what do we make fun of ?

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

More on the story

[Shapley]

Thanks, Selma. I had did not have time to look too far for information, and linked the first Google hit that gave information on the trial. I was familiar with the trial, but not the outcome.

My point, of course, was that this blatant attack on the principle facet of Christianity, the existence of Jesus Christ, was apparenlty not met with widespread riots, protests, shootings, burnings, bannings, boycotts, or tantrums.

V/R
Shapley

[shostakovich]

Keep in mid that fanaticism does not represent the entire Muslim world in much the same way as violent American movies don't reflect everyday life here. The middle east is a mix of religions, nationalities, and ethnicities. Tracing the root causes of lethal behavior is very complicated. It's too easy from this distance to blame it on Islam itself. It's also very dangerous to do so, as it feeds into religious war. Religions don't kill people. People do.
Wary of Religions and People.

[DavidS]

Originally posted by shostakovich:
Religions don't kill people. People do.

Especially the ones hallucinating that they are on a divine mission.

[ratsnake]

Religions don’t kill people, but religions do recruit people on their way to kill those who oppose the religious beliefs. Seriously what’s behind all of that solid body of believers of one specific religion who might make a move in the direction of fanatic ideals or semi-peaceful and circumstanced resolutions? I tell you what, to me the basis of each and every grand religion, any of the three, is havin the potentials of creating mass movements instrumented with false beliefs and totally religious aspects sometimes strong enough to start intercultural clashes. What really disappoints me is that amid all that yabba dabba that the media’s doin over a globalized world in which there no longer come issues such as why some cry over their prayer times at 3 am and why some others sing in choirs into discussion is just framed …..llshit!! Well not that I suggest nobody else knows about it, I say that the matter that still religions could motivate people to hate each other is a reality which in case of Moslems corresponds directly to their type leaderships which are incognito oppressors trying to keep the power over the mass up to whatever it takes. One good thing people did in the west was that they firmly separated the church and the state so that the preachers can’t go to war with Canadians cause they tell nasty jokes on TV!! Unfortunately the latter is happening with many Moslem states where the mass are totally blinded by means of religious teachings and the governments, dictatorships better say, owe their total existence to the Imams or Islamic priests, hence have no reason to stop this. A sovereign middle eastern state is one that has its imams bound to the grounds of their mosques and let them applicate no serious social or political endowment on behalf of what they believe in.

[Haggis@wk]

If this book is any indication it's going to be a long, long war. But then I never thought it wasn't going to be a protracted affair.

The only question is do we, as a people, have the will to see it through? In light of the craven cowardice of the MSM over the recent "Allah Cartoons" I must profess to a sense of unease.

Want people to acquiesce to your religious views and refrain from even the mildest of criticism?

Apparently, threaten to kill them. it seems to works pretty well.

[Haggis@wk]

heh.

"Two weeks ago, we made the maverick decision not to air the Mohammed cartoons -- not because all of us in Atlanta are afraid of being turned into human shish kabobs-- but because we don't want to offend the followers of this great world religion," said Klein. "The fact that we're still alive-- er, I mean--that we've gotten positive feedback from the world, shows we made the right decision."

[barfle]

Originally posted by Haggis@wk:
If this book is any indication it's going to be a long, long war. But then I never thought it wasn't going to be a protracted affair.

I thought you felt it was going well.

Originally posted by Haggis@wk:
Want people to acquiesce to your religious views and refrain from even the mildest of criticism?

Apparently, threaten to kill them. it seems to works pretty well.

We've actually carried out the killing we threatened, and it hasn't worked on them.

[Haggis@wk]

Barfle,

"I thought you felt it was going well."

I think the initial tactical successes have been very successful. I don’t think an Iraqi or Afghani government is going to be a threat to the U.S. But the long term "solutions" are not so clear. What are our options?

I think the radical madrassas will have to be reined in and I don’t have a clue how to go about that. The President support the Democratization of the Middle East as a long term solution and feels the process, along with capitalism, will have a moderating affect. While I agree in principle I’m not so sure that the radical clerics we are trying to rein in actually want to have the kind of world that those influences will bring about. I think they are happiest contemplating an 11th century lifestyle; I’ve seen that kind of lifestyle practiced in the Saudi desert and I, for one, am not enthused.

I’ve mentioned before that I don’t believe Radical Islam is the problem; it’s more of pneumonia to the world’s AIDS crisis, which is demography. It’s very likely we, the U.S. and probably China, will be dealing with a Muslim European Caliphate in 50 years. (okay, maybe not a "Caliphate" but a Europe much different from the one we have today.)

Last week a Muslim cleric in Australia said something similar about Australia becoming Muslim in 50 years, he’s probably more right than wrong. With abortion rates among Anglo Australians of 23% of all pregnancy that’s about 80,000 fewer Anglo Australians every year compared to the Muslim community that encourages large families.

The most recent Australian Census in 2001 revealed a remarkable rate of growth in Australia's Muslim population. The Census listed 281 576 Australian Muslims, an increase of some 40 per cent in five years, while the Australian population as a whole only grew by 5.7 per cent in the same period.

I am increasingly less than sanguine that the world is going to get safer any time soon.

My biggest fear is a radical Islamic state with nukes. Currently the leadership in Iran does not let me sleep well at nights.

Make no mistake about it, a nuclear “event” in the U.S. that can clearly (or even not so clearly) be traced to a Muslim group is, at the worst, going to invite a retaliation that is going to be, in the most biblical sense, a "firestorm". I don't think any president, Democrat or Republican, could withstand the (justifiable) outrage of the American people.

Even if he/she could, at the very least it will result in the complete isolation of much of the Muslim world and mass expulsion of guest workers and even their children from much of Europe.

While similar reactions in the U.S. will be more restrained by the civil liberties we enjoy, being an American Muslim in a post-nuke attack would be similar to being an Irishman in 18/19th century New York.

Altoid and her children are going to grow up in a world vastly different from any we can anticipate

"We've actually carried out the killing we threatened, and it hasn't worked on them."

That, and the history of Muslim reaction to outside authority in the Philippines as contained in the book pretty much makes your case.

My case, unfortunately, has always been that we will have to totally eradicated those that would do us harm in the name of Islam. My original question was, do we have the national will to do it? I don't think enough of us do, now. But I'm afraid we're going to get it in the future.

We have the ability, if not currently the will, to visit death upon large parts of the world. At no time since the Berlin wall came down have I considered that there might be another threat that will cause us to again to think that such an occurrence is possible. Now, I’m not so sure

[OperaTenor]

"Craven cowardice of the MSM."

My sentiments, exactly! (See Haggis, I still agree with you from time to time on things besides good Scotch. )

[barfle]

At this time, in spite of the obvious fact that Muslims have carried out the most heinous acts of terror over the past decade (not counting warfare, legally declared or not), I don't believe we are ready to say that Islam is enough of a problem to make membership an offense. I know I'm not.

I've been participating in discussions on other boards regarding the definition of "moral" acts, and it usually seems to come down to what's beneficial for your society. At one time, we were concerned about overpopulation, and legal abortions seemed to be a way, however radical, to reduce some of that pressure. Oral contraceptives also reduced the birth rate. Now, however, it appears that the propensity of people who do not respect our society to reproduce in far greater numbers, and to take advantage of our largess is a looming threat.

Pat Buchanan, a politician whom I agree with about half the time (and the other half I wonder what freakin' planet he's from) wrote a book titled The Death Of The West where he cites rampant immigration and low birth rates as indications of an American doomsday. I hope he's wrong, although I really can't refute much of what I've heard about the book. (And I haven't read it. Yet.)

Clearly, I haven't reached a conclusion on this topic myself.

[piqaboo]

Immigration into countries other than the US might be a problem for those countries. However it seems to me that the US is all about immigration. Those folks who are willing to uproot and move so far from home to try for a better life seem to embody the American spirit and dream. Therefore immigration cant be a country-doomsday or we'd never have gotten off the ground. It may be doomsday to the particular culture we've developed over the last 30 years, but thats also part of the American Way. remember, "no irish need apply" & the okie from muskogee.

[barfle]

As I noted, I know a few Muslims who seem reasonable and who have integrated into our society fairly well. But I know of many others who have not. They blatantly indicate that they are different, particularly through their dress. I feel they have no cause to complain when someone notes that they are different.

The Irish, Italians, Chinese, Japanese, Vietnamese, and many others, while preserving their own culture, seem to have done a pretty decent job of assimilating into the existing culture here, while widening it a bit.

I'm not saying that Moslems have a goal of taking over our culture (although there are those who profess exactly that), but I do see many of them deliberately segregating themselves from the culture of the infidel.

[Haggis@wk]

I posted a link to Mark Steyn's excellent (if depressing) article on the effects of demographics in Europe as well as the philosophy of "multiculturism” have had on immigration there, but I’ll post it again in case you missed it earlier. It makes the same point you infer about the Buchanan book, if less stridently.

” I don't believe we are ready to say that Islam is enough of a problem to make membership an offense.”

And I’ve asked this question before, but, where is the Islamic voice of outrage and condemnation? Where is the clear unequivocal demand for the end of violence in the name in Islam? Even our own “homegrown” practitioners of Islam are surprisingly muted or sending what seems to me a mixed message that always contains the phrase “we abhor the violence being done in the name of Islam but….”

Until that particular drum is beat and often by moderate Muslims worldwide then people are going to remain skeptical that “Islam is a religion of peace.”

[Schmeelkie]

I've already overrun my lunch, so I don't remember who said it - but I think that our separation of church and state in the US as opposed to reliously-run or -backed governments in much of the Muslim world is better able to keep religious fanatics in check.

Also, that bit about assimilation seems on track too. It appears to me due to references to Muslim 'enclaves' in Europe, that they tend to group together, then, as Haggis says, it's the demographics that get them. Immigrants are likely to at least start working the lower paying jobs, and when immigrants group together, they often find it harder to access resources, quality of schools decline and the area tends to experience an economic downturn. Or maybe it's that a poor immigrant has to start living in the poor part of town to begin with... I'm not sure of cause-and-effect here, but the result is often an easily pissed-off populace.

For example, here in Rochester, much of the city of Rochester could be defined as having a mainly poor, African American and Hispanic populace. The surrounding suburbs are mainly white and higher socialioeconomic class. Crime is significantly higher in these areas of the city, the schools perform significantly worse, and rates of things like teen pregnancy, gang violence and drug and alcohol use are higher than the in the suburbs. Yet it seems extremely difficult to do anything about it. I am currently involved in a research study implementing a preventive intervention aimed at decreasing rates of conduct disorder and oppositional disorder (thus, one hopes, later crime, incarceration and other problems) in 1st-3rd graders in city schools. Kids identified as 'at-risk' get one-on-one mentoring (their parents too) and teachers also are taught what the kids are taught so they can help. A lot of the mentoring is learning to recognize emotions, setting realistic expectations of what the child can control (eg., can control his reactions to events, but can't control things like parents fighting), and methods for dealing with anger. Anyway, some pilot work looks promising, but we're doing the big test here over the next 5 years. And here's the strange thing, we have gotten flak from some school staff to the effect of "those (implied White) people from the University are trying to tell us how to help our kids. Why is it their business?" We're not picking kids based on gender or race, we're not implementing in just majority African American schools, and darn it, we're trying to help. It's not our fault that we're white. We just happen to have the knowledge and abilities to do this. Arg. Most of our mentors, by the way, are either African American or Hispanic.

Wow - didn't realize I was venting there...
But my point is this - a poor populace often gets entrenched. They need to be able to ask for help, but are often unwilling to do so because they don't want to feel helpless and inferior. As we say in the mental health field - there's nothing wrong with asking for help. I think that goes for societal woes too...

[OperaTenor]

Haggis, this is another area where I'm right there with ya - we don't hear any outcry from any Muslim over any violence perpetrated in the name of Allah on "infidels". Even Muslim response to the 9/11 attacks was nothing above lukewarm.

This lack of acknowledgement/accountability/self-policing, whatever you want to call it, is going to blackball them as a culture by the rest of the world. It will be a sad day indeed when we have to war against the Muslims simply because they're Muslims.

Each of the monotheistic religions seems to have had its dark age of violence, but it seems to me the Islamic manifestation of it has a far longer half-life.

[barfle]

Ethnic enclaves are nothing new. Almost every large city has a "Chinatown," a "little Italy," or a "little Tokyo." They seem to be places where you can get pretty good food, maybe a few trinkets, and admire the architecture.

I haven't seen any "little Meccas," at least in the cities I've lived near. But then I haven't seen any "little Vaticans" or "little Jerusalems" either.

Or maybe I'm bored and have nothing intelligent to say, since I didn't work on the laundry room or find any gelato last night. Hmmm, where's little Italy in DC?

[Selma in Sandy Eggo]

And yet another thread turns gelato. Mmm. Gelato.

[ratsnake]

Yeah right that’s another angle from which you can view things, I am amid all my depiction on what seems to be the east and what seems to be the west’s problem, very surprised to here it, the expression: we will have to eradicate them, those who pose a threat to us in the name of islam. Hey is that what I hear as the big drums of the coming world war III?? The prophecy is about to be completed and if haggis believes that US is capable of an act of eradication towards the so called Moslem world without getting engaged in a counteraction which might endanger its existence, well I guess Hollywood and the idea of a future of a totally American dominated world had done a good job! Besides hasn’t the Westside done enough in case of lawful tries to seize control over the savage Moslems and easterners after perceiving the fact they do not wish for any European presence in their territories in the late 18th and 19th century? Well you seeking the answer to those questions like why do they wish the white infidels to be gone and so much hatred re read the sentences of that kind, phrases which radiate total authority over the rest and illustrate the fact that we’re good! So watch it! No dude! I sincerely despite all of the America’s might and glory in the fields of military and economy, don’t think that this would come as a piece of cake so that the baaad guyz are gonna be evaporated and Captain America and the rest of the marvels bring eternal peace to the glorious American nation. I mean man, whatta pity that some of us still think as though its just a video game they’re playin!!

[BigJon@Work]

Ratsnake,

Read it. Learn it. Love it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paragraph



<small>[ 02-23-2006, 11:54 AM: Message edited by: BigJon@Work ]</small>