Why Islam is disrespected

[MCunnilinguist]

Islam bashing is quite in vogue these days

I Slam You Slam we all slam ISLAM

Seems all the sensible people aren't religious anyway.

 

[Gringao]

Actually it was in direct response to a comment AJ made regarding Islam. That's what this thread is about, right?

Maybe it wasn't relevant to your discussion, but then you're not the center of my universe, are you?

Stop, you're breaking my heart.

It was irrelevant. Very, very few of those commiting violent crime here are doing so in the name of Christianity or any other ideology or religion. When Islamofascists charge into pizza parlors wrapped in Semtex or detonate carbombs outside hotels, they are doing it specifically in the name of Islam.

 

[sigh]

Stop, you're breaking my heart.

It was irrelevant. Very, very few of those commiting violent crime here are doing so in the name of Christianity or any other ideology or religion. When Islamofascists charge into pizza parlors wrapped in Semtex or detonate carbombs outside hotels, they are doing it specifically in the name of Islam.

Gosh, I wonder if I mentioned that the killings weren't in the name of Christianity? Oh wait, yes I did!

Try to keep up, hon. I was responding to his point that Islam is a violent culture. I merely pointed out that ours is violent too. Islam has no corner on that market. Far from it. Which (ironically enough) makes your response here completely irrelevant to what I said.

But enough of you. I've seen you argue. It's pointless to engage you further.

 

[Gringao]

Gosh, I wonder if I mentioned that the killings weren't in the name of Christianity? Oh wait, yes I did!

Try to keep up, hon. I was responding to his point that Islam is a violent culture. I merely pointed out that ours is violent too. Islam has no corner on that market. Far from it. Which (ironically enough) makes your response here completely irrelevant to what I said.

But enough of you. I've seen you argue. It's pointless to engage you further.

Derivative, but moderately relevant. My apologies, I see your point.

We have a fair amount of violent crime (actually less than a lot of other nations), but can you really pin it on our culture?

 

[BeWeBoy]

One might wonder why the riots occur primarily in the poorest and most backward of Islamic nations. I see few Kuwaitis rioting over the supposedly flushed Koran pages.

Perhaps it is because the poor and uneducated of Afghanistan are more easily manipulated by those seeking to destabilize the country and preventing the elected governments success?

Truth and evidence has never mattered to those who require hatred and anger to further their agenda.

This thrown in with the warped veiw the press present the west does not allow the good stuff to be seen.. why well your Government wants USA to be scared of Islam etc so they can manipulate their game of making plenty money while you all quake in you Nike shoes while sweetshops abuse the worker so their profits are maxed.


The history is important, for centuries the west has stripped nations of their natural resources, when people wake up they realise they have nothing left and they are pissed off -- easy for some fanatic Mullah to sow the seeds of decent and get things heated so crowd mentality reigns.

America consumes 45% of worlds natural reources and has 15% of the population. Generally as a nation they are all Supersized, which results in airlines spending an extra $150m per year to give free and easy air travel.

One could go on but this war has nothing to do with religion and everything to do with new world orders and POWER. America is a young nation having a go at Empire building. And history tells they usualy fail given time. Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutly !

The people of America are blinkered by their own democratic government, yet only what about 40ish % of voters could be bothered to make their voice heard. That is not democracy


Check this out http://ruckus.org/warprofiteers/cards/index.html

and think long and hard, even entertain the worst you may come up with, 'cause that is probably closer to the real reality not the one the media paints. Fear enables control of the fearful masses. Who are fearful due mainly to their own ignorance and that applies to both sides of the coin.

 

[Gringao]

This thrown in with the warped veiw the press present the west does not allow the good stuff to be seen.. why well your Government wants USA to be scared of Islam etc so they can manipulate their game of making plenty money while you all quake in you Nike shoes while sweetshops abuse the worker so their profits are maxed.

Finally, someone with the courage to make the jihad-sneaker connection public. Bravo, mate, bravo! Those Air Jordans are imperilling democracy everywhere.

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Actually...

it's not a novel argument. Benjamin Barber advanced a similar thesis long before 9.11, arguing that individual liberties and our democratic institutions are being squeezed by the dual and opposing forces of global capitalism, with multinational corporations, richer than many nations (and often less accountable) on the one side and reactionary tribal factionalism on the other.

His message I took from his book, Jihad vs. McWorld (although the way he argues it, McWorld is the primary instigator, forcing reactionary responses in the form of "jihad", a term he uses to refer not just to Islamist jihad, but other kinds of regional factionalism too, like what we in Somalia in the 90's, the Sudan today, etc.), is that for our institutions to survive, we ought to protect our democratic institutions from both forces.

The idea that beating the "Islamofacists" (everyone sounds much worse if you add "facist" to it. Me? I'm a psychitrofacist. ) might entail making corporations more accountable to our democratic institutions might rankle your laissez-faire sensibilities.

Jihad v. McWorld

Oliver, I find it rather ironic that just two pages after you wrote this, Ishmael wrote the following. Rather astonishing, isn't it? "Big moral blindspots" doesn't begin to cover it.

How 'bout that?

Von Clauswitz was famous for saying that "War is a continuation of politics by other means" (that may not be an exact quote). Barroom and Internet BB discussions like this about war seem to me to be "continuations of war by other means". Words (the other means) are obviously hardly comparable in their dangerousness to bullets and A-bombs. And so it's much better that we sit here discharging our anger through internet portals.

Still, it's disappointing that the animosity goes on and on and on...

Your post wasn't the only one glossed over. I invited LN to give up the exercise of "who's the victim and who's the meanie" and talk about what might be done to help the conflicting parties understand each other better and manage their rancorous emotions. She seems more interested in what I consider to be the futile exercise of measuring atrocities.

This is not to argue for some mealy-mouthed ethical equivalency of all behaviors. American and atrocities and Japanese atrocities probably aren't equal. Ditto for America/the West vs. Fundamentalist Islam. My point is that the act of endlessly arguing over history to supposedly answer questions about who's more savage and who's more just is unproductive (and indeed counterproductive, but I'll get to that in a bit).

After all, don't we know how this argument is going to end up? "Facts" are going to be advanced, rationales and justifications given, and when the smoke clears everyone's going to have more or less the same opinion as when they came in. The biggest difference is the chief combatants will like each other a little less. Furthermore, each individual will have had the idea "proven" indisputably to themselves that the other side is unreasonable and that their own positions are therefore justified.

Thus is misunderstanding propagated.

But it's not just the futility of these sorts of debates that's disappointing. It's the opportunity cost. I could be learning something interesting about from LN about Japanese culture, or something about Constitutional law from Gringao (I'm not sure what I'd learn from AJ or Ish ). Of course, I could just ignore threads like these and converse with other people. But I have a Freud complex. I'm desperate to show people the the futility of their own behavior and change them.

Maybe I should give it up. Or at least stick to situations in which I can charge them for it.

 

[smoothdevil]

Originally Posted by Lovelynice
Even IF the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were valid military targets (which they most certainly were NOT), the dropping of nuclear bombs on them was an act of genocide that had nothing do with shortening the Pacific War. The war could've been ended at least 2-3 weeks before, and the excuse that bombing two cities full of civilians falls flat on it's face.

There are no valid reasons for war, except to the victor and and to the beligerent. So what do you call, the rape of Nanking, the Bataan death march, the human testing both by the Japanese and Germans, etc, etc , commited by the Japanese Imperial army. Are you telling me that if the Japanese or for that matter the Germans had the atomic bomb, they would say ... no no we will not use it ... it's barbaric ... the same people who planned the extermination of millions and did kill millions ... obviously you don't consider that genocide ...

The only fault I have with the US military at that epoch, is they were too nice ... I understand why they wanted Hirohito alive ... I would have dropped the bomb dead center of the imperial palace ...

I wonder how many of your ancestors died fighting for your right to say what you did, in Pacific or other theaters ...............

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Gosh, I wonder if I mentioned that the killings weren't in the name of Christianity? Oh wait, yes I did!

Try to keep up, hon. I was responding to his point that Islam is a violent culture. I merely pointed out that ours is violent too. Islam has no corner on that market. Far from it. Which (ironically enough) makes your response here completely irrelevant to what I said.

But enough of you. I've seen you argue. It's pointless to engage you further.

My god, this is turning into one hell of a special school lunch room fight!

 

[phrodeau]

My god, this is turning into one hell of a special school lunch room fight!

Wouldn't be one without you.

 

[Gringao]

Wouldn't be one without you.

There's BD, LD, MR and now LT.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Wouldn't be one without you.

I know you are but what are they.

 

[Le Jacquelope]

Originally Posted by Lovelynice
Even IF the cities of Hiroshima and Nagasaki were valid military targets (which they most certainly were NOT), the dropping of nuclear bombs on them was an act of genocide that had nothing do with shortening the Pacific War. The war could've been ended at least 2-3 weeks before, and the excuse that bombing two cities full of civilians falls flat on it's face.

There are no valid reasons for war, except to the victor and and to the beligerent. So what do you call, the rape of Nanking, the Bataan death march, the human testing both by the Japanese and Germans, etc, etc , commited by the Japanese Imperial army. Are you telling me that if the Japanese or for that matter the Germans had the atomic bomb, they would say ... no no we will not use it ... it's barbaric ... the same people who planned the extermination of millions and did kill millions ... obviously you don't consider that genocide ...

The only fault I have with the US military at that epoch, is they were too nice ... I understand why they wanted Hirohito alive ... I would have dropped the bomb dead center of the imperial palace ...

I wonder how many of your ancestors died fighting for your right to say what you did, in Pacific or other theaters ...............

Yeah, how dare she blaspheme our warrior gods, she ought to know they're immune from criticism!

I say we pass a law imprisoning people who criticize our warrior gods. What say ye?

 

[Veryknowing]

So what do you call, the rape of Nanking, the Bataan death march, the human testing both by the Japanese and Germans, etc, etc , commited by the Japanese Imperial army. Are you telling me that if the Japanese or for that matter the Germans had the atomic bomb, they would say ... no no we will not use it ... it's barbaric ... the same people who planned the extermination of millions and did kill millions ... obviously you don't consider that genocide ... ....

What do you call the firebombing of Dresden, Hamburg, Tokyo, the slaughter of civilians at My Lai by US soldiers, the mass slaughter of 100,000 RETREATING Iraqi civilians and soldiers who were LEAVING Kuwait on the notorous road of death (they weren't all soldiers, there were tens of thousands of civilians in busses and taxis too), the sanctions enforced upon Iraq which resulted in the deaths of 2 million Iraqis (including 600,000 to 1 million children), the use of Agent Orange over Vietnam that continues to poison the Vietnamese people even today in the soil and in their food resulting birth defects and cancers,

 

[phrodeau]

Sorry, but sanctions are a form of inaction. They cannot result in anything.

 

[Ishmael]

Sorry, but sanctions are a form of inaction. They cannot result in anything.

It's like the ignore function at Lit. Or being an Ostritch.

Ishmael

 

[Weevil]

Has someone already done the "Why Ishmael is Disrespected?" parody thread?

 

[Oliver Clozoff]

Sorry, but sanctions are a form of inaction. They cannot result in anything.

They can't?

There are all sorts of "inactions" that result in things. One of the best examples is laws. The don't do anything unless you break them, then they require consequences. Sanctions are laws of personal behavior writ large. They require adherence to some standard to influence a behavior. And there are historical examples of their effects (though like more ordinary sorts of laws, the effects are often quite different from those intended by those who made the law...)

 

[BeWeBoy]

General disrespect...

Perhaps the fact that Islam is disrespected, seemingly particularly in USA by the WASP and similar folks is that most religions are not respected in the main by each other as there is competition and they all feel they are right !

As folks replies reveal there is plenty of historical evidence to give reason for this.

How about people just having respect for other humans regardless of creed colour etc. Just accept that their spiritual/ religious belief is not the same as yours.

There is no right or wrong, because if the war on terror is right then the point of it's existance is completely missed.

When people are angry for long periods with no resolution to their anger well typically they will lash out. Put into thwe context of where the violence is and the quagmire of the why it is, few in the west come close to understanding. I would not claim to, though I get why on the human level it gets ugly and arsehole like Ishmael do not help, like Newsweeks pathetic excuse for "oh sorry our sorce was bad"! that is irresponsible journalism, the truth can not be argued.

 

[Ishmael]

Has someone already done the "Why Ishmael is Disrespected?" parody thread?

Different titles, same results.

Ishmael

 

[Ishmael]

Perhaps the fact that Islam is disrespected, seemingly particularly in USA by the WASP and similar folks is that most religions are not respected in the main by each other as there is competition and they all feel they are right !

As folks replies reveal there is plenty of historical evidence to give reason for this.

How about people just having respect for other humans regardless of creed colour etc. Just accept that their spiritual/ religious belief is not the same as yours.

There is no right or wrong, because if the war on terror is right then the point of it's existance is completely missed.

When people are angry for long periods with no resolution to their anger well typically they will lash out. Put into thwe context of where the violence is and the quagmire of the why it is, few in the west come close to understanding. I would not claim to, though I get why on the human level it gets ugly and arsehole like Ishmael do not help, like Newsweeks pathetic excuse for "oh sorry our sorce was bad"! that is irresponsible journalism, the truth can not be argued.

Let's see. We have a Muslim posting in this thread that isn't supporting your point of view. You aren't Muslim are you?

If you aren't, why do you think you have ANY mandate to speak as if you do?

Do you think they're too stupid? Have you assumed the "White Mans Burden?"

Who appointed you the defender of a faith you know enough about to stuff up an ants ass?

I have no idea what your intelligence is, but you are ignorant. Learn what you don't know before you make ignorant statements.

Ishmael

 

[BeWeBoy]

No

Let's see. We have a Muslim posting in this thread that isn't supporting your point of view. You aren't Muslim are you?

If you aren't, why do you think you have ANY mandate to speak as if you do?

Do you think they're too stupid? Have you assumed the "White Mans Burden?"

Who appointed you the defender of a faith you know enough about to stuff up an ants ass?

I have no idea what your intelligence is, but you are ignorant. Learn what you don't know before you make ignorant statements.

Ishmael

No I am not a Muslim, which is not relevant anyway.

Are you a card carrying member of the NRA, allowing the arrogance to espouse your hate on all others that do not share your veiw.

Actually I'll stop here, 'cause in another life you would be one of those despotic individuals who believes his way is the only way.

Just saddens me that you can afford a computer and there are people starving from poverty in the USA who are caucasian, christian etc because of attitudes like yours.

 

[Veryknowing]

Sorry, but sanctions are a form of inaction. They cannot result in anything.

Sanctions are a form of forced embargo, and yes they do result in plenty. Inaction is when you do nothing at all.

If a group of nations were to completely embargo all American trade, the USA would consider that an act of war - because it would be.

 

[Veryknowing]

Indeed, had the Japanese surrendered unconditionally prior to that, it would have been totally unnecessary. They did not, so it happened. Then they rethought the wisdom of fighting on, and surrendered according to the demands of the victors.

Not really.

The Japanese Emperor remained in his position as Emperor, which was the same condition that the Japanese government required in their original surrender conditions.

Since the USA and the allies didn't remove the Emperor from his position, your claim that the surrender was completely unconditional is proven to be false by the actual events of history and current political reality. I have to agree with Lovelynice and Iced_Cherry; whatever may have been written on the Instrument of Surrender made no real difference at all, and it was consequently made meaningless by the fact of the Japanese Emperor remaining as Emperor (which was a figurehead position in real political reality anyway).

If however, the USA and their allies had tried to remove the Emperor from his position the war would've kept going.

The USA had in fact let it be known to the Japanese government (by radio broadcasts) that they would agree to the one and only condition that the Japanese required. As Iced_Cherry pointed out, there are such things as verbal agreements, the USA had effectively offered such an agreement, and by the historical and political fact that the Emperor remained Emperor, it's apparent that the condition was honoured, despite what was written on a piece of paper.

You can argue all you like about what's written on paper, but in the real world, the Japanese surrender ended up with the same condition as was originally offered. The war could've easily ended in July, but if it had, the government of the USA would've lost the chance to test their shiny new horror-weapons on a couple of Japanese cities and intimidate the Soviets.

 

[Veryknowing]

Has someone already done the "Why Ishmael is Disrespected?" parody thread?

While I think that might be a great idea, I'd rather not engage in such personal attacks to that degree against someone.

I prefer to stick just the usual exchange of insults, calling him an idiot, moron, and similar things as he does the same to me. This is mutually beneficial I'm sure. This being a site with large amounts of erotica, one could consider the frequent exchange of insults as a form of S&M