more acceptable (to some) to play pretend security with a dangerous numbers game.
Resources permit screening 5% of passengers so every twentieth passenger it is then,
regardless of race, colour or creed.
This is the grim reality that the multicultural ideology has brought us to.
Grim because it facilitates “incidents” like flight 253.
Grim because it will inevitably lead to the death of innocents.
Grim because it is avoidable.

When looking for a rapist do the police include women and children as potential suspects,
so as not to be guilty of gender profiling?
Imagine police checking the DNA of women and children as rape suspects according to a numbers game,
dictated by the availability of resources.
They would be criminally stupid do so.

Everything has its consequences and slavish adherence to the multicultural ideology is not exempt.
One of Janet Napolitano’s first acts as U.S. Director of Homeland Security was to issue
a nationwide bulletin warning of the threat of right-wing extremism.
http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf
She has yet to even acknowledge the dangers of Islamic extremism.
The world is paying a high price for this kind of blind, ideologically-driven incompetence.

I say,
so we only have resources to commit to screening 5% of airline passengers?
Muslims make up 5% of airline passengers?
What a happy coincidence.

I wouldn’t object to a DNA test eliminating me as a rape suspect, saying
“Why don’t you test those women and children. This is discrimination.”
I would want to establish my innocence.

To me, and others, profiling is the most logical course of action to ensure everyone's safety.
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/12/please_search_me_next_time_i_b.html

Some related light relief:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HxsCxtzJEdM
Posted by HermanYutic, Thursday, 31 December 2009 2:08:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy;
Islam via its religious leaders has deliberately stuck itself in the
time of the dark ages, ie late first millennium.
A simple example, they cannot change their rule on pork even though
the rest of the world now understands the animal husbandry needs of pigs. They seem unable to update their mental processes.

The suicide bombers really believe they will go to paradise as a martyr.
Sad, really.
Other nations, religions etc have had the same complaints as Islam
claims, but have not engaged in the brutal owardly anti humanity acts
that moslems have engaged in. There is a difference to the genocides
etc of previous centuries, this is being done in the name of God.
In any case precedence is not an excuse.

The only solution I can see that will probably work is to disengage
from all Islamic countries and ban any travel between moslem and non
moslem countries, repatriate moslems to their country of origin,
and apply the same sort of rules as they apply to Christians in their
countries.

Pretty drastic, but I have never heard anyone make a better suggestion.

Oil is a problem for now anyway, but if theu want to sell it it could
be done through designated trading ports, like the Chinese did in the
ninteenth century.

I know all this will not happen because it is too politically incorrect.

Frankly, I don't think there is a solution, any more than there is a
solution to the Israel/Palestinian problem.
Posted by Bazz, Thursday, 31 December 2009 2:18:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy you set a hard task, no anti Islamists tirade was it?
Already some seem to Be half way into one.
But I must go on record, without doubt I am 100% anti Islam, that is radical Islam.
We will see those who blame Iraq Afghanistan, even 9/11, without any of those events we would have seen the same growth in terrorism.
Why?
I sniff an idea in your opening post, living in a past better left behind, in my view an education to hate not love fellow man.
Some true mega rich in Arab country's seem intent on staying very rich by fomenting trouble within their country's, other targets not them.
I think we must confront the truth, war surely is the most likely outcome, in my view only outcome, of false Friends like some from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.
America is not the only target the whole western world is.
No apology's from me I grow weary of the needless murders, spiteful threats and blind hatred.
I view with suspicion any claim this started with the birth of Israel, or that that country is the reason murders are daily events.
Posted by Belly, Thursday, 31 December 2009 2:26:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
YOU EVIL RACIST BIGOTS.
Smearing a whole people as terrorist, extreme, religious fundamentalists is the very essense of racism. Do you people not see this?
What about the christian extremists like Hillsong or the US televangelists? What about Israel and its existence as a virtual Jewish theocracy? What about our support for Saudi and Emirates theocratic dictatorships? What about the wests part in forming Al Queda in Afgahnistan in the 80s? Israels part in the formation of Hamas as a counter to the PLO?

Im sure most Muslims are just like most of us. Caring, polite people who just want to live their lives in peace and care for their families. You cant smear them all just because a few have done evil supposedly in the name of their god. NO single godbotherer can throw stones. All of your religions have at some time practiced murder and evil to further their cause.

A most disappointing and disgusting thread at this time of goodwill and compassion. SHAME OLOers SHAME
Posted by mikk, Thursday, 31 December 2009 2:28:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mikk “Im sure most Muslims are just like most of us. Caring, polite people who just want to live their lives in peace and care for their families.”

Is inconsistent with calling other folk “YOU EVIL RACIST BIGOTS.”

“Hypocrisy” has entered the building

Re “A most disappointing and disgusting thread at this time of goodwill and compassion. SHAME OLOers SHAME”

Blow it out your fundamental orifice
Posted by Col Rouge, Thursday, 31 December 2009 3:03:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes the moralising religious fruitcakes emerge at every possible occassion.

Mikk. Thread is about fundamentalists, not cultural muslims. Take some valium and a reading lesson.
Posted by TheMissus, Thursday, 31 December 2009 3:08:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mikk
All sorts of things have been done in the name of religion, but you
miss the point.
We either cannot or cannot be bothered to sort out the terrorists from
the rest and why should we bother ?

Just get rid of the lot, it is not our problem then as they can then
continue bombing each other.

BTW, who has Hillsong blown up ?
Posted by Bazz, Thursday, 31 December 2009 3:09:04 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Terrorism is not new - remember the IRA, the German Red Army and Italian terrorist groups all nothing to do with Islam until recent times (barring Munich Olympic Games which for the first time took Islamic fundamentalism outside of the Middle East).

At its heart, terrorism has little to do with religion although fundamentalist religious fervour is used to drive poor impressionable people to become suicide bombers or commit other acts of terrorism.

The influence of the West is very much at the heart as well as the influence of economic disparity, distribution of resources, quality of life issues and corrupt regimes within those nations where terrorism thrives.

It is not such a great stretch to imagine those in power or those who hold the wealth in those countries stir the flames of dissent to deflect blame to outsiders (like the West) which also serves to absolve them of their own greed and corruption; and where there is usually huge disparity between the very oil rich sheikhs and ordinary Muslims.

Politics is very much about perceptions and whoever controls or is able to manipulate the perceptions will wield the greatest influence particularly for poor Muslims who do not have access to education and have been whipped into a religous frenzy of self-righteousness which in their mind justifies even the most heinous of crimes. This phenomena is not reserved just for Muslims but is part of many more extreme religious crusades.

Terrorists or revolutions do not come mysteriouly out of the mist - there is usually a sense of injustice having been perpetrated by one or more common enemies. Inteference by the West in Afghanistan, Iraq and the West's allegiance to Israel lies at the heart of this historical conflict.

The IRA was formed as a result of injustices perpetrated by the English. It became on the surface a struggle between Catholicism and Protestantism but it was in essence nothing to do with religion but ownership of land and who rules.

IMO there is no intensification just more of the same. The most recent event was probably planned some time ago.
Posted by pelican, Thursday, 31 December 2009 4:27:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mikk know this, I have zero doubt your self confidence is sadly miss placed.
Keep your insults I give no value to your opinions.
It is in my view partly true that terrorism and extremism is not new.
Remember those planes blowing up in the desert all those years ago.
And Munich Olympics .
However like it or not hate and bigotry in the name of any God is something that should shame honest followers.
If we had no fundamentalists, Christian or any other, we could start building a better world.
We however can never hide the truth, ww3 if it comes may well be bought down on us by Islamists extremists and some of our friends[ other country's] are in fact in that category.
Posted by Belly, Thursday, 31 December 2009 5:18:05 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Islamic fundamentalism is like corporate fundamentalism. It is all about power at any cost because human beings are basically pathetic insecure beings,who will sacrifice their very existence in the pursuit of power.

The Arabic countries also have a lot to be outraged about since the West corporate elites have used them for their own gratification.
Posted by Arjay, Thursday, 31 December 2009 6:12:27 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Please allow me to explain a few things.
Because I was extremely disturbed by Mikk's
outburst and accusations.

This thread arose as a result of trying to
understand the reasons behind what I perceived
to be the intensification of Islamic fundamentalism,
as shown by recent news events.

Fundamentalism, be it Christian, Islamic,
Hindu, Buddhist or Judaism has been defined
as, "an approach, or set of strategies, by
which beleaguered believers attempt to
preserve their distinctive identity as a people
or group - by a selective retrieval of doctrines,
beliefs and practices from a sacred past."

They regard the problems of the world as stemming
from secular influences.

The purpose of the thread was to open up discussions on
the topic of Islamic fundamentalism.
To try to understand the reasons for it.

I appreciate all the comments received so far.
I need time to take them all on board.
You've all given me food for thought.
I'm beginning to realize what a
complicated topic this is. As Bazz pointed out
there doesn't seem to be easy solutions or answers.

Mikk, I apologise if I've caused you distress - that
wasn't my intention. Quite the opposite.
I thought that through discussion -
there was something to be learned.
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 31 December 2009 6:30:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy

Have a happy new year!

Re: the topic,
I would suggest that the the tone of the question is highly personal to you and as such almost unanswerable in any meaningful way.

Objectively, I wonder if the percieved increased militarism of Islam is
a. an artifact of the media.The media is about sensation and that thrives on conflict and gore. One could note that the acts are still comparatively novel enough to be exploited.Compare it with car accidents in the US that kill 20000+ each year. Where are the front page horror stories? Yet a bomb that kills 3 is front page all around the world.

b. because of the media. It's an attention grabber for a cause.
The publicity arguably encourages terrorism.

c.I would argue they are no more fundamentally violent than say Israel,Just different.
d. It is a measure of frustration felt by the dispossessed, younger gen.

Egypt is virtually a dictatorship and the disparity in wealth is horrific. A degree is no guarantee of a job. The country has too many people for their resources.
Suppression is also extremely high and vicious. Against that background it is no wonder 'the Muslim Brotherhood' are powerful, they represent the people's frustration with their lot.

e. It is a consequence of being suppressed, poverty and dominated by western supported dictators.

The more you suppress the population the more radical they become.
Consider the US civil rights of the 50/60's the extremes were the like of 'black power' etc.
Go to east LA today and you are confronted with the disenfranchised, and disillusioned...the subsequent crime and violence.

religion/politics/cultural pride have always been the tools of the manipulative to radicalize people.

To me they're no worse than any number white religious bigoted nut cases in every country. Both Mexico and Argentina are catholic countries but are among the most dangerous. Gangs are responsible for more killings each year than Islamic(?) fundies in Baghdad.
Posted by examinator, Thursday, 31 December 2009 7:11:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Islamic fundamentalism has increased as many has observed the godless perverted result of secular humanism. Funny that Mohammed and Polanski seem to have a bit in common.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 31 December 2009 8:30:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Durgh.Do we not see the parrallels between corporate lust for power and religious lust for power?It is all based on human insecurity and both will collude to subjuagate the masses if it suites their purposes.

The weakness in our humanity is reflected our own insecurity.This is why we form tribes that reflect our foibles.Great civilisations always fall from within and we need the ficticious war on terror to shore up the power of the elites.
Posted by Arjay, Thursday, 31 December 2009 9:19:26 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy's singling out of Islamic fundamentalism signifies progress as it is tacit acknowledgement
that Islam poses a special problem.
Then along comes examinator:
"Islamic fundamentalists are no more violence prone than the Amish
and anyway it's all the West's fault"
and we're back to square one.
examinators reasoning:
a. Deaths by old age being the most numerous should therefore be the most newsworthy.
b. Terrorist acts should not be reported because they cause terrorist acts.
c. Islamic violence is no more violent than Israeli violence, just different in that they deliberately targer innocent civilians.
d. Dispossessed, younger gen Muslims frustrated with their lot blow up Western airliners just like dispossessed younger gen Hindus don't.
e. Osama bin Laden (multimillionare), Major Nidal Hasan, (psychiatrist), Abdulmutallab (engineering student son of multi-millionaire businessman) act out their frustration as "a consequence of being suppressed, poverty and dominated by western supported dictators."
With examinator it's one step forward, three steps backward.
examinator can't seem to comprehend the difference between criminal gangs in "catholic countries" killing each other and Islamic fundamentalists trying to take down plane loads of civilians while claiming justification from their Islamic faith.
They each committed crimes didn't they, therefore they're the same.
While one doesn't want to give up on anyone,
sad to say,
examinator is a hopeless case.
Posted by HermanYutic, Thursday, 31 December 2009 9:31:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Ironically, Runner has probably outlined the reason why:

Puritanical Islamists in past centuries would not have ever experienced Western culture as closely and intensely as they have now- in the past, it was entirely news by word and mouth- and only REALLY serious news- like a crusade ever drew many swords.

These days every war is brought in graphic detail to their TV sets- to which they would feel 'part of', and of course being bombarded with images that they would consider decadent and dangerous- just as readily if a bunch of strippers broke into their house and put on a free show.

I imagine this would increase paranoia and feeling of being attacked.

Again- I believe we should simply lay off these countries and leave them to their own devices so long as they aren't threatening us- publicly declare a neutral stance in the Israel/Palestine conflict (as we do bugger all to help Israel already they have nothing to lose), as a start- along with the proposals I mentioned earlier.
Posted by King Hazza, Friday, 1 January 2010 1:22:06 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mikk,

The difference is made between Islam as an ideology (whose desired goal is to conquer the world through terrorism and impose shariah law) and Muslims (99% of whom are born into the "religion").

Certain death (in some Islamic countries) awaits Muslim who leave Islam but they are definitely disowned by their family or tribe.

An interesting debate took place recently between Wafa Sultan (an ex-Muslim who believes that Islam can never be reformed) and Daniel Pipes (a non-Muslim Islamic scholar) who believes that Islam can be reformed. http://fora.tv/2009/12/01/Moderate_Islam_Western_Ally_or_Western_Myth

When Pipes was asked by Sultan how successful was he (together with some secular Muslims) in reforming Islam, they was no reply.

The obvious answer is that Islam is Islam; there is going to be a fight to the finish between Islam and non-Islam.

Looks like Islam would be wiped out completely because most Islamic countries are backward
Posted by Philip Tang, Friday, 1 January 2010 3:06:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
examinator I consider myself a fan of yours.
But that post got it very wrong.
Goggle news ,any day any time and see the murders of innocents .
No fundamentalism, not just Islamic, is growing.
In my view as a result of Islamic terrorism.
I will never know why, but my in box gets Christian bigotry/fundamentalism, in increasing numbers.
But back to the thread foxy do not be concerned, you set out the rules in post one mikk, is quite wrong not you.
But we all, must not confuse our freedoms and wishes with what is achievable.
Fundamentalist I slam will not ever play by our rules/standards.
We will in time, understand we have to play roll in defeating them, not charming them to our ways.
Posted by Belly, Friday, 1 January 2010 4:57:53 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HermanYutic,

somewhere along the track you appear to have lost the plot of what I was saying.
Deaths from old age compared to preventable violent deaths?
The idea of comparing the Amish with the Israelis/Palestinians is preposterously simplistic and extreme. If anything, your response proves my point that most judgments on issues like this are driven more by emotion than objectivity or reality.

I neither defend or justify the violence of a few extremists, regardless of which side were the perpetrators.
I merely answered foxy's question in broad terms(limited space) to discuss other provable factors.

I did not say it was entirely the west's fault. The intention was to show that the west's, specifically US's selfish interests combined with local, historical issues and unbelievable poverty all contribute to the problem.

Nor did I infer that terrorism shouldn't be reported only that the fact that the reporting is salacious, selectively reported and sensationalized.

The PLO was originally a *nationalist* not religious group per se. As I said religion etc is used by the leaders to motivate the masses.
All the people you mentioned were motivated by a religious extreme emanating from the founders of the Muslim brotherhood.

By the way the Hindu extremists are every bit chauvinist terrorists.
have blown up trains loads of innocent people on religious grounds.They have even burnt Christian missionaries. They see their biggest enemy as the Pakistanis (Muslims are the excuse).
BTW India was a non aligned democratic state with out oil....no interest to the US other than a trading partner. They have a country too.

The references to sociological and psychological principals/influences were also missed.
In short my post was largely a plea for objectivity rather than cultural/religious based bias.
Posted by examinator, Friday, 1 January 2010 8:15:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,

The quote below is from an authoritative Islamic Q&A website.
It clearly explains how the Verse of the Sword abrogates the earlier peaceful Koranic verses.
Could this reality be a driving force behind Islamic terrorism?

“*{And so, when the sacred months are over, slay those who ascribe divinity to aught beside God wherever you may come upon them, and take them captive, and besiege them, and lie in wait for them at every conceivable place ! Yet if they repent, and take to prayer, and render the purifying dues, let them go their way: for, behold, God is much forgiving, a dispenser of grace.}* (At-Tawbah(‘s interpretation of Koran) 9:5)………..

Therefore, the following verses were considered abrogated (by the Verse of the Sword, above):

*{No compulsion in the religion}* (Al-Baqarah 2:256);

*{Forgive them, for God loves those who do good to people}* (Al-An`am 6:13);

*{Repel evil with that which is best}* (Al-Mu'minum 23: 96);

*{So patiently persevere}* (Ar-Rum 30:60);

*{Do not argue with the People of the Book except with means that are best}* (Fusslilat 41:46);

and *{Say: You have your religion and I have my religion.}* (Al-Kafirun 109:6)

In addition, a large number of prophetic traditions that legitimize peace treaties and multi-cultural co-existence, to use contemporary terms, were also abrogated.”

http://www.readingislam.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1220266448739&pagename=IslamOnline-English-AAbout_Islam/AskAboutIslamE/AskAboutIslamE

“Dr. Jasser Auda is the Founding Director of Al-Maqasid Research Centre in the Philosophy of Islamic Law (Markaz Dirasat Maqasid al-Shariah al-Islamiyyah ), Al-Furqan Foundation, London, U.K., since 2005; fellow of the International Institute of Advanced Systems Research, Canada; founding member of the International Union for Muslim Scholars, based in Dublin; member of the Academic Council of the International Institute of Islamic Thought, UK; member of the Board of Trustees of the Global Civilizations Study Centre, UK; member of the Executive Board of the Association of Muslim Social Scientists, UK; member of the Forum Against Islamophobia and Racism, UK…..”

I recognise that Auda later wades into a relativistic quagmire of apologia but the above is sufficient
to demonstrate that Islamic fundamentalists are NOT misinterpreting Islam.
Posted by HermanYutic, Friday, 1 January 2010 8:48:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Happy New Year Everyone!

Once again Thank You so much for answering my questions
and giving me such detailed explanations.
For me this is a difficult issue - as Examinator
pointed out - and one I'm
trying to make sense out of - because I feel that it's
an issue that isn't about to go away.

I can't help but suspect that Islamic fundamentalism
has surged as a result of Western interference.

These societies previously remained fairly
static for generations - in some cases, for
centuries. Then, in less than the space of
a single life span, (as for example - in
Iran), they were thrust into a
world of airports and highways, schools and
television, factories and power plants, as a
result of their new oil wealth.

As part of this process, the Islamic
societies were flooded with foreign
advisers, officials, entrepreneurs.
If you're a fundamentalist, wouldn't you
be concerned that these "Westerners" will
impinge on your traditions?

What King Hazza recommends makes sense.
Perhaps, Muslim societies should be left alone -
to resolve themselves and
Western powers should withdraw from these
countries and stop interfering in their affairs.
The West should have learned something from
the 1979 Iranian revolution, where the shah,
a deeply unpopular ruler was deposed through a
movement led by Shiite Muslim clergy, because he
was perceived to be an American puppet.

Despite the antipathy to
the West the fundamentalists are concerned with
conditions in their own countries. Most Muslims
are desperately poor, for their nations' oil
wealth has often been unequally shared, creating
an elite whose extravagant lifestyle arouses deep
resentment in the local population.

The aim therefore - of the
fundamentalists from what I've
read - is seen to be as nothing less than
the replacement of their rulers by totally
Islamic governments, in which the distinction
between the religious and the secular would
disappear.

Staying out of their affairs - would seem to be
a wise move.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 January 2010 11:39:51 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I think that's pretty much all it boils down to Foxy- sadly I'd have to answer your question and say NO, Western governments haven't figured this out yet- or at least, merely use moralistic interference as a cover to keep the oil flow;
But sadly I don't think that's all it is- as there seem to be a LOT of people that sincerely believe we SHOULD be 'helping' these countries adopt our way of life, with no possible personal material gain for themselves to make by advocating it...

I daresay, the world will be a much calmer place when people around the world begin to rethink how they interact with other countries (especially in regards to policies they disagree with).
In other words, to tolerate what they do domestically- even if it means stoning criminals and jailing adulterers, and demand similar respect to our own customs from them- or else it becomes a constant struggle (no matter how ineffectual it actually is) between the two worlds to interfere with each others' own laws.

I believe it's only fair to take as much as we give mutually to another country- and as I'm not remotely interested in accomodating Shariah principles into my own country- nor even Shariah-advocating TV programs, we should be noble enough not to demand the same from them towards us either- or else it would just be the seemingly powerful west throwing its weight around to undermine things that they feel are important- which is likely exactly how it's being received by the Islamic world.
Posted by King Hazza, Friday, 1 January 2010 2:01:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Everyone seems very selective when speaking of interfering or not interfering with other countries business. It seems that many who hold the line that we should not are screaming at China for handing out the death penalty for the convicted drug smuggler. It also seems strange that those believe in no interference constantly want Israel banned from defending themselves against terrorist.
Posted by runner, Friday, 1 January 2010 3:35:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy;
Thinking a bit more about it all I suspect that the problem exists
because moslems always over react to every little offence.
If a woman shows a bit of leg or hair, give her a thrashing with canes.
Commit adultary and they chop of the woman's head and give the man
a lecture.
This what the Saudis do and it is them that fund Al Quida.

You can probably remember numerous other over reactions.

Something annoys them so they retaliate but they over do it.
This over reaction causes a response somewhat stronger than otherwise
would occur.

Then again they over react and so ratchet up the tension.
It does not require much of this and you are using suicide bombers.
Next step blow up a couple of US embassies.
Next step hijack four airliners and fly them into buildings.

If they keep this up nuclear weapons are next on the list.
Posted by Bazz, Friday, 1 January 2010 4:00:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner,
What would we do without your monochromatic perspective?

NB There is a bloody big difference between complaining about an execution and installing/supporting, with arms and other nefarious activities, a brutal regime against the will of the people. Take your pick of (when) which middle eastern regime referred to.

A bit like your breed of christians deciding to combine parts of two Aussie states as a brutal theocracy with US military support
Ask yourself
a. Would the rest of Australia be happy
b. would they want to be friends with the US
c Would there be rebels/ freedom fighters/ terrorists in your view?

Absolutely.
Posted by examinator, Friday, 1 January 2010 4:11:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
My question is how many of us truly think America and its partners, us too, are trying to teach Muslims to live like us.
Come it would take generations, and most likely fail.
I do think western country's are trying to make us mix via migration in the hope both sides will learn to live together, at least in our country's.
But I am quite sure education, both lack of the right type, and wrong education is driving Muslim extremists.
Remember, yes I have already said it, our freedoms and standards are not theirs.
Women surely, are often treated like cattle, who has an answer for that?
Who can pretend it does not matter, then if that s the case we should retreat from all human rights issues, if women in Islamic country's is not our business nothing is.
Posted by Belly, Friday, 1 January 2010 4:29:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The west has had an agenda in the Middle-East for a very long time.
France, Britain and Italy staked their claims on many countries in the region, including Algeria, Tunisia Libya, Egypt, Syria and the Persian Gulf.
After the defeat of the Ottoman Empire in 1918, Britain and France got together to partition the Middle-East between them. Many modern-day borders were fashioned at this time to suit British and French interests. Most of these countries became British or French protectorates including Syria and Lebanon, Iraq and the western half of Palestine (the eastern half became Transjordan).
Then came the oil.
Western interference in the region, then, is nothing new. America interfered in Iran by installing the Shah. It backed Saddam Hussein to the hilt while it suited American interests and armed the mujaheddin in Afghanistan during the conflict with Russia.
It's latest foray into Iraq was an attempt to create a "new" middle-east nation that conformed to the western concept of a democratic/neoliberal state. This was envisaged to serve as a model for the whole region whereby elections and free trade would open everything up - simple.
The problem is always the same - no-one thinks to ask the locals if that is their wish. Disenfranchisement has become a way of life for generations of people in some countries of the Middle-East.
A little authentic autonomy would go a long way toward restoring the respect that the west has failed earn.
Posted by Poirot, Friday, 1 January 2010 5:34:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Poirot has hit the nail on the head.

However, internal constraints,
dictatorships sponsored
by the West and of course poverty and
underdevelopment are difficult hurdles to
overcome. However, these hurdles
would wane in the face of the evolution of
Modern Islamic public spheres that might
challenge religious conservatism.

To solve the problem we need to address its
roots. But how to do it is the question?
The nature of Islamic theology, ethics,
culture and law limit the impact of foreign
ideas and present barriers to the emergence of
economic, political, and cultural rationality.
The war on terrorism is not likely to end
terrorism. Autonomy - might, as Poirot stated,
be a step in the right direction.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 1 January 2010 6:40:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Wrong Runner, you FAIL at logic- completely.
As I'm one of the few people to have made a clear non-interference statement to which you are obviously referring to, I in fact mean it- SE-Asian countries are free to use the death penalty, Israel is free to defend itself from terrorists, and can all expect nothing out of us in return unless we actually WANT it. It's really not hard to separate yourself from extreme binaries (and when I say "you" I mean "everyone else but you it seems").

And Belly- there IS a difference between humanitarian issues beyond non-interference and injecting our 'rights' into Islamic countries: the simple answer is that the communities that receive whatever ELSE we're offering actually WANT it- and more specifically, aren't going to wage Jihad on us for trying to "help".
If they don't want us, then one less thing for us to waste our time on.
And seriously, what LAWS another country has is NONE of our business nor our right to involve ourselves in.
Posted by King Hazza, Friday, 1 January 2010 8:03:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Gawd.

Foxy's question didn't go far enough. It should have been "Why has religious fundamentalism of all kinds intensified?".
Posted by CJ Morgan, Friday, 1 January 2010 8:30:38 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
History often takes many twists and turns, and this applies to the Muslim world as well.
Many westerners see Islamic nations as backward simply because they do not embrace western industrial culture. However, we should be mindful of the fact that Muslim scholarship through the ages has provided much knowledge for the world.
During the golden era from 750 - 950, the Muslim Empire covered modern day Iran, Syria, Iraq, Egypt, Palestine, North Africa, Spain and parts of Turkey. At this time a great scientific and philosophic tradition arose bringing together many elements including Arabic translation of Greek knowledge of the ancient world. Much of the learning was centred in Baghdad which possessed a paper mill.
Starting with Greek knowledge of science and mathematics, Arab scholars then made their own advances in the fields of mathematics, astronomy, ethics, medicine, mechanics, music, physics, physiology and optics. Utilizing an Indian idea they developed Arabic numerals and made possible the development of algebra and geometry.
In the modern era, prior to the two wars fought with the U.S., Iraq possessed an advanced medical and education system.
The Muslim world has not always cut itself off from outside influence as can be gleaned from the evidence above. However it is obviously selective about the areas of culture and knowledge that it wishes to receive.
Posted by Poirot, Friday, 1 January 2010 8:38:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,

Your initial discussion question:
“(H)as Islamic fundamentalism intensified…because these Islamic societies
resent the influence the West is exerting in their territories, especially the US?”

Your conclusion:
“I can't help but suspect that Islamic fundamentalism
has surged as a result of Western interference.”
(Surprise! Just as you thought all along.)

Your solution:
“Staying out of their affairs - would seem to be
a wise move.”

Wrong.
Wrong.
Wrong.

Islamic fundamentalism is on the rise not only in Iraq and Afghanistan,
but also in Pakistan, India, Darfur, Somalia, Yemen, Philippines,
Egypt, China, Ingushetia, Chechnya, Thailand, Aceh, etc.
Are all these the result of Western interference?
How about the Uighurs in Xinjiang?
Why is their response to Chinese (Western?) “interference” totally different from the response of the Tibetans?
Could it be related to their religion?

How about U.S. interference in Germany and Japan post WWII?
Has this resulted in German and Japanese suicide bombers?

I see U.S. interference as continually trying to put out spot fires,
before the whole region goes up in flames and takes us with it.

Islam provides the ignition source, the fuel
and the arsonists’ justification.

CJ Grogan,

<Foxy's question didn't go far enough. It should have been "Why has religious fundamentalism of all kinds intensified?".>

You're right on the ball as always CJ.
While everybody's talking about Flight 253 on Christmas day,
nobody mentions the Christian fundamentalist on NCIS who honour killed his brother because he converted to Islam.
And then immediately afterward on NCIS LA a Christian fundamentalist blew a Muslim's head off with an IED in a mobile phone.
http://bighollywood.breitbart.com/author/cjacobsen/
These also happened on Christmas day and the press is hushing them up.
It's Islamophobic.
Posted by HermanYutic, Friday, 1 January 2010 8:52:01 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You're getting weirder, Herman.

Just so you know, "NCIS" is fiction. I agree that it's not very good.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Friday, 1 January 2010 9:13:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
CJ Grogan,

That was my point.
Your attempt to obfuscate the issue by generalising Islamic fundamentalism
into "religious fundamentalism of all kinds" is also a fiction.
Not all kinds of religious fundamentalists try to bring down passenger airplanes in the name of their God.
Or mutilate the genitalia of their victims before murdering them in the name of their God.
Or push disabled people in wheelchairs off passenger liners in the name of their God.
Or behead captives on the internet in the name of their God.
Etc.
No CJ, it takes a unique strand of religious fundamentalism to perpetrate these horrors
and Foxy has accurately identified it.

A weird tag coming from you, I wear as a badge of honour.

At least we can agree that NCIS is not very good.
Posted by HermanYutic, Friday, 1 January 2010 10:26:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A few of my comments from 1995 here:

First of all let me make clear that the massive immigration of Muslims to the West is a new phenomena that has only occurred in the last generation. Prior to the 1960s when immigrants came from Muslim countries, it was mostly Christians escaping discrimination they suffered under Islam.

Understand also that the rules have changed - 100 years ago a family would move and they had to integrate. Now with multiculturalism, welfare and technology, this is different. A group can live, work, worship and even hate, and live side by side with another group. When people praise past immigration (as in the US or Australia) they are talking about a world that no longer exists.

Welfare now makes immigrants independent of work and responsibility. Multiculturalism makes them immune from OFFICIAL criticism and discourages integration. Modern technology means they can live in the West like they never left home (and even eat their favorite Pakistani dishes or watch their favorite Imam in Old Arabia on TV telling them to hate the infidels). It is a whole new world. The effects of globalism, new communication technology and mass migrations are so many and so deep that they are beyond any individual's understanding. This is a dangerous mixture one day and it will explode.

The fact is that things will get worse. Muslims cannot integrate and live side by side (in numbers) with other people, and still be good Muslims. Read the Quran and the hadiths. They are very clear as to the preferred relationship between Muslims and infidels. When the number of Muslims reaches a certain level they will start their jihad. In fact, some consider immigration to be a low level jihad. First it will be just demands, then a little crime, then more demands, then fights, then a riot, then murders, and then more riots and finally full-scale war. Yes there are good Muslims, but not enough to make a difference. Most of them are indifferent and/or in denial, so the radicals will win, as they always do in Islamic societies.

Kactuz
Posted by kactuz, Saturday, 2 January 2010 11:17:25 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Herman Yutic,

There's a few points that need clarification:

Firstly, fundamentalists explain reality by
blaming social problems on the departure from
religious morality and promise redemption via
a return to old traditions.

The basis of support for radical Islamic
fundamentalism can't be discovered only in the
religious doctrine. That's an over simplification.
We also need to look at the social conditions
of the region.

Part of the problems are tied with
the desperate searching on the part
of the oppressed masses for a way out of the hell of
poverty, hunger, unemployment, disease - and as
history has shown - in the absence of worldly
salvation many seek solace in religion.

Also, the US Government has a long and bloody history of
dominating and exploiting the people and resources of
the Middle East. Egypt would never challenge Washington
because of Washington's $2 billion annual bribe -
officially called - "financial aid."

We need to look at the histories of the countries
to understand the context of what's happening
there today and why.

As I mentioned in an earlier post -
1) limits to modernity 2) religious conservatism 3) resentment
of Western influences are all difficult hurdles to overcome.

Underdevelopment and the lack of basics such as clean
drinking water, sewerage, electricity, proper housing,
education, health facilities et cetera , all play a big
part. Shanty towns with horrific living conditions -
are a part of the urban scene in these areas. Between
1982 - 1992 the population of Pakistan was given as having
grown by 33% while the basic facilities grew by only 6.9%

As I also stated earlier - to begin to solve the
problems - we need to address their roots.

Blaming only religion - is a narrow and limited concept -
and doesn't look at the broader picture of the social
conditions of the region.
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 2 January 2010 1:14:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here I too become a little weird C J Morgan, not in the Herman mold, but I agree with the directions of Kactus,s post.
Lets get to the bones here.
I find all forms of fundamentalism threatening.
I can say that about Christians and only be condemned to a non existent hell.
Some Muslims however would call for my death.
Christians, note the catholic church have far too much influence on governments.
Some Muslim country's, increasingly, the government and religion are the same.
Why should we mixed up humans bend to ANY creed?
We teach evolution , most do believe in it, yet give a special protection to an idea most of us do not share.
Mankind is growing More independent from mythology Gods that never existed.
But we tip toe around this issue, education, the very seed that aloes man to grow, is controlled most in Muslim country's.
Posted by Belly, Saturday, 2 January 2010 1:21:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*Shanty towns with horrific living conditions -
are a part of the urban scene in these areas*

Hang on Foxy, shanty towns etc also exist in India
and many other places, which have not produced
religious fundamentalism. If you go to the ME
gulf states, its not Arabs doing the work, but
cheap labour from India, Indonesia, Bangaladesh.

The difference today is that there is huge money
in the ME. Go back 50 years and most of these
people still lived in tents etc. Whatever
religious beliefs they had, they had no money
to implement them.

Not so today. Bin Laden inherited a couple of
hundred million $, enough to follow his cause
with $. Zawahiri is a surgeon from Egypt, he
was not poor.

It is also a Muslim duty to give money to charity.
Much of that is channeled to fundamentalist groups.
So money is the big driver that has enabled
Islamic fundamentalism to flourish.
Posted by Yabby, Saturday, 2 January 2010 1:30:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I would be interested to know what the definition of a fundamentalist Christian is in the eyes of the godless. Any form of Christianity that denies the sinful nature of man, God's love in sending His Son, the Resurrection of Christ and future judgement for those who reject such love is not worth a piece of toilet paper. It seems to me that the greatest increase of late in fundamentalism has been humanism. This is shown how many have blindly swallowed the evolution myth as true science, have an outward form of morality but inwardly are corrupt (like many of the heroes of humanism) and a new environmental religion is preached by their prophets. It is easy to see with this new hard line hypocritical humanistic dogma and rubbish that many become disillusioned with such hypocrisy and in turn join terrorist groups. Interesting that many of the terrorist have trained as doctors, engineers etc. They obviously know half the crap fed to them at uni is just that. Unfortunately they become self righteous like many of the fundamentalist humanist. They become blinded by the dogma of Islam just like many of our academics are blinded by humanism
Posted by runner, Saturday, 2 January 2010 2:57:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
A few comments re Indonesia i.m.o:

1. Under the religion you have the traditional practices, and under the traditional practices you have the controllers and their vested political and economic interests.

2. My BeLoved was there during the "Banyuwangi Massacres" of '98. I have been and spent time with these people, and got on the p!ss regularly with 1 who claims to have done an alleged "Black Magic" pracitioner or 2 HimSelf.

(yang "ronda" jalan untuk penduduk/saudara)
(one who patrols the road for the neighbours and family)

3. The Munchkin folk tell stories of many "disturbing, dark and violent" things.

4. There are more variables at play than immediately meets the eyes Poppets.

A good article I tried to find for you appears to have gone, but here, a snippet from one newspaper:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/masked-ninjas-blamed-for-wave-of-killings-in-java-1177992.html

" ... But who? Since May, when President Suharto was forced from power, Indonesia has been in political turmoil, with ancient rivalries and feuds - suppressed during 30 years of dictatorship - rising to the surface. Some suspect that former members of the Indonesian Communist Party, massacred during the 1960s, are using the ninja rumours to take their belated revenge against the Islamic establishment. Others believe it is directed against NU which has recently set up its own political party in opposition to the new President, BJ Habibie.

Whoever is responsible, they have achieved something remarkable: the transformation of a modern town into a state of medieval superstition and terror. ... "

..

The people are, were and still are very superstitious.
My "friend" is NU.

The above snippet appears to have a general idea, but the facts in my experience are considerably scrambled.

..

The reach of the Masjid speaker appears to travel far and fast. When Gaza was invaded, it appeared that more than just a few stood up and asked, "Shall we go and fight the Yahudis *S.B.Y.!?"

Islam appears to have a very large, extended family.
Posted by DreamOn, Saturday, 2 January 2010 3:24:24 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whilst I am no expert and have but limited experience, it appears to me that be it the Indonesian Hindus, Muslims or even the Christians for that matter, they are all indoctrinated from birth, as an alleged matter of socio/cultural/family and economic security to

BELIEVE without question

AND
that there is certain things which MUST be done

AND

certain things which MUST NOT.

..

So, I ask you, would you wrestle with the body, of those brought up on the DOCTRINE of an eye for an eye

(and in that regard the opponents likely reckon that they have a lot of catch up to do)

or would you remove the Head of the Snake?

..

Is it true that hate is openly preached in those places where they think "we" cannot hear?

..

Or do we need to think outside the square and come up with different strategies all together to attempt to circuit break an intractable situation?
Posted by DreamOn, Saturday, 2 January 2010 3:38:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy;
I don't think there is a rational answer to your question.
Viewed after the reports of the suicide bombing of a volley ball match
in Pakistan where they killed 88 plus those not yet recovered, who
would mostly have been Moslems, I am pressed to the following
conclusion;
It is racial mental retardation, probably caused by a high level of
cousin marriage.
It does explain what seems to most as irrational behaviour and an
inability to foresee repercussions. A typical symptom.

This won't be a popular conclusion but realism seldom is.
Posted by Bazz, Saturday, 2 January 2010 4:32:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Yabby,

You might want to google
Islamic fundamentalism in Kashmir.
It could be of some interest.

Also, Thomas L. Friedman in his
book, "Hot, Flat, and Crowded,"
points out that:

"The rise of the more fundamentalist strain of Islam
in the past two decades is by no means entirely
attributable to Saudi money ... A broader backlash
against globalization and Westernization is also
at work in the Muslim world, as well as a rejection
of all the previous failed ideologies -
Arab nationalism, Arab socialism, and Communism - by
a new generation of Muslim youth...
Nearly two-thirds of the Middle East's population is
under the age of twenty-five and more than one in
four are unemployed. Many of these frustrated,
unemployed youth are finding succor in faith."
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 2 January 2010 6:26:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hermie the germie,

You really should stop with the rash statements, in the last 24 hours two incidents had Muslims blowing up other Muslims in the name of their brand of Islam?

It's about the same as Waco's Wacko Koresh and his 'Christian'(?) Branch Davidians or the white supremacists and their 'Christianity'(?).

Clearly there are biblical texts that can be 'taken' to (if only in the minds of the extremes) give justification. But in reality religion is only the unifying vector not the cause. The cause is proclaimed as defending their culture (sic), independence(Sic) some......identity/security as a part of an exclusive grouping.

Don't kid yourself, that the USA interferes in other countries to improve the lives of that country's population, they do so solely for their own selfish interests.

Consider the scenario I painted for runner...honestly, how would you react? If you and all those you knew were constantly being dispossessed, denied basic freedoms, are you sure there wouldn't eventually be embittered marters from those families? Lets get real you squeal against the limitations of this a liberal democracy now.
It's time you advanced from your germ's eye view.
Posted by examinator, Saturday, 2 January 2010 7:31:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*Most of today's foreign workers come from the Asian subcontinent, the Philippines and other Arab countries. Many of these people are employed in unskilled jobs traditionally shunned by Saudis.*

Foxy, this is from :

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/3024081.stm

Fact is that there are 5 million foreign workers in just Saudi
Arabia, as the young might be unemployed, but they refuse to take
the crappy jobs, so leave them for foreigners. Its much the same
in other parts of the Gulf. All that building work in places like
Dubai, nearly all foreigners, the Arabs don't want those kinds
of jobs.

Those many mosques built around the world, including the payment
for the wages of Imams, have been from Saudi Arabia. Their form
of Islam, Wahabism, is quite hostile compared to other forms.

I'm not sure what your point is about Kashmir.

Yes, some muslims reject Westernisation and globalisation, but its
by no means an overwhelming majority. Just look at the divisions
in Pakistan. They have their share of religious nuts, as we have
our share. Only their share are happy to use force to achieve
their objectives, unlike ours, who just complain but accept
democracy.

This is the problem with Islam, its an extremely political religion
and always was.
Posted by Yabby, Saturday, 2 January 2010 9:24:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We continue to tip toe around the issue.
Not truly addressing the issue, well some of us are not.
Yes poverty is a big part.
Education bad and not true is too.
Western actions?
Yes for a very long time France Germany England, all long before America, and as bad.
Like we used China the world used the middle east, Holland, Spain, many country's.
Indonesia was used.
But we once had a white Australia policy, we no longer do, do we understand the hate still generated by the Crusades?
Or that it would be tens no hundreds of generations ago, that our ancestors took part in that?
In this big world, moving so very much to be a better world, hate for us is generated by a religion that calls for our death.
Yes the Bible does too, but every single day, every minute, females are living and dieing in a hell created by a book.
examinator, mate, do not forget freedoms rights, a chance to live well, are often denied in the name of Gods, a tool of the rich.
Posted by Belly, Sunday, 3 January 2010 6:57:01 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner asks about Christian fundamentalism. Surely it is the same as Islamic fundamentalism or any other variety. Anyone who kills in the name of their religion or commits other acts of atrocities (child rape and kidnapping) in the name of their religion would rate being labelled a fundamentalist.

I tend to think the more isolationist a cult the more fundamentalist. They are generally those who will entertain no other belief system as being valid to another culture or group of people and will go so far as to dehumanise them to validate their own treatment of that culture.

And they would never entertain the thought that their own version of history may actually be wrong althought that in itself probably does not make a fundamentalist.

King Hazza's comments resonate most strongly. Sometimes to end an era of tyranny the countrymen and women need to be the instruments of change. Interference by the West usually leads to a puppet government who hold no interest in the welfare of their own people but the interests of other nations. And in many cases corruption and theft are rampant such as in Afghanistan where hordes of US aid money has not been allocated to designated programs like building schools, but to feather the nests of the new elites.
Posted by pelican, Sunday, 3 January 2010 9:58:43 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The fundamentalist humanist win hands down by Pelican's definition. With up to 100000 unborn babies massacred in Australia alone each year Hitler looks like a saint. Seems to me that the fundamental teachings of Christ are by far the most peaceful when it comes to violence. Islam and secularism both kill without conscience.
Posted by runner, Sunday, 3 January 2010 10:06:19 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Agree completely Pelican- the puppet governments of the past would definitely not help (not to mention drastically decrease the enthusiasm over there for a pro-western party- everyone suspicious they might be puppets themselves).

So in a way the lack of change is solidified further.
Posted by King Hazza, Sunday, 3 January 2010 10:49:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Here's something interesting from
Thomas L. Friedman:

"Up until 9/11, America treated the Arab world
basically as a collection of big gas stations -
the Saudi station, the Libyan station, the
Kuwait station... 'Guys,' we told them - it was
only guys we talked to - 'here's the deal: Keep
your pumps open, keep your prices low, and don't
bother the Jews too much, and you can do whatever
you want out back. You can treat your women badly.
You can deprive your people of whatever civil rights
you like. You can print whatever crazy conspiracy
theories about us you like..."

Well on 9/11 the US got hit with all the pathologies
going on "out back."
Unfortunately the US did virtually nothing to reduce
their dependence on oil, or reduce the price of oil,
as part of a strategy to weaken those forces out back
and beneath the surface. The US bet everything on
the quick success of the Iraq invasion.

Today, no one knows how the Iraq saga is going to end.

But as Friedman points out:

"There are two things for sure...One is that the need
to drive reform in the Arab-Muslim world is as vital
as ever - educational reform, empowerment of women,
religious modernisation, and more consensual politics.
The other is that no matter what happens in Iraq, the
US is not going to invade another Arab-Muslim country
in the name of reform any time soon. We need to find
another way to partner with people there to change the
context out back."

Friedman believes that the best post-Iraq strategy for
driving reform in the Persian Gulf is to bring down the
global price of oil - be developing clean power alternatives-
and then count on the forces of globalization from the outside
and economci pressures from the inside to push the
leaders of these countries to change.

He believes that if the price of oil was half of what
it is today, these regimes would not be able to
resist political and religious modernization so easily.
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 3 January 2010 11:14:14 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*Go Foxy!* Yes, we are all Human Beings aren't we, irrespective of whether projecting that view is conducive to doing business with the "Butcher's of Beijing" or not?

..

*Runner* I always thought you were a Nun, but other comments suggest not. Would you care to clarify?

Fluff or Noodle?

I was thinking, have you ever considered an inter faith exchange where you exchange your "Vows of Chastity" for a "Vow of Silence?"

Don't mind a bit of medical waste poppet. I'm sure if El GodO wants to send *Baby Jesus* again that there will be no risk of the bucket.
HaHaHa

(Where's *West* when you need him?)

..

So, yes, the Indos do appear to have copped a bad time at the hands of the Dutch. Sadly though, even now, us whitey's, Dutch, Poms, Aussies or otherwsie all get tagged with the same derogatory term - "Bule" pronounced Booley ( "oo" as in moon )

In Bali, further to comments re Arabian practice, the majority of the sh!t jobs are done by the Javanese - a virtual 2nd class.

And all the Mosques just over the water - allegedly heavily contributed to by the Saudis - not many Wahabis, but extended Islam.

And the security check point AGAIN, in the case of myself and all of the other ex-pats I know who regularly make the crossing between Java and Bali don't even get checked. Now, I'm no one special, AND, who's to say that I am not some frothing at the mouth looney with a spite against the guvment? But no one even looks twice when I come in with a car load of traditional Islamists - some with identity documents and some without.

I imagine that that is but the tip of the ice berg. There are thousands of Islamists here, mostly good people too in my experience, but there MUST be SECURITY and whilst they have a really good on paper registration system, it is not enforced, or only rarely.
Posted by DreamOn, Sunday, 3 January 2010 1:17:17 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
So, it's not a matter of IF in my view, but just when another tragedy will occur. And what do those p!ss boys in Canberra do knowing all this? I'll tell you. They defer to the politicians, who do a few little paragraphs on the DFAT website recommending no travel to Indo.

Why not a mandatory BIG sign with all the travel agencies and air line ticketing outlets and bang the message home loud and 'ing hard.

..

Oh, I'm very fond of the Indos, and for the most part they have been most courteous and considerate hosts and they have taught me much, for which I am most grateful HOWEVER, zero tolerancey on matters of security.

I note further that whilst I support their right to do their own thing, if they won't pull their executive into line, enforce the standards and make way for complaints and dispute resolution, working collectively for peace and security, then we should withdraw our AID funds until they WANT to do so.

Mining contracts do NOT concern me in the face of the risk of losing people.
Posted by DreamOn, Sunday, 3 January 2010 1:20:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
Is the Friedman you mention the economist ?
I am afraid that most economists believe that the market can fix everything.
Unfortunately it cannot "fix" the price of oil.
I suggest you read the link below and you will see how hopeless that
approach would be. Alternative energies are the techno fix that will
come in time, but nowhere soon enough.
If we forced down the price of oil (no mention of how to do that) all
that would happen is that OPEC will turn off the tap.
The suggestion is impossible.

http://www.postcarbon.org/article/40503-temporary-recession-or-the-end-of

http://tinyurl.com/ybnhxzk

I read a joke today; Lock three economists in a cellar and leave them.
No worries they say, as soon as our stomachs start grumbling
sandwiches will appear to supply the demand !

Anyone who thinks that infinite growth in a finite world is possible
is either a madman or an economist !

ps I notice no one commented on my suggestion that the Islamic
problem is caused by cousin marriage.

Rather shocking suggestion, but there it is, it must have some effect.
Posted by Bazz, Sunday, 3 January 2010 1:32:03 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
runner
You christians can spout all you want about barbaric moslems et al. Just because you christians have changed your practices (but not your beliefs) does not absolve you of the filth of the crusades, the inquisition, antiscience, sth america, helping hitler, persecution of jews, subjugation of women, kiddie fiddling and all the other nastiness in your history. Poeople in glass houses as they say!

Foxy better that we just stopped buying oil from despots and force them to hold democratic elections either by sanctions, rebellion or even military action. If the price of oil fell renewables would be unable to compete and people would just use more oil. Sadly it may be the only way we sort it out and by that i mean it will only be sorted when the oil has run out and the saudis et al have to face life without all that western income so maybe friedman is right in that the best way to hasten it is reduce the price of oil so it gets used up quicker. Pity about the environment and anyone living near a coastline or the people who rely on monsoons or glaciers for their food production.

I say ban ALL religions everywhere. I could happily live without mother teresa, father bob, the salvos, nuns and religious charitys if it meant living without people like amadinnerjacket or zionists or fred bloody nile or runner. They are all intolerant and antagonistic towards each other and logically they cant all be right so the vast majority (if not all) are wrong in their beliefs and so deserve no consideration. Erroneous beleifs are dangerous and harmfull and SHOULD be suppressed and killed off. Wether it be sacrifising virgins or praying to L ron hubbard if you cant back you beliefs with anything more than some imaginary invisible superfriend in the sky then you have no right to inflict restrictions or dominance over anyone let alone use violent means to get your message through and force others to follow you.
Posted by mikk, Sunday, 3 January 2010 1:41:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
All religions are fundamentalist dogmatism at their cores and they neither serve humanities needs nor assist in our progress materially or socially. Indeed the history of religion has been nothing but war, ignorance, repression, bigotry, injustice, torture, lies, sexual abuse and the impeding of progress. We must stop the religious fools who run our world or they will happily loose nuclear catastrophe on the rest of us and anything else they think will gain them eternal exaltation.
Posted by mikk, Sunday, 3 January 2010 1:42:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
“Western powers should withdraw from these
countries and stop interfering in their affairs.” - Foxy

“Staying out of their affairs - would seem to be
a wise move.” - Foxy

"(one) thing for sure...is that the need
to drive reform in the Arab-Muslim world is as vital
as ever” – Foxy approvingly quoting with Friedman

I know that some people can simultaneously accommodate seemingly contradictory stances,
but for those of us who can’t - what do you mean Foxy?

Is Friedman advocating Western interference in Middle Eastern affairs and are you agreeing?

If so, then it is only a matter of determining the appropriate nature and degree of interference.

Options range (downward) from the “shock and awe” approach as exemplified by GW Bush
to support for popular insurrection as per the opportunity in Iran missed by Obamarama.

An approach I personally think could be effective is exemplified by Father Zakaria Botrous.
Botrous’ television show is beamed into the Middle East via satellite.
He is an expert on the Koran, Hadith and Sunna who delights in pointing out
Islamic idiosyncrasies and contradictions as well as the Holy Prophet’s peccadilloes.
Needless to say he is widely condemned by the Islamic hierarchy,
who nevertheless seem unable to take up his challenges to prove his claims wrong.

Imagine that, instead of honouring Islam and Mohammed,
as Western apologists do for fear of inciting a violent reaction,
and in accordance with their flawed relativistic ideology,
we up the ante and bombard cyberspace with cogent criticism of the “religion of peace”.

This approach is predicated on the belief that when people realise
the dangerous absurdity of Islam they will ultimately jettison it.
And that is what it will take to begin reform in the Middle East.

In the long run I believe this approach will result in less bloodshed.
Posted by HermanYutic, Sunday, 3 January 2010 1:55:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I am with Mikk on this one. There is not one religion in our world that can boast a violence-free history- past or present.
People should be free to practice and believe what they like, as long as it does not affect anyone else's life.

Herman would have us believe we should flood cyberspace with anti- Islamic messages. No, I believe this would result in way more bloodshed.

All the rest of the world was upset with the terrible violence in the form of bombings and shootings between the protestant and Catholic Christians in Ireland and England a few years ago (and again just recently), but that took an awful long time to resolve (if it ever did!).
Posted by suzeonline, Sunday, 3 January 2010 2:10:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Suzie on Line
Actually religion was not what the Irish were arguing about it was not
why they were fighting.
It was a political struggle and really was not about making protestants
catholic.
It was about incorporating Northern Ireland into the Republic.

So it should not be considered a true religious war.
Posted by Bazz, Sunday, 3 January 2010 2:52:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Perhaps present-day Muslim cultures do not wish to be modernized, or perhaps they resent having innovation foisted upon them. And who is the arbiter who decides which is the correct way to live? For every benefit enjoyed by the average westerner, there is an equal blight endured by the planet. We enjoy our privileged lifestyle, yes, but our way of life is finite - never ending growth is a myth.
It all comes back to the psychological structure emanating from the world view experienced by individuals in their societies.
The west seems obsessed with renewal and reform. One has only to glimpse the changing cityscapes through the decades of last century for evidence of this. We like to knock ém down and build ém up. Other cultures don't think like that.
Herman mentioned the Uighurs who inhabit a strategically valuable region rich in gas and oil reserves.
What Herman failed to mention was the Chinese government's intention - already under way - to remove 50,000 Uighur residents from their ancient mud brick city of Kashgar and rehouse them in flimsily built modern apartments, citing fear of earthquakes.
These buildings have lasted centuries, resisting the aging processes of weather. They are warm in winter and cool in summer. Most of all, they contain the culture of the Uighur people and symbolize the identity they have preserved for centuries.
Human beings react for specific reasons. The Uighurs, understandably, were trying to defend their heritage.
Posted by Poirot, Sunday, 3 January 2010 3:31:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I beg to differ Bazz. My husband is Irish, and he says the conflict had everything to do with religion!
The Protestants killed only Catholics and the Catholics killed only the Protestants- what could be more religion based than that?

Yes it was also about England invading Ireland and taking their land, but the main problems were the religious differences.

In any case, the Fundamentalist Muslims are not just killing other people to try to get them to become Muslims either. There are also killings against other Muslims, for political reasons also.

So you see, the two religions are not so different are they?
Posted by suzeonline, Sunday, 3 January 2010 5:02:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Suzie,
Ask your husband this question.
If Northern Ireland became incorporated in the republic, would the Catholics keep killing Protestants ?

The answer will tell you whether it was religion or Nationalism.
Posted by Bazz, Sunday, 3 January 2010 5:32:23 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
suzeonline and others

I think the issue of Ireland is a bit deeper than simply a religious war.

It was/is about Ireland for the Irish so to speak, their culture etc.
The conflict about the protestants V catholic came later,*more a symbol of their Irishness*. One need to look at the Brits that colonized the Ireland destroying kingdoms etc.

There was an attitude of British superiority (class) that translated into the law, those that held land office power were usually protestants. Those local who were Anglicized become Protestants and regarded as traitors.

True to most rebellions the indigenous (Irish) were dispossessed and after many starved in the potato famine. The people rose up (IRA) and eventually the republic of Eyre was agreed to.

The Brits kept Nthn Ireland counties because of its industry, and the Brits owned them. By this time there were many Protestant Irish who were in the Nth.
After Eyre, the Protestants fearing persecution and loss of power if the Catholics Irish were to unite Nth and south. The Protestants given that many had power discriminated against Catholics, because they were seen as non English.

Following the usual course the Catholics became militant,the protestants (unionists...joining GB) hit back and there was sectarian warfare.

In the final analysis *religious conversion* wasn't the issue, rather a sense/fear of powerlessness and dispossession, masquerading as a nationalist/religious war.

It is interesting to note that nominally some of the most volatile "religious" based wars happen in India estimated a million victims.
Hence the partitioning. The power struggle between Pakistan and India continues today.

Today elements of the Hindu party wants to force conversions to Hinduism. The question is "is this still a religious war of simply maintaining/increasing power.

It could be argued that religious conversion is all about control/power. A bit like Labor V Liberal conflicts on speed.
Posted by examinator, Sunday, 3 January 2010 5:56:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Herman Yutic,

You really need to read my entire posts
if you're going to quote from them and
not simply selectively quote them to suit
your own agenda.

Friedman is not advocating Western interference
at all as you well know. It was quite clearly
explained that there is a need to find another
way to partner with people there to change the
context "out back."
"If the price of oil were half of what it is today -
these regimes would not be able to resist political
and religious modernization so easily."

People don't change when they're told they should.
They change when they tell themselves they must.
Falling oil prices would make them tell themselves
they must.

Anyway, re-read that particular post - and perhaps
you may eventually comprehend it.
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 3 January 2010 6:39:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
<<So it should not be considered a true religious war.>>
With all the nationalism, colonialism, occupation, war, injustice and poverty in the middle east the same could be said for the whole conflict ridden area.

The Irish, on both sides used their religion for support and cohesion and sometimes as justification for atrocities, even though the conflict was really about land, nationalism and conquest. Much like the middle east today.

Coincidentally Robert Fisk has a recent article on just this subject.
http://www.commondreams.org/view/2010/01/02-0
Posted by mikk, Sunday, 3 January 2010 7:19:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear mikk,

Thank You for the Robert Fisk site.

You may find the following interview
with him interesting as well:

http://www.medialens.org/articles/interviews/robert_fisk.php

Fisk as you know is the most decorated British
Correspondent and has been based in the Middle East
for the past 25 years. His knowledge is unparalleled.

In this interview he answers questions about
Islamic fundamentalism which are very revealing.
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 3 January 2010 9:14:57 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Bazz, I asked my husband the question you put to me <
" If Northern Ireland became incorporated in the republic, would the Catholics keep killing Protestants ?"

He said that the majority of people in Northern Ireland are protestant and they do not want Northern Ireland to join the Republic at all. They want to remain affiliated with England.

He believes that even in the unlikely event that they were all under the Republic of Ireland, the 'troubles' would continue between the two religions. The history of problems is just too ingrained in both sides for either religion to be happy to coexist in Ireland.

At least there is an uneasy truce in Ireland at present. Maybe there also is hope for the current problems between Islamic and other religions?
Posted by suzeonline, Sunday, 3 January 2010 10:19:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
In one of your earlier posts on this issue, you surmised the reason for the targeting of the U.S. by fundamentalists who you reasoned found it politically helpful to have an alien enemy.
However, the U.S. has been the driving force for decades in implementing a scorched earth policy for any country or region that resists it's overtures for it's brand of globalized free trade. Usually the victim country gets entangled in the tentacles of the IMF or the World Bank and in order to repay "generous loans" is forced to privatize services and jump into bed with multinationals. Countries and cultures have been worn down relentlessly to accommodate America's capitalist juggernaut.
A different template was introduced by the Bush Administration this time in the Middle-East with Iraq as the main staging point.
Naomi Klein, in her book "The Shock Doctrine" in a chapter titled "Erasing Iraq" quotes Thomas Friedman, who was quite forthright at the time of the post 9/11 invasion about the significance for Iraq to have been chosen as the new model for wiping the slate clean in the Middle-East. "We are not nation-building in Iraq" wrote Friedman, "We are doing nation-creating".
Klein says that Friedman is among many onetime war advocates who has since claimed he did not see the carnage that would follow the invasion. "It's hard to see how he could have missed that detail", she says,"Iraq was not an empty space on the map....If nation-creating was going to happen in Iraq, what exactly was supposed to happen to the nation that was already there?"
In the case of Muslim nations in the Middle-East, one doesn't have to try too hard to see where the anger and sense of grave injustice comes from.
Posted by Poirot, Sunday, 3 January 2010 11:38:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bazz. had a look mate you have done good things for our hobby, 73s bloke, and examinator have Ireland about right.
England was not alone in divide and conquer tactics, remember they gave birth to Pakistan.
But Islamists problems while maybe fed by others once are self inflicted.
All reildgions have used the Catholic vs Protestant type thing, to win totally unrelated wars.
That interfaith hatred is often as bad in Scotland, watch the football teams oppose one another Catholic and Protestant, those roots go back to migration to Ireland.
I n time, too soon in fact, the next 20 years we will find few who are not concerned about even more growth in fundamentalist blind hatred.
Posted by Belly, Monday, 4 January 2010 5:37:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Belly,
Re India, Britain tried to prevent the division, but ultimately they
were powerless to stop it.
The Celtic vs the other team whose name I have forgotten goes back
further than immigration to Ireland, it goes back to the Irish
immigration to Scotland, or rather Pictland as it was then called.
That whole western section centred on Glasgow was Irish and spoke Gaelic.

Now here is a lesson for those that promote unfetted immigration.
1500 years later they are still fighting.

Suzie, you didn't really answer my question.
The present truce may indicate that they would not engage in
religious cleansing if they were "united".
If so it proves that what they were fighting about was not what they
were arguing about.
Posted by Bazz, Monday, 4 January 2010 6:35:33 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
All of you, including Foxy, have drifted away from the initial question "Why do these people set out to kill themselves and as many as possible?"

this has nothing to do with poverty, the warped minds designing these obscene acts have a big 'Quid' to buy arms and base chemicals to wage their 'Holy War' and so force the world into some 'Dark Age'empire ruled by religious fanatics who beleave they are the font of all knowledge and behold any who disagrees.

People, please return to the topic - WHY do they do these dastardly deeds on behalf of of these warlords? Why do they cover their
'cowardly faces'? 'To go into paradise'?

Is not the heven the residence of the meek and pure of hart?

I am so happy to be a non beiever - these foul thoughts never enter my mind to ponder.

This is why i would like a simple answer from a 'Believer' as to;

WHY become a mass murderer and the reason? That is the Queston.
Posted by JMCC, Monday, 4 January 2010 8:32:54 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Okay, I can't hold it in anymore.
This topic has split into two TIERS of intelligences (the upper being myself and a handful of others actually analyzing all possible points- and answering much of the question but would like to see the few others expand or critique them), while the other half seems to have taken the junior-debaters route and have spent (LONGER than us answering the question) arguing if Islam and Christianity are different or not- the worst part is some of the upper tier debaters are actually responding to the morons- DON'T BOTHER- it's obvious that they never even bothered to read the first few replies (full of informed analysis) before adding their 'important' opinion.

Can someone please create a "Why has Islamic Fundimentalism Intensified- FOR DUMMIES" (or "The difference between Islam and Christianity") thread for the latter group to continue do whatever it is they do?
I'd do it, but I'd worry that if I made it the group would avoid it knowing that they would have to officially recognize themselves as a lesser level of debate.

Okay, look:
-Islam is a different religion from Christianity, it's super evil!
-The Muslim world includes a lot of Feudal countries, and thus has millions of fanatics- the secular, modern post-enlightenment West only has a few like Runner.
-NOBODY ELSE CARES
Can anyone caught up in this subject just MOVE ON?
No seriously, it's embarrassing- it's like a town hall political debate room being taken over by a kindergarten class.
Posted by King Hazza, Monday, 4 January 2010 9:05:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
JMCC,

<This is why i would like a simple answer from a 'Believer' as to;
WHY become a mass murderer and the reason? That is the Queston.>

The answer to your question is ludicrously simple.
Major Nidal Hasan is a 'Believer'.
Major Nidal Hasan is an Islamic mass murderer.
Where did he find his justification?
He made a power point presentation to demonstrate his reasoning.
Here is his "simple answer from a 'Believer':
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/gallery/2009/11/10/GA2009111000920.html
It's all in the Koran.

"There is none so blind as he who will not see."
Posted by HermanYutic, Monday, 4 January 2010 9:18:05 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Herman, do you condone the killing of innocends in the name of God.

I had a look at the US blog regarding the good Major.

But are you saying we should blindly follow a set of thoughts written by an unknown scribe over 1500 years ago.

What nonsense in 2010.

Please, Please start thinking in a logical manner so that people of good will will start to turn this evil against humanity.
Posted by JMCC, Monday, 4 January 2010 10:31:30 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks for that link Foxy.

Fisk is one of the few journalists I trust. He knows and lives with the people he writes of and has never shirked putting himself in the dangerzone to report on it.

This comment says it all in my book.

"There are plenty of poor countries in the world that don't have violence because amid the poverty there is a kind of justice and in some countries a democracy. The violence stems from injustice, because people feel they have been treated unfairly, whether that means military occupation, starvation under U.N.! sanctions, whether it means that they have a dictatorship imposed on them, propped up by the West. This is why people turn to violence, because they have no other avenue left."

People are neither Rousseau’s noble savage nor the Church’s depraved sinner. They are violent when oppressed, gentle when free.
Posted by mikk, Monday, 4 January 2010 10:39:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear mikk,

I'm so pleased that you read the Robert Fisk
interview in the website I quoted.

It's interesting also that the quote that grabbed
you, resonated the most with me as well.

I've actually now contacted my regional library -
they've got about 20 books on the subject of
Islamic findamentalism, including ones by Robert
Fisk. I've reserved several - and intend to do
more research on the subject. I'm finding that
my previous assumptions were made by my naive
"Western" mentality. I need to actually read more on
the topic - especially works written by people
who like Fisk - have lived in the area and
better understand the multi-faceted problems
involved.

Dear Poirot,

Thanks for the information about Friedman.
I wasn't aware of his bias. It makes me
look at him in a somewhat different light.

Dear King Hazza,

Discussions on public Forums such as this one
take many twists and turns.
Still, I find that getting a variety of opinions
is not only to be expected on this topic but -
as someone warned me prior to my starting this
thread - "It goes with the territory."
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 4 January 2010 11:24:35 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
mikk,

<This is why people turn to violence, because they have no other avenue left>

Yes, that must be why Abdulmutallab tried to blow up Flight 253!
Abdulmutallab was one of nearly 100,000 Muslim students in British Universities.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/12/30/world/europe/30nigerian.html?_r=1
32,000 of those Muslim university students believe killing in the name of religion can be justified.
33,000 of those students support the introduction of a global caliphate based on Islamic Law.
24,000 of those students believe that men and women are not fully equal in the eyes of Allah.
6,000 of those students believe that apostates should be punished in accordance with Sharia Law,
which advocates death.
http://www.socialcohesion.co.uk/files/1231525079_2.pdf
Abdulmutallab paid $25,000 a year for his engineering degree course and reportedly lived in a $10,000,000 apartment in Central London.
http://www.saharareporters.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=4631:northwest-flight-253-leg-bomber-is-son-of-drumaru-abdul-muttalab-former-first-bank-chairman-from-yaraduas-home-state-katsina&catid=1:latest-news&Itemid=18
So, tell me again mikk, was it oppression, lack of education or poverty
which drove the Islamic fundamentalist Abdulmutallab to try to blow up a passenger airplane?
Poor fellow, he had "no other avenue left".

What's the weather like in Cloud Cuckoo land?
Posted by HermanYutic, Monday, 4 January 2010 11:54:00 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
How about we consider the Greek concept of 2 opposing triangles, and apply it to this topic.

Then, psychodramatise and imagine ourselves "in the shoes" of the Islamists.

..

Now, let us pretend (for some of us) that we believe in an eye for eye, a tooth for a tooth and reckon things by the number of "innocents shed" say since the time of Gulf War I.

So, can anyone hazard a reasonable guess?

How many dead "Moozees" and how many dead "Westies?"

..

For a backdrop, I would suggest to you that people of all creeds and colour tend not to be particularly rational when they have the pain of loss of Luved Ones inflicted upon them.
Posted by DreamOn, Monday, 4 January 2010 2:44:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You of course refer to the adamic nature Dreamon which no doubt you display well.
Posted by runner, Monday, 4 January 2010 3:12:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
ReamOn,
I'm truly sorry for your loss of Luved Ones
and am now more understanding of your tendency to irrationality.
Yes if we could all just psychodramatise ourselves into the shoes of the Islamists,
Then perhaps jihadists like Richard Reid would not feel so all alone.
Posted by HermanYutic, Monday, 4 January 2010 5:18:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Herman,

I don't know if you're aware of this
but lately I've noticed a parallel
between you and some of the qualities you
ascribe to Islamic fundamentalists.
I haven't worked out if this is intentional
or accidental.

For example Islamic fundamentalists according
to your posts believe that there is no virtue
or truth but their own. As do you judging
from your posts.

You ascribe bigotry and intolerance to Islamic
fundamentalists. Yet you appear to be guilty
of the same thing.

It's very uncharitable of you to put people down.
People are entitled to their opinions -
even if they happen to disagree with yours.
And these people are not necessarily wrong or
irrational.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 4 January 2010 7:06:22 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Her man
Speaking of cloud cuckoo land. Has it ever occured to you that maybe mr Abdulmutallab could be mentally ill? Trying to blow yourself and a hundred or so people out of the sky seems pretty insane to me. But then so does talking to imaginary superfriends in the sky and following ridiculous fictions like "trickle down" economics.

One explanation for all those uni students responses is the solidarity they feel with their countrymen and fellow oppressed peoples. Would you not feel inclined to support those you saw as family or neighbors if they were being downtrodden and subject to injustice? Why is it so strange to you that people would be supportive of their own when they were in crisis?
Even then you cant really state anything more than a few students at english universities think bad things. You cant use it to say they are all terrorist muslim extremists. Makes me wonder why you brought it up. It looks mightily like racism to me.
Posted by mikk, Monday, 4 January 2010 7:20:41 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I agree Mikk. Intelligence and education does not always mean a person will not take up arms against the perceived oppression of their people. Just that it is usually in those countries where inequities are greater than terrorism might be fostered.

Religious fundamentalism certainly adds to the fervour of a would-be terrorist but it is not, IMO, the impetus of the hatred that leads to such behaviours. Religous hatred of others who are different can only be fostered if those other essential stimuli are present - poverty, injustice etc.

It is too simplistic in my view to put it all down to pure religious hatred in it's own right without this backdrop. There is often a complex combination of factors that lead to terrorism that might be different depending on cultural variation and the like.

Terrorism and revolutions don't occur when populations are content. Generally those who are well fed, educated and where the quality of life is more than reasonable and where there is some sense of self determination do not revolt.

Do you think the French Revolution would have occurred if the elites had not squandered money, took special priveleges and where the burden of taxes was totally placed with the citizens; where poverty and injustice was rife. Throw religious fervour into the mix such as with Islamic Fundamentalism and you have an explosive situation.

Whether we like it or not we in the West have to rethink the way we relate to other nations and behave in a fairer and more egalitarian way. This does not excuse terrorism. Terrorism in fact makes the situation worse and does not highlight in any meaningful way the plight of those in those nations where terrorism takes root.
Posted by pelican, Monday, 4 January 2010 7:49:42 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,

I don't recall ever using the words bigot or intolerant to describe either Islamic fundamentalists or other posters.
Even when mikk addressed some posters (including me?) as
<YOU EVIL RACIST BIGOTS>
I did not respond in kind.
And what was your response to her outburst?
<Mikk, I apologise if I've caused you distress>
Summarising:
You criticise me for calling people bigots, when I didn't.
You apologise to mikk when she called people (me?) EVIL RACIST BIGOTS.
Is it any wonder that some of us are struggling to understand what's going on in your minds?
Sorry, but I find it incredible.

But that won’t stop me from pointing out perceived inconsistencies in her statements.
Yes, people are entitled to their opinions.
Yes, I'm entitled to point out why I think they're wrong.

eg <This is why people turn to violence, because they have no other avenue left> - mikk
wrong - Abdulmutallab did not turn to violence because he had no other avenue left.
He was an example cited in your original post if you remember.

eg <They are violent when oppressed, gentle when free.> - mikk
wrong - Abdulmutallab was not oppressed.
I didn't even laugh at the "gentle when free" bit, so give me some credit.

As for implying me into the same camp as Islamic fundamentalists,
that is a dirty, low down tactic,
but one that I've come to expect from incorrigible relativists.

I am not calling for the death of those who don't believe what I believe,
but those of the opposite (your?) political persuasion (is that why she got a free pass?)
scream YOU EVIL RACIST BIGOTS.
I wonder who is the fundamentalist?

BTW
Cloud Cuckoo land is "an imaginary place where you say people are
when they seem optimistically out of touch with reality"
Not such a harsh put down.
Posted by HermanYutic, Monday, 4 January 2010 8:42:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I can't imagine how Foxy might find Herman Yutic biogoted and intolerant, nor how mikk might think him racist.

I mean, Herman thinks he's so clever at continuously expressing bigotry, intolerance and racism without actually directly expressing such sentiments.

How dare anybody suggest such things about such a clever troll.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Monday, 4 January 2010 8:54:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Back to your porcelain cave, Grogan.
Posted by HermanYutic, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 10:33:16 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I'd rather be a tolerant 'Grogan' than a bigoted, intolerant, racist bogan.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 10:50:03 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well the good news is that the U.S. is finally implementing a form of profiling!
No longer will "an elderly visitor from Iceland (be treated) as big of a potential threat as a twenty-something from Yemen"
but rather
"anyone traveling from or through nations regarded as state sponsors of terrorism as well as “other countries of interest” will be required to go through enhanced screening."
http://www.mercatornet.com/articles/view/forget_about_a_permanent_solution_to_terrorism/
Terrorists will of course find loopholes in any procedure but at least it seems to be a move in the right direction,
targeting likely suspects instead of bending over backwards to be politically correct.
It seems that 13 of the 14 targeted countries are Islamic.
Who would have thought?
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/01/profiling_the_first_step.html
Maybe Obamarama and Janet Incompetano are turning into EVIL RACIST BIGOTED Islamophobes?
Hopefully Australia will take note.
Posted by HermanYutic, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 2:24:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Yes, *Herman* must have quite a head on him if he's afraid to look in the mirror.

HaHaHa

No, I haven't lost anyone in the conflict, and neither has any of my immediate family, though the old dear and sister did frequent the bus which got taken out in England. They were lucky to have not been on it at the time.

When I was last in Perth, W.A. Nov 19 - 29 my 2nd cousins murder made front page news as he was dragged from his car and kicked and beaten to death for interceding in a domestic dispute.

Oh, it wasn't persons of the Islamic persuasion who are alleged to have committed the crime.

I barely new him though still, it impacted on my Scottish ex Aunt in law and cousin on the paternal side quite heavily.
Posted by DreamOn, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 2:24:32 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Herman Yutic,

I'm sorry but I don't buy your protestations.

When you refer to another poster as "ReamOn,"
instead of their accurate nom de plume "Dream On."

When you say that you're sorry for the loss of
their "luved ones," then accuse them of irrationality,
this doesn't smell of sincerity. And then when you go
on to ask another poster who happened to view things
from a different perspective to yours, "What's the
weather like in Cloud Cuckoo Land?" Then you've
go to wear the fact that people may see you as being
intolerant and uncharitable.

And, if you don't like being compared to a fundamentalist -
then stop acting like one!

"A man must be both stupid and uncharitable who
blieves there is no virtue or truth but his own."
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 6:03:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,

In an environment
where there is no truth,
only different perspectives,
where tolerance is deemed higher than truth,
but truth is met with intolerance,
where all opinions are held to be equal,
except those deemed to be intolerant
because they expose the absence of reason.
What value sincerity then,
when all is relative?
Is not insincerity just as valuable as sincerity?
Is not lack of virtue as virtuous as virtue?
Posted by HermanYutic, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 7:47:09 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Muslim-majority Malaysia objected to Christians using the word Allah for God in Malay. Allah in pre-Islamic Arabia means God. The word Allah just means God.
http://www.godallah.com/

The reason is simple enough. When Muslims are in the majority they start to bully the non-Muslims.

Evidence shows that Muslims are the ones wo are not only intolerant but also threatening. http://www.bangladeshnews.net/story/584757
Posted by Philip Tang, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 8:50:58 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Presumably, then, you think Muslims don't feel bullied by Christians, who wish to paint them all as intolerant terrorists and deny their religion validity.

The only difference between Islam and Christianity is that Islam hasn't yet been neutered by secularism. The first wave of immigrants is always insular, but Australia can show their children the greatness of a secular society, and make Islam in this country as twee and feeble as Christianity now is.
Posted by Sancho, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 9:01:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Individual Muslims in Western countries may feel threatened. But it is only a perception but not real. However in Malaysia it is the government and a senior figure that warned the non-Muslims. It is state terrorism.

ALL Western countries have had a long history of Christianity. That is why Western countries are far, far culturally superior to Islamic-based societies.

Germans apologised for their Nazi past, did any Islamic organisation ever apologised for their lot burning down non-Muslim buildings or killing non-Muslims? NO, because their "Holy" Qu'ran encouraged them to do acts of vandalism against non-Muslim properties, killing non-Muslims and abusing female Muslims.

The only hope for Muslims is what Daniel Pipes said, re-interpret the Qu'ran, but he and secular Muslims aren't very successful.
Posted by Philip Tang, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 9:25:06 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Supremacism makes Christians feel special, but it has no basis in reality.

When Christians were burning witches and praying for deliverance from smallpox, the Islamic world was preserving the knowledge of the Greeks in universities and public hospitals.

The current prosperity of Christian countries owes everything to the secular Enlightenment. We are successful DESPITE religion, not because of it.

The Nazi comparison is beyond absurd. Or did I miss the Vatican's apology for the Inquisition and Crusades?

The Malaysian business is concerning, but that's what you get with a theocratic government. If Tony Abbott's elected, how long do you think until non-Christians are officially discriminated against? A year? Less?
Posted by Sancho, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 9:36:02 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Herman Yutic,

The description you gave of your environment
in your last post is quite dismal and ever
so sad.

My advice to you is - you really need to
change your environment and get into the real
world. Mentally you'll be much healthier for it.

A closed mind is like a closed book - just a piece
of wood.

Anyway, Good Luck with your attempts to bring
charity and tolerance into your environment!

Perhaps it would help you to start your own thread
on the meaning of "truth," "sincerity," "virtue,"
and so on? Just a thought!
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 9:49:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*The current prosperity of Christian countries owes everything to the secular Enlightenment. We are successful DESPITE religion, not because of it.*

Sancho, that is very true indeed! As a kid, I attended both a Catholic
and later on a Baptist school. Sheesh, when I think back at some
of the rubbish they tried to teach me, when we could have used that
time to learn some interesting science, or something usefull.

Its similarly a problem in the Islamic world. Years ago I read a
UN report in the Economist, which basically implied that all
that learning of the Koran off by heart, which is a big part of
Islamic education, is holding them back from a better education.

*When you refer to another poster as "ReamOn,"
instead of their accurate nom de plume "Dream On*

Ah Foxy, you are just very prim and proper. I can just imagine
you in the library, bun in your hair, spectectacles at the end
of your nose, a long librarian kind of dress :)
Posted by Yabby, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 9:54:20 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
I was talking about this post,
as if you didn't know.
Or were you being sincere?
Posted by HermanYutic, Tuesday, 5 January 2010 10:21:44 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
As an illustration of how stupid this has become just look at
the Dreamon Readon complaint.
If you look at your keyboard you will see how close D & R are located.
It is an obvious typo. so take a Bex and have a nice liedown.
Posted by Bazz, Wednesday, 6 January 2010 7:16:57 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Yabby,

Nah, my hair's too thick and curly to
wear in a bun - and I don't wear glasses (yet).
I also prefer jeans or slack to dresess - however
when I do wear dresses - they're usually the
shorter version (more practical, besides I've
been told I've got nice pins).

Now, in all fairness I'll tell you what I
think you look like... George Clooney - right?
(Yummy Yabster!).

Dear Herman,

Of course I'm sincere - always!
Just trying to help - with the best intentions!
However, you go on doing what you're doing
(just don't expect different results).

Dear Bazz,

You've got a good and generous heart!

And now folks... let's get back to the topic of this
thread - please?
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 6 January 2010 9:45:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Well, I'm not shy for a bit of sledging

BUT

for the record, I am actually straight in sexual preference

AND

prefer Fluff and Growl to PoleAxe and Reaming.

;-)

Still, there have been a few boys along the way that have wanted to give me the pork sword, and indeed, I have a number of Gay friends.

(hope I didn't just break any OLO rules)

That hopefully will satisfy *HermanMunster* and *Yappy*
Posted by DreamOn, Wednesday, 6 January 2010 11:09:46 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
And now back to the topic ...

I've just come across an interesting book
on Islamic Fundamentalism by Kim Whitehead
which gives a valuable overview. It details
the historical and political context that
gave rise to modern Islamic fundamentalism,
suveys fundamentalist movements in a variety
of countires and regions, and outlines the
ongoing challenges Islamic fundamentalism presents
for the US and its allies.

One chapter that I'm finding particularly intersting
is entitled, "The Western Response." It states:

"In the wake of the September 11, 2001, attacks on
the US, analysts and ordinary citizens in the West
have explored various explanations for why Islamic
terrorist organisations are targeting the West...

Many of these arguments, however, contradict one
another, and no single argument sufficiently explains
the complexities of Islamic fundamentalism or the
Western response to it.

Some argue for swift and decisive military retaliation
without dialogue, while others say the only lasting
solution is increased exchange between Westerners and
Islamic leaders around the world.

Many make broad assumptions about the nature of Islam
itself. Some, for example, maintain that Islam and the
West are now engaged in a titanic battle between
civilizations. Others say Islam is simply incompatible
with the modern way of life, while still others argue
that Islam is inherently violent and unjust... Some
say Islam and democracy can never coexist, while others
insist that Islamic democracies will work under the
right conditions."

The author finds that the central problem with the idea that
the West and Islam are locked in an inevitable, global
conflict is that Islam, like the West, is not easily defined
as a single entity.

She points out that Islam is in fact made up of Muslims
who think differently about the relationship between their
faith and politics, just as Westerners have different,
shifting ideas about freedom, democracy, and the
relationship between church and state.

cont'd ...
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 6 January 2010 6:14:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cont'd ...

The author tells us that similarly, the argument
that Islam is by nature unjust belies the reality
of different legal codes and freedoms in Muslim
nations; women for instance, are thought by some
to be oppressed in all Muslim countries, when in
fact, the author states that the status of women
is often affected by socioeconomic and cultural
trends as by Islam. She tells us that
the arguments that democracy and Islam do or do
not mix often overlook the complexities of
political rule in Muslim countries, where the chaos
of post-colonialism has led to authoritarianism and
democratic projects have not been attempted at all
or have been attempted only in ways that deny true
participation from opposition groups, including
fundamentalists.

The author warns that the US and its allies must
seriously weigh their responses to Islamic
fundamentalism in general and Islamic terrorist groups
in particular.

However, she says that more and more,
Western lawmakers and policy
analysts interpret the Muslim world through the lens
of extremist activity.

She sees the future in this way:

" It will be interesting to see if democracy emerges in
Iraq as promised and if a final peace deal can
successfully be brokered between Israel and a new
Palestinian state. The outcome of these and other
situations in which Western and Islamic interests
intersect may shape Islamic fundamentalism
and the Western response to it for decades to come."
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 6 January 2010 6:34:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"When Christians were burning witches and praying for deliverance from smallpox, the Islamic world was preserving the knowledge of the Greeks in universities and public hospitals."

I keep seeing this pop up all the time- yet ALWAYS falls flat on its face at failing to point out that this was an achievement of the pagan ancient Greeks.

That's like crediting the Spanish empire with preserving the astronomic wisdom of the Aztec pyramids.
Posted by King Hazza, Wednesday, 6 January 2010 6:45:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear King Hazza,

A point of clarification:

It was thanks to Islamic scholars that Hellenic
philosophy and science was re-discovered in the
West after many centuries of neglect. The Islamic
scholars preserved much of the works of the
great Greeks. These were saved in Baghdad,
translated, re-translated and transmitted to
Muslim Spain. These texts started to become
available to the West with the defeat and expulsion
of the Moors (Muslims) in what was then known as
Andalusia. The end of the Dark Ages was on its way...

As Tor Hundloe points out in his book, "From Buddha to
Bono," : "Today, we may have very serious concerns
with the fundamentalist fringe of Islam - just as we
do with the fundamentalist fringes of Christianity
and Hinduism - but we should never forget the role
of the Muslim scholars of 1000 or so years ago..."

" What would society be like today if we had lost that
once-in-millenium era of Greek philosophy?
Would the enlightenment have occurred? Or would we
only today be in the initial phase of inventing
democracy, law, science and ethics? The answer
must be "probably yes." New ideas - better ideas -
build on old ideas. Ideas can be lost and can be
destroyed. Dark Ages resurface. Dictators burn books
because it is possible to destroy the building blocks
of civilisation. All these things happened in the Dark
Ages. Yet classical Greek science and philosophy was saved,
to be built upon."

"We did not have to start from scratch."

Thanks to Muslim scholars of 1000 or so years ago.
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 7 January 2010 10:44:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
But the question is, how did the Muslim scholars come across these Greek libraries and why weren't the Greeks still using them?
Fair enough if the Greeks were conquered and chased out by Christians, and the area was later conquered by Muslims who came across the books which the crusaders overlooked or else burn them (which may well have been likely).

But it seems a bit strange to credit a group being owed something by the world for merely FINDING someone else's work and copying it- even if the Christian world was enforcing a backward empire (Which was really not even that big at the time- even in Europe).
Posted by King Hazza, Thursday, 7 January 2010 1:31:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
You've got to be kidding.
The Muslims burned the library at Alexandria in 642.
The Muslims burned the centre of Buddhist learning, the library at Nalanda, in 1193.
It was reputed to be the largest library in the world at the time.
The Muslims burned the library of the Manaeans in Iraq in 2003.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2003/12/a-loss-to-the-cultural-inheritance-of-mankind.html
Don't they teach librarians the history of Muslim library burning anymore?
The Muslims burn churches, convents and schools.
http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=en&art=4609
The Muslims have a history of destroying knowledge,
not creating or even preserving it.
If it's not in the Koran it's not worth knowing.

"It's very easy to make uninformed (state)ments when looking
at things only from a narrow lens - you don't get the
full picture."
Posted by HermanYutic, Thursday, 7 January 2010 1:54:46 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The Christians have a history of destroying knowledge,
not creating or even preserving it.
If it's not in the bible it's not worth knowing.

Funny how her mans words are so applicable.
Posted by mikk, Thursday, 7 January 2010 4:33:13 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
King Hazza,
The Muslim world had the only real universities of the time. In the west all knowledge was held in monasteries etc controlled by the church.

The "great Greek culture" was in declining by the time of the Roman war machine. There had been long standing inter polis warfare and raids from barbarians. The cultural/intellectual center had moved to Rome and Egypt with the Greek Ptolemaic dynasties in Egypt..(Cleo).

The great library of Alexandria was burnt to the ground by 300 AD the Christian took over Church then was the dominant power fist in Constantinople (turkey) then to Rome.

During all this the *middle eastern traders* (not all Arabs) collecting the science and knowledge from both the Christians and the East Chinese etc. Setting up centres of leaning in important Caliphates.

By the late 600 AD ish the Muslims sent these(centres of learning) into overdrive, where they studied poetry, the law,literature, astronomy, agriculture, engineering, medicine, sciences, and maths. Some as far East as Asia Minor, South as Timbuktu and the greatest outside Baghdad and for a while the most racially tolerant/harmonious was the one Foxy referred to in what was southern Spain.

The Muslims contributed far more than just rediscovering Greek wisdom.
-Our number system owes it's existence to Muslim Scholars.

In all this it is important to see them as Arabic Scholars (not Arabs) as like today, they obviously weren't all just Arabs any more that all 'Roman' citizens were all Roman or even Italian.

Up untill the 1800's nationalism as we understand it didn't exist, it was more whose empire you belonged to defined your citizenship.

I may have is a bit muddled but generally speaking that's the way it went.
Posted by examinator, Thursday, 7 January 2010 4:46:31 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear King Hazza,

Any reputable encyclopedia like "Britannica,"
or even "World Book," will confirm for you that
Muslim scholars preserved much of the classical
knowledge of the ancient world, translating it
from Greek, Syriac, and Persian into Arabic.
They also developed new ideas, notably in the
sciences such as astronomy, medicine, philosophy
mathematics, and chemistry. This work was later
transmitted into Latin.

The Muslims also built magnificent buildings - such
as the Taj Mahal in India, the Alhambra in Spain,
just to name a few. And of course apart from architecture,
they are also known for their magnificent rugs,
textiles, metalware, pottery, glassware, carvings,
and books. Experts consider Islamic book-bindings
amongst the most beautiful ever produced.

Dear Herman Yutic,

A few corrections:

1) The Great Library of Alexandria - no one knows
for certain what became of it. I politely suggest
that you use more reputable websites then
"jihadwatch." Or better still try an encylopedia
like "Brittanica."

2) The Library of Nalanda - again this is in dispute
as to who actually destroyed it. But no matter -
for your information Nalanda is being revived. Which
is excellent news. A consortium led by Singapore
and includes China, India, Japan and other nations -
will attempt to raise millions to build new establishments
on the ancient site and millions more to develop infrastructure.
The New York Times on Dec. 9 2006, detailed a plan in the
works to spend $1 billion to revive Nalandia...

3) American forces invaded Iraq in 2003 - which resulted
in a great deal of destruction.

You seem to be very keen to only point out the negatives
about all of Islam. You make no distinction
between Islam and it's fundamentalists.
Which is exactly what the Islamic fundamentalists do about
all Westerners. You lump all Islamists together as one
entity. And that is precisely what Islamic fundamentalists
do. And then you wonder why you're perceived to be
ignorant and uninformed?

I wonder what that says about you?
Posted by Foxy, Thursday, 7 January 2010 5:08:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,
I don't "wonder why (I'm) perceived to be ignorant and uninformed"
and I can't imagine where you got that idea from.
I truly don't wonder, or care, how I'm perceived.
Nevertheless it's nice of you to be concerned with how I might feel about myself.
I've always thought that you had a heart of gold.
Posted by HermanYutic, Thursday, 7 January 2010 8:41:11 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Very interesting Examinator and Foxy, thanks for the heads up!
Posted by King Hazza, Thursday, 7 January 2010 10:31:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
the intensification of Islamic fundamentalism is the death throes of
patriarchy, the terminal use of religion as an excuse for men who
fear women to maintain control, coming two thirds of a century after
other men, since largely enlightened, bombed whole cities in pursuit
of the same goal, best countered with law enacted by agreement
between the women's cabinet and the men's cabinet of the parliament
of an equal rights republic.
Posted by whistler, Thursday, 7 January 2010 10:44:33 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
" You make no distinction between Islam and it's fundamentalists." foxy.

This is the biggest insult one can say to a Muslim. Erdogan, the PM of Muslim Turkey finds it a big insult to make distinctions in Islam. Islam is Islam he says.
http://sheikyermami.com/2009/04/05/turkish-pm-erdogan-moderate-muslim-label-unacceptable/

The Muslim-majority country of Turkey has already closed down all abattoir for pigs. Egypt has slaughtered all pigs using the excuse that they spread the H1N1 virus. One wonders why they did not kill all the chickens during the bird flu epidemic.

If Obama is serious about fighting Islamic terrorism, he should close down ALL Islamic schools, close as many mosques as possible and put all mosques under surveillance.

The script for Islamic terrorism is found in the Qu'ran. Anyone below the age of 18 should only be allowed to read this hate manual under guidance.
Posted by Philip Tang, Friday, 8 January 2010 1:28:10 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear HermanYutic,

Me having a heart of gold?
Nah, - mine actually beats!

Seriously though all jokes aside -
I'd like to Thank Everyone for their
inputs.
It's been a "robust" discussion to say
the least.

I started this thread with the intention of
learning a bit more about the topic.
I thought that since globally -
1.25 billion people are Muslims,
(approx. one in five of every 5 people follows Islam),
and the total of believers has surpassed two older
religions (Hinduism and Buddhism) with only Christianity
having more followers - it was a topic worthwhile
discussing.

I've found that -
part of the problem is that many people in the West
are uninformed about Islam. Their only contact is
through news reports about wars in Muslim countries,
terrorist attacks, or fundamentalist denunications of
Western corruption.

As we enter a new century, cultural and political tensions
between Muslims and non-Muslims continue. Now more than
ever it is important for people to learn more about their
neighbours of all faiths. It's only through education and
tolerance that we will be able to build a new world in
which fear and mistrust are replaced with understanding
tolerance, and peace.

I fear that our world can become so obsessed with the
problems of hatred and aggression, that it will allow peace
and love to be regarded as soft and weak.

Yet our survival on this planet depends on their dominance.
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 8 January 2010 10:43:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Last words of the Khost CIA base suicide bomber.

NB: This has nothing to do with Islam

"By God, if the reward for martyrdom for the sake of Allah had only been forgiveness of sins and the exemption from being called to account for one's sins, I should sacrifice my property and my life for it. All the more so, since the reward includes also the uppermost paradise. How much more so since it also includes being in the company of the Prophet Muhammad….

"Oh God, I beseech Thee not to let me die except as a martyr for Your sake. Oh God, I beseech Thee that I would [be given the chance to] massacre Your enemies and then be killed under the ruins of a building destroyed by the Jews and the crusaders, and that the rescue people shall not take out my body, so that my corpse should turn into human fertilizer that will bring forth fruit upon which a Muslim child shall feed and become a jihad fighter when he grows up,"

"My heart burns to ashes because of my love for jihad….This is a nightmare which makes me sleepless and it wrecks my nerves. I'm afraid that on the day of resurrection, standing before a mountain of [my] sins, I shall be asked to account for each and every one of them, and it shall be a long account, and I will be covered with sweat, while they [i.e. the martyrs] will be moving about the rooms of paradise in everlasting pleasure. One of them will say to the other: 'What do you say about him who used to be called Abu Dajana Al-Khurasani, who used to urge people to go to jihad?' And the other one will answer: 'But he died in bed, a contemptible death, having stayed away from jihad. I wish for him that he had benefited by his own words….He was like a wick that burned itself to give light to the others.'"

http://www.memrijttm.org/content/en/report.htm?report=3886&param=APT
Posted by HermanYutic, Friday, 8 January 2010 5:30:19 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Raja Petra Kamarudin is a secular Malaysian Muslim who reports honestly about Islam's moral police(RELA). He is now in hiding for his life.

"...the Federal Territory Religious Department who arrested 17 or so Muslim staff who were working in a disco in Kuala Lumpur. And all except one pleaded guilty and paid the RM400 fine. One, however, decided to sue the Malaysian government...,

According to the police report that this Muslim woman made, which is the basis of the suit, she plus all the others were handcuffed and placed in the police truck. After some time she needed to answer the call of nature and requested permission to go to the toilet. However, they refused to allow her to go to the toilet and asked her instead to just pee in the truck.

This woman could not hold her bladder and had no choice but to pee there and then. Her colleagues helped guard her modesty by placing a scarf in front of her so that she could at least have some privacy. But the RELA officers pulled away the scarf and started taking photographs of her peeing, of course with her private parts fully exposed.

In the police station, the men were separated from the women...

Then the women were told they could avoid getting charged by settling the case 'outside court' in exchange for sexual favours. All they had to do was drop their panties and after a quickie they would be allowed to go home without any further action taken against them.

Yes, these are the upholders of the dignity of Islam. These are the defenders of Islam...Now do you know why the non-Muslims fear the prospects of Malaysia being turned into an Islamic State? Hey, I don't blame them. If this is the Islam they are talking about then I too fear Malaysia being turned into an Islamic State. I fear my wife and daughter getting picked up by these perverts because they are perceived as dressing too sexily and then being asked to grant these 'officers of Islam' sexual favours as out of court settlement."http://mt.m2day.org/2008/content/view/1252/46
Posted by Philip Tang, Friday, 8 January 2010 7:27:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear HermanYutic,

More quotes from reputable sources?

What about showing some balance and
also giving a few quotes from
Christians who were willing to kill
and die for their religion?
Or are only websites that present
Muslims in a derogatory light of interest
to you? You really need to remove those
blinkers! You're not fooling anyone!

Extremists are not only
followers of Islam. And giving us quotes
from a troubled individual - is
(to quote you) a "rather low and dirty
tactic." But obiously poor
soul - it gives you some sort of
perverse pleasure. However, just to jog you
out of your "Christian" comfort zone...

Richard the Lionheart
amassed a well-equipped army for his
Crusade and Richard's Christian soldiers
were on their own 'jihad.' Like their
Muslim enemy they believed they would get
easy access to heaven if they fought bravely.

Then of course there was the Inquisition,
the New World invasions, the edicts and
acts of the Byzantine Empire - and the US
and her allies - fighting the "axis of evil."

Today - many people are concerned about
climate change and saving the planet from
unimaginable environmental problems - but
we're replaying a far more dangerous situation...

What's the point of saving humanity and the
planet from a possible environmental disaster
if we are going to keep killing each other in
the name of different prophets of the same God?
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 8 January 2010 7:34:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Philip Tang,

Bad people do bad things - but blaming
an entire religion for the behaviour
of corrput individuals? That's like saying that
all priests are pedophiles, or blaming
religion for the 'Forgotten Australians.'
Or blaming the entire US forces for tortures
in Guantanamo or Iraq and so on.

Finger-pointing is a risky business - it just may
end up your own nose!
Posted by Foxy, Friday, 8 January 2010 7:49:56 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,

<Bad people do bad things - but blaming
an entire religion for the behaviour
of corrput individuals?>

You're clearly having trouble processing the information being put in front of you.

* Infidels are your sworn enemies (Sura 4:101).
* Be ruthless to the infidels (Sura 48:29).
* Make war on the infidels who dwell around you (Sura 9:123, 66:9).
* Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day (Sura 9:29).
* Strike off the heads of infidels in battle (Sura 47:4).
* Take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends (Sura 5:51, 60:13).
* Never be a helper to the disbelievers (Sura 28:86).
* Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them (Sura 2:191).

Bad religion > Bad deeds
Posted by HermanYutic, Friday, 8 January 2010 10:49:47 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear HermanYutic,

Thank You for your last post.

It has finally cleared things up for me.

I can see now that you're a man on a mission.
From your post history it's evident that
you consistently post inflammatory extraneous
messages online about Islam with an intent of
provoking others into an emotional response.

That qualifies you as a troll -
I shan't be responding to you any further.
From now on I'll simply scroll past the posts
that have your name on them.

I don't know who you are - but if you're not
Boaz David, or Polycarp, you're certainly his clone.
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 9 January 2010 10:44:41 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy,

<What about showing some balance and
also giving a few quotes from
Christians who (are) willing to...>

Blow up passenger airliners over the Middle East,
Behead Muslims on the internet,
Burn down madrassas and mosques,
Genitally mutilate their daughters,
Honour kill their daughters,

<...for their religion?>

Are you for real?
You've got to be winding us all up?
Surely?
Posted by HermanYutic, Saturday, 9 January 2010 10:49:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cont'd...

One can also selectively quote from both
the Old and New Testaments to get emotional
responses:

http://www.evilbible.com/

"The Bible makes Osama Bin Laden look like
a Boy Scout."

I'm done!
Posted by Foxy, Saturday, 9 January 2010 11:14:02 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Or maybe Islamic fundamentalism is intensifying because
they're teaching their children to behead infidels.
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2009/12/22/muslim-children-training-for-jihad-video/

WARNING:
The link below shows a child trainee jihadist beheading a captive man.
Do not click on this link unless you have a strong stomach.
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2009/06/05/muslim-child-and-friends-behead-man-while-praising-allah-video/

This is what we are up against.

People who teach young children to behead other people,
while screaming Allahu Akbar,
just like their good book says.

Isn't it comforting to know that all religions are the same.

I'm sure that if we all just hold hands and sing Kumbaya,
then they will reach out to us in peace and goodwill.
Posted by HermanYutic, Saturday, 9 January 2010 8:47:49 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear foxy,

We would very much like to agree with you that HY “consistently post inflammatory extraneous messages online about Islam”, however, being enlightened people what we say has to be based on evidence and facts.

Three examples come to mind.

i) Pakistan and India became independent countries in 1947. Pakistan was founded on the ideal of a Islamic Republic guaranteeing rights for the minority non-Muslims. Today, the non-Muslim minorities have been massacred and the lives of the remaining few made so unbearable that they have fled Pakistan. Pakistan has become a truly Islamic country where lawlessness reigns. Muslims are killing fellow Muslims because they are deemed not Islamic enough.

Needless to say, Hindu India is way ahead of Muslim Pakistan in EVERY field except for rape and murder.

ii) A recent article in the Spiegel featured Nigeria where the Muslims live in the north and the south, Christians. Not surprising north Nigeria is turning into a lawless, backward and an uninhabitable region. The Muslims are migrating to Christian south.

“The irony in Nigeria is that the north has a greater need for the better-trained experts, doctors and scientists from the south, and yet the lack of culture and persistent acts of extreme violence have led to an exodus of businesspeople, professors, doctors and scientists.

In the early 1990s there were about 500 industrial firms in Kano. Ten years later, that number had declined to about 200. This is one reason why many Muslim Hausa-Fulani have moved further south where, in cities like Kaduna, Jos and Bauchi, they now form the new proletarian poor.” http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/0,1518,670178-2,00.html

iii) Muslims in Malaysia fire-bombed at least 3 churches because Christians used the pre-Islamic Arabic word ‘allah’ for ‘god’. http://www.france24.com/en/20100108-malaysia-church-fire-bombed-ahead-protests

Malaysia is soon to join the ranks of failed Islamic countries.

Any reasonable Muslim will realize that Islam is the cause of the Muslim’s problem and should leave Islam.
Posted by Philip Tang, Saturday, 9 January 2010 8:57:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Philip Tang,

Don't you realise that Foxy has no room in her mind
for historical facts that challenge her paradigm?
Such facts are by definition Islamophobic to her.

Nevertheless,
I welcome your contribution to reasoned debate,
which can be sorely lacking in this forum.
Posted by HermanYutic, Saturday, 9 January 2010 9:07:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
We'd already worked that out, Porky.

Now toddle back off to your greener pastures and have a nice life. With any luck Herman will join you before long.
Posted by CJ Morgan, Saturday, 9 January 2010 10:51:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Been a good thread foxy, any one with Muslim or Islam will bring interest.
We have even tossed around the question Islamic new or worse now?
It is understanding that concerns me.
This mornings newspapers ask a question I would like answers to.
In Dubai we are told an English couple unwisely got drunk, after being engaged.
She says she was raped in a toilet by a waiter, unwise at least to be drunk in public and separated but it happened they say.
They went to bed, had sex, put it together after and went to the police.
Both have been charged, with what amounts to immoral conduct.
No rape tests no investigation.
Dubai, millions no billions spent to bring tourists.
Yet no place surely for westerners? well these folk may not be average but how can we understand these people.
How can we EVER learn to except actions like this?
Mankind must b breath we must and should know we are our own best judges of right or wrong.
Watch sadly as things get worse before better, the west must understand our freedoms are not even wanted by some and not available for us in their lands.
Posted by Belly, Sunday, 10 January 2010 6:06:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
The question of - "Why has Islamic
fundamentalism intensified?" as we've discovered
is a complicated issue due to the fact that
the central problem is trying to define Islam as
a single entity - which in fact it is not.

Finger-pointing and blaming the religion - as I've
said before is an over simplification that belies the
fact that there are -
also other issues involved. Harping about what radical
extremists believe - only ignores
the fact that all religions have their radicals,
fundamentalists and extemists.

History is full of
atrocities committed by Christians against non-Christian
peoples. One has only to look at the histories of the
indigenous peoples of the Americas, Australia, New Zealand,
Africa, and Asia. Then there's Christian Missionary atrocities,
Or the histories of Serbian Orthodoxy and Roman Catholicism.

However, most observers do agree that the United
States and its allies must seriously weigh their
responses to Islamic fundamentalists in general
and to Islamic terrorist groups in particular.

A critical fist step in this process is to explore
why Muslims, including fundamentalists, around
the world think of the West, and particularly the
United States, as they do.

Doubts among Muslims about Western intentions have
their roots in the Crusades of the 11th through
13th centures and in European expansion beginning
in the 19th century and continuing through World
War I, when Europeans divided Islamic lands
throughout the Middle East and Africa among themselves.

This imperialism sowed the seeds of mistrust.

Now of course the prominent world power is the US.
Many Muslims accuse the US of hypocrisy. Especially
in its uncritical support of Israel.

This issue, more than any other, unites Muslims
around the world in their mistrust of the US.

Surveys in the Arab world show that a majority of
Muslims feel that the Palestinian issue is an important,
or even the most important issue they face as Muslims.
Surveyss of Muslims in the US show strong support for a
Palestinian state.

cont'd...
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 10 January 2010 10:22:24 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cont'd ...

As the US backs Israel's repressive policies in
the occupied territories and looks the other way while
Israel violates U.N. resolutions, Muslims cry foul
and accuse the US of ignoring its own principles when
convenient.

Similar charges of hypocrisy have been leveled at the
US for punishing Iraq and Pakistan, both Muslim
countires, for having nuclear weapons programs without
insisting that India and Israel also gut their programs.

Muslims also condemn what they view as the slow response
of the US to Serbian campaigns of "ethnic cleansing"
against Bosnian Muslims and Kosovar Muslims during the
1990s, as well as the US refusal to take strong action to
halt the repression of Muslims in Kashmir and Chechnya.

While many Islamic fundamentalists decry Western
influence in general, and while Wahhabis like Osama bin
Laden vow holy war against Western infidels, it is
important to remember that the vast majority of Muslims
around the world do not see Westerners as evil.

However, rhetoric of good versus evil as a way to increase
the West's "war on terror" only increases mistrust among
Muslims worldwide. The previous US President's (George
W's) identification of Iran and Iraq (along with North
Korea) as an "axis of evil" in his State of the Union
address in January 2002 provides one potent example.

Finally, oil continues to be a key factor in US and
European policy. The US and its allies first developed
close relationships with Persian Gulf countries to
ensure a steady supply of oil to the West, and a central
objective of the Gulf War was to secure Kuwait oil fields.
Perhaps not surprisingly critics have charged the previous
Bush administration with being more concerned about access
to oil than fearful of weapons of mass destruction.

As I've state earlier as the threat of terrorism continues,
the challenge for the US and other Western countries will
be to deal with all the complexities within fundamentalist
Islam and within Islam itself.

See you on another thread.
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 10 January 2010 10:55:45 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy I have the greatest respect for you, in my mind you never drop below the top ten poster in OLO.
But this time you got it wrong, humans, every color do great things, read the books we produced see the great ideas not related to God we have done well.
We too can be evil, all of us, every nation,
But if I am to suffer for deeds done by generations a thousand years ago?
Yes, yes England did great wrongs, we only have history written by others to judge the crusades.
Basically we humans invented other great books, great ideas great good and great bad, we invented Gods, now hold this truth, Christians are unconcerned at the idea other Gods are inventions..
Like it or not the west is in fact finding far less interest in Christianity, in our lifetimes inventing new ones.
SOME Muslims, have not excepted the modern world, still word for word believe the controlling demanding religion of their choice, it could be any, MUST control life.
Sorry but continuing world attempts to integrate us by a thing called multi culture's, in its self not a bad thing, by stopping me and you using the word once used for God on fear of death?
No its not America only who must look at the problem, ask the Dutch how they think, or Swiss.
Ask the kids of western Sydney .
Ask those hate filled teachers of murder whom use damaged children as bombs to murder.
Time sadly will show it is not just the west who must commit to change.
Let us be clear I can be condemned to death, for just holding the views I put in this Post.
We rightly say sorry for past wrongs but it seems only our side ever gets it wrong.
Posted by Belly, Sunday, 10 January 2010 12:04:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
*Harping about what radical
extremists believe - only ignores
the fact that all religions have their radicals,
fundamentalists and extemists.*

You have a little problem there Foxy. At the
end of the day, religions operate on a similar
method. They have a so called holy book, then
some take those words and twist them into whatever
they want, to fit their agenda. Little kiddies
are brainwashed from an early age to believe this
stuff.

Fact is that because the Koran does actually contain
alot of violent stuff, it is very easily reinterpreted
into a violent belief system.

Its possible too with the bible, but modern Xtians
simply claim that the old Testament does not really
apply to them, for there of course too many contradictions
in there, for it to be taken seriously.

Now if you look around, not too many wars have been based
on Buddist ideology, for its basically a peacefull
religion. Yet just about wherever Islam goes, conflict
seems to invariably follow.

I once took a trip from Singapore, up through Malaysia
and then into Thailand. The thing that just blew
me away, was the change of attitude to everyday life,
as I went from an Islamic to a Buddist culture.

Arriving in Thailand, felt quite liberating!
Posted by Yabby, Sunday, 10 January 2010 12:54:45 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi BOAZ_DAVID.
Yes indeed, I am not you and you are not me.
Thanks for the interesting links.
I’d seen the Google video before but the marcuse link gave it deeper meaning.
The brainwashed coterie of OLO contributors certainly testify to the success of his strategy.
Consider this latest gem from Foxy:
< A critical fist step in this process is to explore
why Muslims, including fundamentalists, around
the world think of the West, and particularly the
United States, as they do.>
duuuhhh…
Let me see.
What would their Holy Book say?
* Infidels are your sworn enemies (Sura 4:101).
* Be ruthless to the infidels (Sura 48:29).
* Make war on the infidels who dwell around you (Sura 9:123, 66:9).
* Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day (Sura 9:29).
* Strike off the heads of infidels in battle (Sura 47:4).
* Take neither the Jews nor the Christians for your friends (Sura 5:51, 60:13).
* Never be a helper to the disbelievers (Sura 28:86).
* Kill the disbelievers wherever we find them (Sura 2:191).
But no, Foxy doesn’t even have the decency to respect their core beliefs,
she has to project her own belief system onto them to account for their actions.
Talk about condescending.
Even when Nidal Hasan produces a power point presentation demonstrating why he engaged
in mass murder of the infidels, Foxy knows better than him why he did it!
It’s an incredible spectacle really,
to watch this self-congratulatory claque of heteromatons “go round..and round...and round..”
They make the landscape here so arid.
I can see why you’ve moved to “much greener and more rewarding pastures”.
Good luck!
Posted by HermanYutic, Sunday, 10 January 2010 1:45:52 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Western nations accomplished separation of Church and State a long time ago, so that politics, law and government can continue to function fairly well irrespective of the religious beliefs of the populace. In contrast, to what extent do Muslim nations evidence a separation of state and religion?

As Westerners we are not required to just be tolerant of another's religious beliefs, which is fine, but to accept that where Islam is concerned, we must be required to be tolerant of a combo package of religion, politics, law and government. That those institutions are entwined mean that we do need, from a policy perspective and in regard to preserving our preferred state system, to be very careful about what 'toleration' means and the extent of it.

Also:

1. Many historians have written that the Crusades were not expansionist but defensive - conducted to reclaim Christian countries which had been invaded by Muslim forces.
2. Crusades and all that went on then - brutal times. Revolting all round. However, as unfashionable as it may be to state it, I am somewhat grateful to the Crusaders. If they hadn't done their thing maybe we'd be living under a very different regime.
3. The Golden Era of Islam is highly questionable; some historians have written that whatever innovations there were, were adopted from elsewhere (esp. numerals from India and zero I think) or produced by progressive thinking Islamic and non-Islamic scholars trying to survive in an environment that was hostile to their ideas. That is, innovations that came into being were not fostered by the surrounding culture.

I am pro-multiculturalism, for many reasons, but I think that we need to think clearly and strategically and with compassion unclouded by romanticism and the urge to be trendily cosmopolitan.

http://www.newyorker.com/arts/critics/books/2008/02/04/080204crbo_books_acocella?currentPage=all
Posted by Pynchme, Sunday, 10 January 2010 2:49:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Asking David Boaz if he's HermanYutic
and expecting an honest answer is like
expecting him to be tolerant as far as
Islam or Muslims are concerned.

We all know anyone can join up at various
Internet Cafes under different names and
post to their heart's content.

Look at the responses and connect the dots.

Totally predictable!
Not addressing the issues being discussed,
instead more mud-slinging and rants!

I simply don't buy the denials.
Unfortunately, - Boazy/Herman may be with us
for quite some time yet.

What is objectionable, what is dangerous about
extremists such as Boazy/Herman is that they think
that communication means agreeing with them.
They are haters. They always hate people on the
other side of THEIR scale.

"Railing and praising were his usual themes;
and both showed his judgement in extremes.
Either over violent or over civil,
So everyone to him was either god or devil."
(John Dryden).
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 10 January 2010 3:00:07 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy thinks that HermanYutic is David Boaz,
But HermanYutic thinks that Foxy is Janet Incompetano.

Foxy thinks that HermanYutic/David Boaz is a dangerous extremist,
but Islamic fundamentalists are misunderstood voices for progress.
Janet Incompetano thinks that conservatives are dangerous right wing extremists
and that Islamic fundamentalists don’t exist.
http://www.fas.org/irp/eprint/rightwing.pdf
Very similar.

Foxy/Incompetano should be aware that the overwhelming majority of terrorist incidents and threats
in the world today involve Islamists but she only see's danger from those who criticise Islam,
because this is Islamophobia which is the root cause of terrorism.

Foxy/Incompetano is blinded by ideology.

There is hope however.

As her cognitive dissonance is heightening at increasingly futile attempts to reconcile the irreconcilable
within the constraints of her paradigm, her voice is becoming ever more shrill.

Will this lead to an awakening or a breakdown?

Stay tuned.
Posted by HermanYutic, Sunday, 10 January 2010 6:28:28 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
HermanYutic is the latest incarnation of KMB. His few lines of argument were so weak that he went away, reviewed the factual basis of his statements, and came back with a more logical, rational...wait, wait, wait. Sorry. I drifted into fantasy for a moment.

I meant to say that KMB got so roundly trounced, and he failed to defend and justify his statements so often, that he had to choose between being a laughing-stock and registering a new user name.

Guess which option he took.

BOAZ IS banned, though. Regrettably, I don't know the particulars of why. I'll email GrahamY to ask if the ban is still in effect.
Posted by Sancho, Sunday, 10 January 2010 7:16:53 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Sancho,

I believe Boaz David was banned because he was posting under
two different names, (what a surprise), which is not allowed.
Anyway, check with Graham and ask if he is banned still,
how come he posted on this thread?

And yes, he could have been KMB - Boaz David has had
several re-incarnations - including his latest.

"Walks like a duck, talks like a duck..."
Posted by Foxy, Sunday, 10 January 2010 7:31:18 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"What is objectionable, what is dangerous about
extremists such as Boazy/Herman is that they think
that communication means agreeing with them.
They are haters. They always hate people on the
other side of THEIR scale."

I think we should be focusing on this from now on- what there is for the Western and Fundamentalist Islamic worlds to actually communicate about.
I'm ignoring the issue regarding the moderate/secular Islamic societies for the simple fact that we can simply communicate as normal, and religious sensibilities don't even factor in.

But for the Fundie world, sadly I think the only communication we should be having is a mutual agreement over how to REDUCE each other's presence in the other's world.
As our presence only seems to ignite hostilities there- and seemingly, vise-versa.
We have to admit we have very little that they want (beyond our modern products and our money), and they have absolutely ZERO to offer us (even, arguably their oil has little use that numerous other products, fuels and technology we currently possess can't do also).

Also, an interesting study by the Gallup polls found that most people in the Islamic world (and USA) believed more interaction between Islamic and Western worlds was a good thing- while an overwhelming majority in Europe considered it a massive negative.
Posted by King Hazza, Monday, 11 January 2010 7:47:55 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Why has Islamic fundamentalism intensified?

It’s so obvious.

Global warming!

Think about it.

Most Islamic countries are already pretty hot.

Global warming has made them even hotter.

We all know how cranky we get when we’re hot and bothered.

Who’s responsible for global warming?

The West.

So who’s responsible for increasing Islamic fundamentalism.

The West.

Problem solved.

Reduce global warming to reduce Islamic fundamentalism.
Posted by HermanYutic, Monday, 11 January 2010 9:08:47 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy, and others
One can use two names but there are limitations.
My reading of the rules,Polycarp/Boaz what ever, probably got banned more for the intrusive and aggressive behaviour.

I don't think enough commenter fully understand the depth of alienation/identity (a need to belong) and its subsequent effects/vulnerabilities to its 'victims' those offer them an emotional purpose. Particularly if the dominant force is a cause.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/8441193.stm

One only need to look at the underlying needs that show in Stockholm syndrome. the test giving electric shocks on command, Branch Davidians, Heavens Gate, Jones town. All these give an identity, emotional security, commonality etc.

One could group religion, congregations, even street or culdersac. cultural, gangs, nationalism, football allegiances and even rusted on Political affiliations.

This can be triggered by deprivation/excluded and a *perception* there of. We tend to see our selves in terms of groupings we belong to. This can also be true if people don't feel they're getting their fair share. One only needs to look at the apparent selfishness of some of the OLOers comments. Many are fighting for 'their share/identity' although they wouldn't see it that way.

We give to charity largely because it enhances the self image.

What I'm suggesting is a variation based on Maslow's hierarchy of *needs*.
My view is if we ignore those needs in others we do so at our own peril.
Being human I do this somewhat imperfectly. As an observation you do this better than most. :-)
Posted by examinator, Monday, 11 January 2010 9:28:13 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear King Hazza,

Oil will continue to affect the US and
European relations with countries where
Islamic fundamentalist movements exist.

However, the US is increasingly looking
to Nigeria and other countries in West
Africa as a source for oil imports to
offset reliance on the Middle East,
a relationship that the current administration
fears will be threatened by increasing Islamic
fundamentalism in the region.

Dear Examinator,

The vast majority of modern mainstream Christians,
Jews, and Muslims seek a better life on earth, rather
than seeking it in heaven. Modern people are not
waiting for Armageddon, or a future coming of a
saviour. Nor are they waiting for anything else that
exercises the theological minds of fundamentalists.

We must keep in mind that the religiously minded modern
person is not a 'card-carrying' fundamentalist.
The latter are a tiny minority.

Today's fundamentalists were taught to be bad people,
yet they believe they are good people - God's chosen
ones, whether Jew, Christian, or Muslim.

However humanity cannot afford to have fundamentalists
with their fingers on the nuclear-war button. It's for
that reason that the Western response to Islamic
fundamentalism is so crucial. The challenge as I've
stated previously for the US and other Western countries
will be to deal with the complexities within fundamentalist
Islam and within Islam itself. Whether to choose to use
military strength to stop fundamentalist movements or to
exercise diplomacy to encourage more open political
processes and economic development in Muslim countries.

The task is not an easy one.

Religious fundamentalists usually can't be stopped by reasoned
discussion. But, they may be influenced by a change in
Western actions as King Hazza suggests in his posts.

Anyway, so much for this sad state of affairs in our
world today.
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 11 January 2010 12:38:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
cont'd ...

Dear Examinator,

I forgot to Thank You for the compliment.

The explanation may be due to the fact
that Librarians are Happy Bookers and infomaniacs! :-)
(And they don't shrill. They shush).

My other car is a bookmobile!
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 11 January 2010 12:54:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Pynchme
In truth you are right and incomplete, yes the Muslim scholars did borrow from others but in the same way all knowledge is from others and *added* to.

Objective question for you to consider "*why* was it so important for the 'Christians' to regain land that they took in the first case?"

Foxy,
re your argument that the majority aren't waiting for Armageddon or the heavenly reunion.
I think you're confusing the symptom with the cause.

I ask the question *why* do the fundies *want to* believe in this?
One could objectively ask the same about a country, a culture et sec.

What is the payoff to believe in a God at all? The answer this and the above is that it fulfills an emotional need. The problem is when either side of this belief structure tries to proselytize. force their views onto another.

To do so means that you are subverting their identity and that *is* a threat to a people, religion, culture and so on. The greater the threat the higher the resentment and aggressive/dogmatic (fundamental) the response.

We Aussies don't take our selves that seriously, except when the criticisms come from someone outside the faith/belief that we are the greatest nation on earth. We'll defend our embarrassing yobbos *because they are ours*. One can extrapolate that across most conflicts.

The yanks continue with their superiority based hegemony via proxies and other less subtle means. Justifying the hegemony on the grounds that it is essential to their culture.

In the final analysis reasoning is not the answer on its own but as a vector to become aware of what is important to others. Then ACT ACCORDINGLY. Clearly this is a long way off but a good start is both diplomacy and educating both and being less narcissistic as a nation.
Posted by examinator, Monday, 11 January 2010 3:25:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Zam,

The point is that innovation has been antithesis to the cultural grain for several centuries. Instead of romanticizing we should be honest and realistic about history and current events.

As for the Crusades, I have read a range of reasons for reclaiming conquered territories, including to alleviate the persecution of Christians in the occupied lands. They were persecuted terribly. However, for many centuries everyone endured terrible turbulence and conflict. I think most wars boil down to economics; however, power struggle between religious and political ideologies could also have been factors; as could prevention of Muslim expansion.

Anyway, I think this speaker expresses some of the issues that concern me, esp from approx 3.20.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ough-e6ThWE

Brave woman.
Posted by Pynchme, Monday, 11 January 2010 8:31:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Pynchme,

Have you read any of the works of -
Ayaan Hirsi Ali?

"The Caged Virgin,"
(A Muslim Woman's Cry for Reason).

Or -

"Infidel,"
(A profoundly affecting memoir
which tells her astonishing life story
from her traditional Muslim childhood
in Somalia to her intellectual awakening
in the Netherlands, to her life under
armed guard in the West).

Both are a "must" reads!
Posted by Foxy, Monday, 11 January 2010 8:54:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
"It's for that reason that the Western response to Islamic fundamentalism is so crucial." foxy.

foxy started this thread on Islamic fundamentalism but failed to see beyond 9/11.

Islam is not only a big problem faced by the West but by each and every non-Muslim country in the world today.

How do you account for the recent 2008 Mumbai Massacre?

How do you account for the burning of churches in Malaysia because the pre-Islamic Arab word 'allah' is used to mean 'god'? Since the early 1900's the word 'allah' has been used by the Malay-speaking Christians in Malaya and Borneo.

That frequent church burning by Muslims in Islamic countries is caused by the West?

The common denominator for all these acts of killing and vandalism is the ideology of Islam. The script for Islamic terrorism is contained in the Qu'ran.

Get rid of the mosques, Islamic schools and imams in the West and a large proportion of threat posed by Islam terrorism would dissappear
Posted by Philip Tang, Monday, 11 January 2010 11:06:26 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Woman arrested for chewing gum during Ramadan!
I admit that the news source is a bit suspect.
It's that Islamophobic rag, the Arab Times:
http://www.arabtimesonline.com/NewsDetails/tabid/96/smid/414/ArticleID/145900/reftab/96/t/Woman-nabbed-for-chewing-gum-on-the-first-day-of-Ramadan/Default.aspx
I can see at least one positive for Sharia Law in Australia.
No more sticky mess on the bottom of your shoes.
Well, at least during Ramadan.
Posted by HermanYutic, Tuesday, 12 January 2010 9:39:42 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Mr Tang,

I'm not going to point out the errors in
your statements and mindset because I can
see that it isn't going to change unless
you take a deeper inspection of the issues
involved.

You seem to be quite content to simply go by the news
reports about wars in Muslim countries or
terrorist attacks. You interpret the Muslim world
through the lens of extremist activity.

I'll leave you to it.
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 12 January 2010 10:46:17 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy claims that Mr Tang
"interpret(s) the Muslim world
through the lens of extremist activity."
But Foxy
(who is apparently boycotting me because she's unable to defend her position-
which is, admittedly, indefensible)
is in fact
"interpret(ing) the Muslim world
through the lens of " political correctness and multiculturalism,
combined with a dash of, otherwise appealing, naïveté.
When Islamists, such as Major Nidal Hasan,
accurately quote from the Koran,
citing their justification for engaging in Jihad,
in total accordance with authoritative and almost universally accepted exegeses,
Foxy refuses to engage the issue.
Posted by HermanYutic, Tuesday, 12 January 2010 3:04:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy, I'm truly sorry to see your attempt to bring some objective thinking into these issues has degenerated into the now-customary whack-a-mozzie dross.

Sadly, that's almost certain to happen, with the level of fear and loathing these people display.

It does show however that there is still a vast gulf between those who believe that radical adherence to religion itself is the root problem, and those whose dearest wish is to foment aggression against people who don't share their specific view of God.
Posted by Pericles, Tuesday, 12 January 2010 3:55:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Thanks for the references Foxy.

I'm putting them on my to-do list and look
forward to reading them.

I did find this very interesting (3 part)
debate between Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Tariq Ramadan.

I think the comments below the clips are
interesting too - some are pretty much the same
sort of horrible comments that are directed at
Western feminists. Same mentality I suppose.

Philip Tang: <"Get rid of the mosques, Islamic schools and imams in the West and a large proportion of threat posed by Islam terrorism would dissappear... ">

Oi mate. I would say that would be a great way to incite extreme violence. One thing that Christian cultures have in their favour is genuine tolerance. They have no record in the modern world of blowing up planes and churches and punishing people because their beliefs are different, or of forcing their religion on others by like um - beheading and whipping. I wouldn't like us to start behaving like terrorists now.
Posted by Pynchme, Tuesday, 12 January 2010 5:03:16 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Sorry, here are the link/s to the debate:

Part 1:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FtO5Zo9grz4

Part 2:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LXR10XSFrVY

Part 3:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nsP5sm7-94c
Posted by Pynchme, Tuesday, 12 January 2010 5:05:21 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Pericles,

Thanks for your words of support.

I totally agree.

There is a breakdown in communication
when things are viewed through the
lens of extremism - no matter what the
faith.

Extremists are only interested in condemnation,
rather than explanation. Explanations seem
tantamount to sympathizing and excusing.

Extremists are not capable of reasoned debate
and will not modify their judgements.
Continued stereotyping of any group however
encourages "counter-stereotyping" and the
result is usually a complete breakdown in
communication.

Dear Pynchme,

Thanks for the sites.

This is really an interesting topic - and
has been quite an education in so many areas.

A poster on another thread said:

"Don't look at only one side of the coin ...
look at the edges too, the borders, the marks
and scratches..." ( you get the idea).
Posted by Foxy, Tuesday, 12 January 2010 7:03:54 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Hi Pynchme, Foxy

The recommendations of Wafa Sultan and Ayaan Hirsi Ali are indeed very good.

Ayaan Hirsi Ali spoke in support of Geert Wilders's film on Islam and the Koran.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwOCUuILJIg

Wafa Sultan an ex-Muslim agrees with the Turkish prime minister (and 1.2 billion Muslims) that there is no such thing as ‘moderate’ Islam.
http://fora.tv/2009/12/01/Moderate_Islam_Western_Ally_or_Western_Myth#chapter_06

Foxy is going in circles chasing her own tail, blaming the West for provoking Islamic terrorism. She is confused and back to where she started.

Hint for Foxy. Follow Ayaan on ForaTV and she should shed some light on you regarding Islam.
Posted by Philip Tang, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 12:00:56 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Philip T while I am in Foxys bad books on this subject, others too I have followed one of your links.
Yes I am deeply concerned at the continuing radicalization of this religion.
But on seeing you anti Muslim site I think it is worthless.
Yes it is in my view bigoted.
See I have no doubts we are better than them, the extremists, no fear of them, no time for them.
But we do not need their weapons to fight them, truth has value.
Adolph Hitler had supporters in all walks of life, we may very well be living in our own 1933.
Foxy has not defended Islamists, she clearly remains the nice person she is, wanting the best from people.
Primitive age old hate, deliberate lack of education as we know it, education to hate, tell me we have another way, that we one day must confront in a war such hate and bigotry, then know humanity always has to fight in the end.
Posted by Belly, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 5:21:12 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
the problem is men, of this there is no doubt
the rhetoric risible, especially when men shout
to resolve empower women, with an equal rights republic
peace or global catastrophe, Australians take your pick.
Posted by whistler, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 10:40:44 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Mr Tang,

Thank You so much for being concerned
about my state of mind. However, I want to
re-assure you that I'm not at all confused
as you suggest. The problem is that condemnation
to you is preferable to explanation. And as I've
stated earlier - I'll leave you to it.

I have read the works of Ayaan Hirsi Ali.
Have you actually read any of them?

Dear Belly,

You in my bad books?

Never!

All I'm trying to do with this thread is present
more than a "one-eyed" view on the subject.
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 11:15:58 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Whistler a thread exists saying we/me are getting a bit rude in OLO.
I offer you as evidence it is not true, your right to your opinion is a given.
But you invite such replies, what is your point?
A woman standing up for her rights could be dead before speaking in some country's.
Can not even worship with the men, may be forced to wed a much older Man.
If you care about women tell me your thoughts on the horrible lives some must lead?
Any one see that Muslim bloke preaching hate in English streets? wanting to march in protest in the streets dead soldiers came from.
in time we all will learn our good intentions are not always shared.
Posted by Belly, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 6:11:50 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Belly,

We are willing to label Hitler,
Stalin, Pol Pot and Idi Amin
as sub-human zealots - why
not those who preach religious
hatred against others who won't
accept their fanatical views?

Today's extremists were taught to
be bad people, yet they believe they're
good people - God's chosen people,
whether Jew, Christian or Muslim.
And they believe that if you can't be
good - then you should be put to death -
if you're not one of the chosen few.

"We should invade their countries,
kill their leaders and convert them
to Christianity ..."
(Ann Coulter - American newspaper columnist
Sept. 2001).

"I want you to just let a wave of intolerance
wash over you. I want you to let a wave of hatred
wash over you. Yes, hate is good. Our goal is
a Christian nation. We have a Biblical duty,
we are called by God to conquer this country..."
(Randall Terry - "The New Sentinel" Fort Wayne,
Indiana).

"When I, or people like me are running the country
you'd better flee, because we will find you, we will
try you and we will execute you. I mean every word of it
I will make it my mission ... "
(Randall Terry - on doctor's who perform abortions).

"Ladies and Gentlemen...Only Christianity offers a
comprehensive worldview that covers all areas of
life and thought, only Christianity offers a way to live
in response to the realities that we find in this world...
Only Christianity!"
(Tom DeLay - House Majority Whip - Republican -
Texas- 2002).

"The Church has through the centuries understood
that ideas are really more dangerous than other
weapons..Their use should be restricted."
(Francis J. Lally, American Roman Catholic Monsignor).

"There is justification for killing babies if it is
clear that they will grow up to harm us!"
(Rabbi Yitzhak Shapiro - from his book -
"The King's Torah" - he invigorates Jewish
teaching for future generations).
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 6:51:14 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Dear Belly,

The point that I'm trying to make is
that religious extremists come in all
shapes and sizes and are not restricted
to only one religion.
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 7:03:59 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
yes i should have been more clear, Belly.
i meant ALL men, you, me AND some sick brother in islamabad.
starts with Australian men being equal with Australian women
as it did with franchise at the first opportunity on federation.
from franchise to an equal rights republic, wars are first won at home.
Posted by whistler, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 8:10:43 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy is confused between white supremacist such as Ann Coulter and Christianity.

Organisations like the KKK think of themselves as "Christian" but they are just white supremacist.

In examining Christianity one should consider what the Christian scriptures says, especially the New Testament , e.g.

“There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free,…”

“The commandments…are summed up in this word: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself."

Fundamentalist Christians are not very successful in engaging Islamists because they get their butts kicked by turning the other cheek.

Foxy needs to examine the Islamic scriptures instead of running away and dismissing the challenge put forward by HermanYutic.

A good start is a book on Islam by Wafa Sultan “A God Who Hates”.
http://www.amazon.com/God-Who-Hates-Courageous-Inflamed/dp/0312538359
Posted by Philip Tang, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 8:56:10 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Mr Tang,

Again you missed the point completely
that was being made in my previous post.
But never mind.

Ann Coulter was only one of the
quotes I gave - however she still
was relevant to the issue of religious
extremists - which she is considered to
be in the US.

Speaking of quotes ...

There are quotes that can be taken from
the Bible that will make Osama Bin Laden
look like a Boy Scout. Both from the Old
and New Testament as I've stated in a
previous post.

http://www.evilbible.com/

As for your recommendation of the book on Islam -
I've actually got the six volume series -
"Great Religions Of Modern Man,"
edited by Richard A. Guard. I've read them all -
and have recently re-read the volume on Islam by
John A. Williams. I can highly recommend it to
you (if you'd be interested in reading a scholarly
book on the topic that is).

This will be the last time that I shall be
responding to you. I find that for me this
thread has run its course - I've said all I
can on the subject and its time to move on to
another thread.

Perhaps you'd like to start one on a controversial
topic?
Posted by Foxy, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 9:53:55 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
If you do Foxy I'll probably have to follow as I think there's little left to analyze (especially if the people taking the issue seriously are starting to leave)- but it was a good topic even despite some of the less constructive contributors as the rest of us definitely covered a lot of points and largely dissected the issue without them.
Posted by King Hazza, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 10:38:27 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Waaa! Apakah itu memang *BoazY* yang asli ngak?

Sudah lama kamu ngak datang dan aku kangen sekali.

Tapi kenapa bilang begitu sama aku?
Rasanya permikiran *BoazY* tambah keras lagi. Kl Melayu tdk aman untuk apa di situ?

Ayo ke sini aja.
Posted by DreamOn, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 10:55:12 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Foxy your "scholarly" volume on Islam by John A. Williams was published in 1961,62. It was probably written in the 1950s

May I suggest you update your knowledge on Islam, post 9/11.
Posted by Philip Tang, Wednesday, 13 January 2010 11:03:51 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
That's a bit rich, coming from you, Philip Tang.

>>May I suggest you update your knowledge on Islam, post 9/11.<<

Your own views on Islam haven't shifted from the seventh century, have they?

If anyone suggests that there are terrorist extremists in other religions too, what is your response?

"Look at what rhey wrote in the seventh century."

It's your mantra. Your comforter. Your blanky.

Your views have no standing here, I'm afraid, since you refuse to engage in a discussion, instead using the thread as yet another soap-box for your fear and loathing.
Posted by Pericles, Thursday, 14 January 2010 7:25:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Phillip,

I know a lecturer in modern Islam and tried to get him to talk to Policarp/Boaz et al who has similar views to you he said then that people of that mindset just want to tell not listen. I suspect he would suggest the same about your posts.

Last visit from me here.
Posted by examinator, Thursday, 14 January 2010 8:55:11 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
When I muse idealistically for a moment visa vi topics like this, my thoughts often wander to that part of the world held "Holy/Sacred" to members of Islam, Judaism and Christianity.

There is the Al Aqsa mosque, the Temple Mount and it was also a site of significance in particular to the Christian crusaders of old

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isra_and_Mi%27raj

Still, I have to wonder (and assuming there is a God for a moment) if it is pleasing to said Deity that all 3 lineages could and perhaps should come together in Body, Heart and Mind at this location and that there will be no "New Peace" until "we" do.

There appears though at present to be a need for significant remedial programs to bring us as a collective to the point we we accept one another to the extent that we can share with one another.
Posted by DreamOn, Thursday, 14 January 2010 11:58:38 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
examinator,

Many of our views are based on incontrovertible evidence given by people who knows Islam first hand.

For example, Ali Sina, from http://www.faithfreedom.org/ , MA Khan from http://www.islam-watch.org/iw-new/index.php and Wafa Sultan (together with Nona Darwish and Ayaan Ali) who has identified that Islam and the Qu’ran as the root cause of terrorism. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sI8AQ3sGdDg&feature=related

Rather strange that Pericles would make accusations such as “...you refuse to engage in a discussion”, when in fact, it is he who has completely avoided discussing why he thinks Islam is a peaceful "religion" but would prefer to label critics of Islam, “Islamophobes”
Posted by Philip Tang, Friday, 15 January 2010 1:44:36 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
You're kidding yourself, Philip Tang.

>>Rather strange that Pericles would make accusations such as “...you refuse to engage in a discussion”, when in fact, it is he who has completely avoided discussing why he thinks Islam is a peaceful "religion" but would prefer to label critics of Islam, “Islamophobes”<<

Dead wrong. Both counts.

Interestingly, the only person to have used the word "Islamophobe" on this thread has been... HermanYutic.

That tells a story, doesn't it.

Nor will you find me referring to Islam as a peaceful religion.

What you will find is that I object, strongly and often, to people like yourself spending their lives trying to instil fear and hatred into other people, by constantly shouting "the Mozzies will get you"

Islam is no more peaceful than Christianity.

Like almost every religion, including your own, it attempts to create an "us and them" mentality in its followers. The Shia vs Sunni bloodshed mirrors exactly the Catholic vs Protestant violence that has been the hallmark of Christian history over many centuries. Partition in India exposed the massive faultline between Hindu and Muslim. And then there were the Crusades, of course.

When I say that you refuse to engage in discussion, I mean exactly that. Whenever you are challenged as to why you consider Christianity to be less dangerous that Islam, you merely point to carefully selected verses from their holy book.

That's what I meant when I pointed out, in response to your request that "you update your knowledge on Islam, post 9/11", that your own views are still rooted in the seventh century.

We can all point to religious terrorist cadres that threaten our lives. I was resident in London throughout the IRA bombings, of restaurants, pubs and other open spaces.

But it is religion that is the problem, Philip Tang.

Yours, when it attempts to revive the spirit of the twelfth century to mobilize the forces of Jesus against the infidel, is equally as dangerous as any other band of extremist thugs.
Posted by Pericles, Friday, 15 January 2010 9:44:29 AM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. 2
  4. 3
  5. ...
  6. 29
  7. 30
  8. 31
  9. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy