 |
| Author | Post |
|---|
Psycho Gizmo
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Sun Apr 15th, 2007 08:29 am |
|
Classic Woman sent this to me to post. I thank her. I also should warn anyone who wants to remain asleep in the delusion that devout or fundamentalist Muslims anywhere intend to cooexist peacefully with non-Muslims in the world, that this will not ease your slumber.
http://www.islamreview.com/articles/americasvalues.shtml
It's discouraging to know that Islam does not teach the same values as Christianity. We Christians natrually assume that when a person is talking about God, they are talking about a being that respects the Rule of Law, since for Christians, respect for God and for the Rule of Law are synonymous. Not so with Islam. Laws are to be created and broken as serves the Jihad. Nothing more and nothing less.
Any law that they establish, any moral edict, is subject to immediate retraction or complete fundamental alteration the moment it is perceived as being in the best interests of Muslims. That is why CW and others who actually know the doctrines of Islam and of devout Muslims, insist that Islam is not a religion per se, so much as a political ideology based upon bald-faced xenophobic genocide and waton imperialism. The use of the service to Allah as a motivation for them, is only incidental to achieving their political goals. In their view, a dedication to domination of the entire world and subjugation of it to the rule of Muslims, and being "faithful" are identical. There is no "separation of Church and state" to fundamentalist Muslims. In my view most devout Muslims are more-accurately described as "devout imperialists, atheists or Satan-worshippers who like to think of and project the image of themselves as Godly", than as actual followers of anything that might be described as "God" or "Godly".
So what, you may ask, is the value of liberating Iraqis, if they will only revert to Islam? The answer is plain. Once the brutality and abject poverty is erased from Iraq, few will feel compelled to follow militant, fundamentalist Islam, since it has always been historically, merely the only cohesive element that allowed diffuse tribes and villages in that part of the world to unite effectively against common adversaries or invaders.
Since we are gradually doing exactly what we said we would in Iraq - allowing them to take over their country and run it by themselves again after we eliminated the most-dangerous terrorist networks and the most violent criminal leaders, the lies of the Muslim fanatics will be revealed. They have said all along that the Western Coalition intended to take all of the oil and territory for themselves, and that is obviously not happening at all. This will prevent militant, fundamentalist Islam from gaining more supporters for their imperialistic, fascist ambitions.
It is no coincidence that Islam flourishes mostly in nations with very high poverty rates. When you feel that you have very little to live for, fanatical doctrines, and suicidal glory seem far more appealing than if you have a decent place to live, enough food to eat, have a decent job to support your family with, and have prospects for an even more-pleasant and more-personally-fulfilling future. Islam preys on poverty and hopelessness, and that is what is methodically being removed in Iraq and throughout the region.
The reason that Iran doesn't try to ameliorate the poverty of it's citizens (breaking all of the promises of the "liberators" in the 1970's Iranian Revolution) is the same reason that Dune author Frank Herbert's mythical Emperor Shaddam and Baron Harkonnen did not gentle the conditions on Geidi Prime or on Salusa Secundus. The creation of willing fanatics is best accomplished in an environment of severe deprivation and oppression of the populace.
Democracy fosters prosperity. And that is why Islam cannot hope to succeed in holding the populations of their regions enslaved. Once the citizens of Iraq (and elsewhere) realize that those who offer them physical freedom are also offering them ideological freedom, they will abandon Islam as the antiquated pseudo- spiritual entity it really is.
As I've said before, if Muslims really wanted to be good and sincere followers of God, they'd probably abandon Islam for some other genuine religion that allows true mysticism or spiritual endeavor within it's doctrines, and does not demand that they be part of a xenophobic conspiracy to dominate or kill anyone who is not exactly like them in every way- as does fundamentalist Islam. Devout Muslims cannot be good people (as we understand them) by definition. Their own "religion" forbids them from putting moral doctrine before factional supremacy. That's one reason why Muslims are so quick to murder each other. Their religion tells them that it's not O.K. just to be a good Muslim, they must also be dominant socially and culturally over any other faction in their environment. Just exactly the way that reptiles behave. Fundamentalist Muslims behave more like reptiles than like mammals.
And any religion that places self-interest before morality or the Rule of Law is clearly pathological and horribly dangerous in the Real World and will not find itself compatible with the prevailing modern ideologies of the 21st century. Making up the rules as you go is just a Second and Third World thing. We civilized nations stopped acting that way a thousand years ago. It's time for Islam to catch up with the rest of the world and put the Rule of Law before the interests of personal or factional supremacy. Then and only then will they be on track to becoming truly civilized and prosperous as a united people.
The Rule of Law matters. And so does having a genuine belief in some consistent, fair moral doctrine, as opposed to maintaining a contrived, wholly-spurious excuse to behave like a fraternity of vicious predatory reptiles under the pretense of following the will of some supposedly war-and-politics-obsessed "god" who ostensibly calls himself, "Allah". A " god" that is so insecure, that he demands that his followers remind him of how great he is and how worthless they are, by prostrating themselves like slaves to him at least six times per day.
Last edited on Sun Apr 15th, 2007 08:45 am by
|
Psycho Gizmo
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu May 24th, 2007 01:03 am |
|
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,274934,00.html
Gosh, what a surprise. Nearly three-of-ten American Muslims polled say that they approve of terrorism against civilians!!! So much for the devout Muslim's claims of being the "religion of peace", eh? Monsters all. Deportation is too gentle for such savage degenerates. If there was simple justice, these horribly-diseased creatures would be treated the way a Christian in their land would be treated under the same circumstances.
Classic Woman pointed the above out a long, long time ago. She said that this was the rule not the exception with many, many Muslims and she was mercilessly, viciously castigated on this forum for expressing that view. As I recall, good old Corvus and others said that she was in essence, "a hate-filled kook who was way off base and out of touch with reality" as I recall. I wonder if any appologies will be forthcoming from Mr. Corvus and his associates some day? I'm not holding my breath. A heartfelt expression of appology for gross affrontery is a rarity that I have seldom witnessed on any internet forum. It's far more convenient and fun to plead mitigations like a big prevaricating sissy than to stand up, admit error and appologise like a man.
If any such views as voiced above about killing Muslim civilians in the name of Chrisitanity were expressed in a Muslim country by Christians living there, they would be arrested, jailed and probably executed for crimes against Islam. Such a huge disparity between our civilization and devout violence-addicted devout Muslims can never be bridged. The Prosperos V. the Calibans. The Reasoned v. the Chaotic. The Peace-Loving v. The Disciples of Unrepentant Xenophobic Paranoia. Little changes over the centuries. It's even more-basically the Rational and Calmly Considered Caretakers v. the Irrational, Desperate Haters of Modern Civilization. The Mature v. the Infantile.
Classic Woman, you have once again, been vindicated by the news. And where is Corvus? I note that after he successfully helped to drive Classic Woman away he just vanished (as I predicted to Roy that he would). No doubt after his vindictive deed was done, he lost all interest in the Grove. He derived his amusement from bullying Classic Woman and assuaging his own perverse, liberal-guilt-ridden conscience, which drove him to verbally assault, denigrate and insult the one person who was trying to tell him the truth about his own universe.
If Christ were to return, He would surely be criucified a second time. This species is not interested in the Truth. Only in the lesser truths that they want to hear.
I should have known that was the best way for anyone in this world to invite abuse. To tell the truth that others do not want to hear. I hope that some day, after certain parties appologise to her, she will return to share more of her valuable insights with us about the horrific dangers and utter monstrousness of modern fundamentalist Islam.
Before it's too late. If it's not already. See, the point that nobody wants to admit is that Islam itself is an institution that blatnetly advocates such atrocities in it's own doctrine. It requires no parsing to find this encouragement in the text of the Koran. The stated doctrines of Islam themselves literally encourage all manner of inhuman behavior, without any ambiguity at all. That is what some of us seem to be having a hard time acccepting. It's right in our faces and we just can't quite believe that any so-called "religion" could be this f*cked up!
Well, we Westerners had all better wake up fast, because time is running out for us to prepare for the next militant Muslim/Arab onslaught. And the Fundamentalist Islamist/Militant Arab's know it, even if we Westerners struggle and squirm to deny the obvious - the Muslims themselves know that they are capable of destroying our civilization, even if their dreams of conquest are childish fantasies born of ignorance and abysmally low intellectual capacity.They can only destroy us, but they will never enslave us to worship of Satan (whom they call, "Allah"!).
Trust me, most FI/MA's would settle for simply wrecking the world if they believed that they could not dominate it. Like any infantile person. That is why militant Muslims/Arabs have to be totally and utterly neutralized by any and all necessary means If there is an almighty God, he must really, really hate modern Islam. It' nothing more than a fraternity of childish imbeciles with heavy weapons and massive, oil-revenue-derived funding to play with.
Salmon Rhushdie was correct in spades when he called the Koran, "the Satanic Verses". You may not like it folks, but if you are honest, you will accept it as the truth and deal with it on that basis. No more excuses from them or from us on their behalf. Devout Muslims just suck as a species and they sort of half know it themselves. The "religion of peace" is nothing more or less than blasphemous, institutionalized violent insanity with no legitimate basis whatsoever in God or Godliness. Period. It's not a religion, it's a political/philosophical ploy that simply uses a supposed-link to spirituality as a thinly-veiled excuse to carry on a purely secular campaign of wanton, selfish violent fascist Imperialism upon the world.
If devout Muslims are becoming pariahs in the free civilized world, they have only done it to themselves by their ceaseless active and tacit support/tolerance for the worst imaginable criminal violence by their compatriots. We do not see Christian forces deliberately targeting civilians in Muslim countries and we never will. Unlike devout Muslims, Christians would rather die than to become Satanic in the pursuit of their Earthly aspirations.
It's way past time for arrest, jail and deportation for any Muslim who openly advocates or condones terrorism against civilians or violent overthrow of any free government! Now. If the U.S. government doesn't start taking effective steps to remove such infestations from our society, vigilantes probably will. And we all know what happens when the yokels try to adminstrate justice without the guidance of the law. Innocent people inevitably get hurt.
Here's some advice to any Muslims reading this - CONVERT TO SOME OTHER RELIGION OR GO SECULAR BEFORE IT'S TOO LATE TO SAVE YOUR OWN LIVES SOULS!!Islam is the religion of Satan in our times. Pure and simple. Wake the f*ck up people! The Dream is Over. If you pursue militant Islam with global conquest in mind, you may well die screaming as your only significant reward.
The Constant Vigilance of Freedom means being ever-ready to confront the thret of overt violence, even on it's own terms sometimes. Since we can't negotiate with fanatics, we will treat them the same way we have treated all of the other violent lunatic movements in history. Total neutralization.
We will wipe out the 21 century Nazis, just like we did the 20th century ones. Even if some of us demand to be allowed to keep their heads buried firmly in the sand ...
Last edited on Thu May 24th, 2007 01:15 am by
|
Roy
Quasi-Infallible Egocentric Tyrant
| Joined: | Mon Apr 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | Washington USA |
| Posts: | 4324 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Thu May 24th, 2007 01:46 am |
|
No, Corvus came around after getting over the initial shock. He moved toward CW's position, while she didn't give an inch of ground on anything.
Corvus has a new job where he is completely in charge and keeps me posted. It is understandable that he is too busy to post. I almost am too busy to post myself.
When did CW get over the "initial shock" that Corvus, Helgi and me had been grossly mistreated by Christianity?
For me and Helgi, changing our positions about Christianity was pure hell and something that has taken and will continue to take a toll. Don't feel sorry for us. That, plainly and simply, is why we are here on Earth.
As Rudlolf Steiner said: we are not here to be happy. We are here to fulfull a task. You need to take historical Christianity off the pedestal.
And, as Helgi said to me just a few hours ago, talking over the computer, most of the left's message actually comes out of Christianity's denial of the warrior and the basic need of egoism (as opposed to egotism).
Yes, yes, I am paraphrasing here. But CW went ballistic everytime we got into discusion.
About the new report:
Frankly I don't think we need any more immigrants here for at least a decade. Anyone who won't assimilate should find their visa expired and have to go.
Not assimilating means not learning English and holding allegiances to foreign powers above the US.
You keep arguing that eliminating corruption and poverty will moderate the Muslims of Iraq. I think that it is more difficult than that. The movement to a higher consciousness always threatens the lower consciousness and leads to inquisitions, revolutions, and deviant forms as well as more advanced ones like liberal democracy.
Ablut your Rx for Muslims: In the first place, the relative absence of poverty in the US should insure the Muslims accepted our way of life. But it is obvious that a very wide swath of their society does not our way of life and wants "Londonistan" here. Yes, it is a minority, but it a big minority.
You can't argue that Iraqis will come around once peace has been established and a non-corrupt, nor-repressive gov't put in charge looking at "Londonistan" and the statistics on the US Muslims.
Yet, you continue to hold those contradictory postions.
Exhorting Muslims to change won't do. Ask yourself why they hold those positions. Look at why we hold the positions we hold. How did you come to change your positions as you matured ?
It's not a religion, it's a political/philosophical ploy that simply uses a supposed-link to spirituality as a thinly-veiled excuse to carry on a purely secular campaign of wanton, selfish violent fascist Imperialism upon the world.
When the pope sent his armies to wipe out the Albingensians, the Cathars, wasn't there a selfish violent imperialism at work there?
Didn't the Spanish Inquisition kill a greater percentage of the Jewish population of Spain than Hitler did in Europe? That is what I have read.
How and why did we change? But, of course, we didn't change soon enough to stop "Christians" of Germany from killing quite a few innocent children in other countries.
The sins of America in settling America, including the sins of Catholic Portugal and Spain, were on that level. Yes, most died of diseases, but we stole and killed where we didn't need to, didn't we?
Last edited on Thu May 24th, 2007 02:28 am by Roy
____________________
"The force and degree of a man's inner benevolence evokes in others a proportionate degree of ill-will" - Gurdjieff
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." — George Orwell
|
Roy
Quasi-Infallible Egocentric Tyrant
| Joined: | Mon Apr 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | Washington USA |
| Posts: | 4324 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu May 24th, 2007 02:40 am |
|
And didn't you learn enough history, PG, to understand the significance of the US's being the first place in modern times to be officially, legally tolerant?
Pennsylvania was settled by Quakers looking to escape persecution by Episcopalians, while Scottish Catholics left their persecution in the UK to come here to Maryland.
Georgia was settled by French Protestants who ran away from the big massacre in France where, one day, all of a sudden, the Catholics went apeshit and killed thousands of French Protestants, often seizing their property or eliminating business rivals.
The Puritans also sought relief in the US from persecution.
All these groups were fleeing persecution by other Christians. That is why I don't get where your "Christians would never" is based on.
http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel01.html is about the history of the US.
____________________
"The force and degree of a man's inner benevolence evokes in others a proportionate degree of ill-will" - Gurdjieff
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." — George Orwell
|
Roy
Quasi-Infallible Egocentric Tyrant
| Joined: | Mon Apr 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | Washington USA |
| Posts: | 4324 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu May 24th, 2007 07:40 am |
|
Execution of Mennonites 
This engraving depicts the execution of David van der Leyen and Levina Ghyselins, described variously as Dutch Anabaptists or Mennonites, by Catholic authorities in Ghent in 1554. Strangled and burned, van der Leyen was finally dispatched with an iron fork. Bracht's Martyr's Mirror is considered by modern Mennonites as second only in importance to the Bible in perpetuating their faith. Murder of David van der Leyen and Levina Ghyselins, Ghent, 1554
Engraving by J. Luyken, from T. J. V. Bracht (or Thieleman van Braght), Het Bloedig Tooneel De Martelaers Spiegel. . . .
Amsterdam: J. van der Deyster, et al., 1685
Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Library of Congress (1)
 A Jesuit Disemboweled
Jesuits like John Ogilvie (Ogilby) (1580-1615) were under constant surveillance and threat from the Protestant governments of England and Scotland. Ogilvie was sentenced to death by a Glasgow court and hanged and mutilated on March 10, 1615.
John Ogilvie (Ogilby), Societas Jesu, 1615
Engraving from Mathias Tanner, Societas Jesu usque ad sanguinis et vitae profusionem Militans. . . .
Prague: Typis Universitatis Carolo-Ferdinandeae, 1675
Rare Book and Special Collections Division, Library of Congress (4)
Now, what is it that finally got us past all this?
For the Calvinist Dutch, it was business.
____________________
"The force and degree of a man's inner benevolence evokes in others a proportionate degree of ill-will" - Gurdjieff
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." — George Orwell
|
Psycho Gizmo
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu May 24th, 2007 04:30 pm |
|
Well, if Roy wants to talk about what's wrong with organized Christianity in an historical context on another thread, he is welcome and I'll read it with interest.
Here and now on this thread, I reiterate the topic for discussion is: "How Militant Islam Uses Western Culture Against Itself".
I'm no longer a Grove moderator and yet I find myself still in that role from time to time. Strong minds are willful and capricious. They like to go where they like to go. I'm not complaining mind you all, I'm just sayin' I think we have categories and discreet topic threads for a good reason...
Last edited on Thu May 24th, 2007 04:32 pm by
|
Roy
Quasi-Infallible Egocentric Tyrant
| Joined: | Mon Apr 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | Washington USA |
| Posts: | 4324 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu May 24th, 2007 05:52 pm |
|
We do not see Christian forces deliberately targeting civilians in Muslim countries and we never will. Unlike devout Muslims, Christians would rather die than to become Satanic in the pursuit of their Earthly aspirations.
"We never will", but I have to add that we have. Great pledge and too bad historic Christians didn't know about this. If the past is any indication, then it isn't true, looking at Constantinople's rape and all the rest.
All the rest would be, by the recent past, hardly an indication as auspicious as you would want to believe.
Yes, there is some attempt to avoid this now, but what was Dresden about then? Not a deliberate targetting of civilians? The firebombing of Tokyo which killed 100,000 people a night was designed to destroy their capacity to house themselves and break their spirit. Was that "Christian"?
This comment of yours has elements of hysteria in it, hysteria as in the substitution of the emotional center for work that the intellectual center needs to do.
So, historically, we haven't been able to live up to that ideal, and you know it.
You and CW have a narcissistic attitude about Christianity. You don't get Christianity, frankly, and I am surprised, but now I understand why you thought it strange that I expected CW to read some Jung. I know you need to do it as well, but I don't think you will until you crash and burn.
America was founded by Christians who had been persecuted by other "Christians" in Europe. In America, the attitudes changed over time and in the context of our Founding Fathers whose religion, Freemasonry, and whose religious spirit, something called "universalism" if I am not mistaken, triumphed over parochial prejudices and religious hysteria.
Entire villages of Amerindians were killed or enslaved. When the enslaving didn't work, Christian Dutchmen, Englishmen, Portuguese and Spaniards bought African slaves from Muslim slave merchants in West Africa, trading them for rum and then for tobacco in a profitable run called "the Golden Triangle".
Even now in the world, we have spent billions of dollars to stop the Christian Catholics and Protestants of Northern Ireland from killing each other.
You have succumbed to being the right-wing version of Gene Jacob and, frankly, I am surprised.
Just like Gene Jacob, you completely idealize your side and demonize the other. You contradict CW about the possibility of democratizing Iraq and other Muslim countries.
You refuse to answer any questions which I pose. What the hell are you afraid of? That if your position is fallible it will turn you into a surrender monkey?
Gesu Christu!
Last edited on Thu May 24th, 2007 07:03 pm by Roy
____________________
"The force and degree of a man's inner benevolence evokes in others a proportionate degree of ill-will" - Gurdjieff
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." — George Orwell
|
Clemsy
Honored Fellow Grover
| Joined: | Mon Nov 14th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 138 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Thu May 24th, 2007 06:26 pm |
|
Nearly three-of-ten American Muslims polled say that they approve of terrorism against civilians!!!
You know, it's interesting. I get the feeling that 30% number crosses lines, although translates differently according to culture.
Example, around 30% of Americans polled consider torture acceptable for terror suspects. Over 40% consider physical abuse appropriate for terror suspects.
I would suspect that number would go up when considering military operations in which large numbers of civilians are killed.
Now I'm not saying to discount your statment, PG. I do wonder, however, if this isn't an expression of human nature and we would be doing ourselves a disservice by focusing all our attention on on one demographic when we are just as prone to similar behavior ourselves.
One wonders... if we can address that honestly than, perhaps, some effective counter could be conceived.
Most certainly, though, addressing the issue should be lensed through justice, and justice is never visceral.
Acceptance of terrorism, torture and abuse is visceral.
The reverse, of course is that 70% of all are against these things.
That is encouraging. Any behaviorist worth his salt would look for factors in both groups which contribute to those tendencies, then work on reinforcing the acceptable and extiguishing the other.
____________________
“There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box.” ~Admiral William Fallon
|
Psycho Gizmo
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 12:05 am |
|
Roy wrote :
What the hell are you afraid of?
Well my goodness gracious me, that may be the crux of what's the matter here! It's not fear at all, despite your vehement, ceaseless assertions to the contrary (morbid wishful thinking?), it's indifference, Roy. Pure and simple lack of interest on my part. Excuse me for living !
Somewhere along the line did it become taboo in Roy's mind not to talk about certain things on the Grove? The only one who seems to be upset (since Corvus is just too busy to post on the Grove anymore at all) about originators of topics trying to talk about what they want to talk about, is Roy. Hence the constant browbeating, badgering and hammering to discuss things that Roy wants to discuss, when Roy wants to discuss them that frankly, seems more than a little narcissistic to me.
If this obsessive fascination with the flaws of organized Christianity throughout history interests you so much, why hijack another's thread? Why not just post your own topic and go to town? Is it possibly because nobody responds when you do that? Hmmm. Maybe that should tell you something...about a general lack of interest in discussing that whole thing, perhaps. Whatever!
For the ten thousandth time, Roy - (what do we call men who have ears but hear not?) if you or anyone else wants to talk about what you think is wrong with Christianity in the context of it's history in the previous 20 centuries, feel free!!! - ON YOUR OWN THREAD !!
The topic here on my thread is militant Islam's infiltration into non-Muslim Culture. Can you not see that no nerd temper-tantrum or thinly-veiled taunting (PG, you're chicken to talk about it!) or criticism is going to knock me off track? Maybe Roy should change his title from meager tyrant to full-fledged Autarch- then we could all known and expect up front that our own choices of topics will never be acceptible unless the Supreme Ruler approves it in content, style and context?
Come on! Please just give it a rest...
Last edited on Fri May 25th, 2007 12:40 am by
|
Clemsy
Honored Fellow Grover
| Joined: | Mon Nov 14th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 138 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 12:44 am |
|
:One more very deep sigh:
Okay Psycho. I give. I'll leave your threads alone. Roy, I need a rolling eyed emoticon right here.
Last edited on Fri May 25th, 2007 12:45 am by Clemsy
____________________
“There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box.” ~Admiral William Fallon
|
Psycho Gizmo
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 01:15 am |
|
Clemsy wrote: :One more very deep sigh:
Okay Psycho. I give. I'll leave your threads alone. Roy, I need a rolling eyed emoticon right here.
Oh, don't be so melodramatic Clemsy. I thought better of replying to your post as I did, so I removed it about ten seconds before you posted above. Even though I hate your signature these days, and think it beneath a person of normal intellect, at least your above post had some substantive content worthy of addressing, which I did below.
What I will refer to in response to your above wel-intentioned suggestion about "bridging the bigotry gap," is the science fiction feature film Indpendence Day. The scene where the president is trying to talk with an alien about the coexistence of their races, and the president asks the alien, "What do want us to do for you?" to which the alien replies, "Die!"
In our culture, it is difficult to get our heads around the concept that someone does not intend to ever negotiate in good faith - that they invite needless destruction as their base platform of address. That they are not sane enough to be reluctant to turn to violence as a first resort. When a faction takes a stand that says in effect, "We only want to dominate all of you, kill you or if we can't, to destroy your world in the process," the only rational response is to surrender or to annihilate them. What on Earth is the alternative? How does one negotiate with a faction that has no interest whatsoever in negotiation? Who will you negotiate with if the terrorists tell us to "go fuck yourselves" every time we approach their leaders with diplomatic efforts? With ourselves?
What is simplest is most difficult, because our Judeao Christian, law-and-morality based doctrines tend to leave us feeling disoriented when we confront any system of belief that is singularly amoral - and unchanging with circumstances or context. The fundie Islamists are betting that if they wait long enough, our own "liberal" guilt will drive us to more and more compromise with them, until they have completed their mission and fully infiltrated our cultures with espionage networks. Then they will strike - when we think that we are safe. Just as they did in 2001 and several more times since.
Civilians who have never known combat or the loss of war personally, have a bad habit of thinking only like civilians. The Islamists train and indoctrinate their population to think like guerillas at war, not civilians. Ideas of peace do not excite them much at all. The only thing that really excites them is the idea of defeating the Western Hegemony and taking it's place. They derive no ego-satisfaction from any morality-derived doctrine, since they are essentially amoral atheists holding up a banner of religion as a shield for their operations, that is entirely utterly bogus as spirituality. And many Muslims seem to know their claims of religious faith and "love of God" are bogus.
When dealing with collective psychotic minds, the only thing that works to neutralize them is firm boundary-enforcement. It takes two to make peace, but only one to make war and that is the delimma of our time in relation to militant Islam. In my experience, most Muslims do not give a rat's *ss about "Peace on Earth". Peace to them is only for themselves after they have neutralized or exterminated everyone who openly opposes them.
Think of them as a fraternity of crazy Charles Mansons and then suggest to me that they need to be negotiated with and "finessed" as if they were normal, rational reasonable beings. Not all human-seeming hominids are capable of normal reactions, rational thinking or sane discourse. Ask a criminal psychologist if psychopathic killers are "human beings" and they will tell you, "No way!" Psychopaths are te closest things on Earth to aliens from another planet. See, the truth is that some hominids are merely animals who have learned speech and to cover their genitals in public. So with many, many Muslims - they approach life form the position of belief in psychotic ideas-of-reference about how much more deserving they are of being in control than any any others of different mind. Not all Muslims are deeply psychotic (ruled by schizo-affective anger) or overtly sinister perhaps, but so many of them are or are dominant over the others, that the danger needs to be directly addressed as such, apart from any experimental, altruistic plan to establish communications and dialogue with the "Muslim World".
But this does raise another idea that I've been thinking on. It seems to me that human beings really are more like a vast race of aliens all living together than beings with like minds and similar natures. The ability for humans to truly communicate as opposed to simply mouthing words and terms at each other often seems as impaired as it would be if we were all truly from completely dissimilar alien worlds.
Attitude is the key to effective communication, and the attitude of millions of militant fundamentalist Muslims in the U.S. is, "accept us unconditionally or we will cause TROUBLE"! The message of misguided pollyannas is, "accept them anyway!" That seems as irrational to me as trusting a known psychopath in the belief that they will "suddenly wake up and change their ways by virtue of some stirring of moral conscience caused by our love"...hah! That is what they are counting on - our abiity to deceive ourselves about they and their intentions. God save us from that type of magical thinking that believes psychotic characterological disorders can be cured with "love and understanding". Ptui! Guns and bombs are what they understand and a foot on their throat is the only position from with to effectively negotiate with a fanatic or a terrorist.
Why do people have such a hard time believing that there are bad people in the world who respect nothing but brute force and for whom fear is synonymous with respect? Maybe because our own culture is so advanced in comparison, that such people are very, very rare in our land. Like it or not, there are millions of Muslims who will only repsect you or your government when they see a willingness and an ability to harm them greatly.
And frankly, if it's "me or them" who gets neutralized, I have no problem with it being "them". Maybe we should teach classes in Self Preservation Instinct to remind some of our more-dissociated, free-floating, overly-intellectual citizens of our evolutionary basis in feeling good about defending ourselves and our own families.
Last edited on Fri May 25th, 2007 01:51 am by
|
Clemsy
Honored Fellow Grover
| Joined: | Mon Nov 14th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 138 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 02:04 am |
|
Oh, don't be so melodramatic Clemsy.
LOL! Hey, whatever works...
Honestly, I just had two glasses of a fine Peruvian red with pasta slathered in a nice black and green olive tomato sauce, so I really can't do more than a quick skim of your, as usual, lengthy post.
But still, after doing so I can only ask...
How can you be so sure? Aren't your own assumptions grounded in your own emotions? Isn't there ever any room for doubt?
Oh I know, I know. Don't I ever have any room for doubt?
Yes. Constantly. But they never pan out. They always get blown away, like sandcastles, by the facts... as I read them.
If 30% of American Muslims support terrorism against civilians, doesn't that leave 70% to work with?
Are you really drawing a parallel with Independence Day's ugly, smelly buggers?
Do we have to kill them all, Ender?
But then, I am keyboarding under the influence...
Last edited on Fri May 25th, 2007 02:05 am by Clemsy
____________________
“There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box.” ~Admiral William Fallon
|
Psycho Gizmo
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 03:03 am |
|
Wow! Nothing wrong with that! Maybe even top it off with a Macanudo if you like. Even the ladies love the aroma of that brand...
Yossarian finally sat back in satisfied fatigue, his mouth filmy with a succulent residue... Catch-22
The Independence Day reference above was to highlight the aspect of basic strategic thinking in which one must always appraise the worst and best scenarios that will result from one or the other approaches. We do not often think about the worst scenarios invoked by accepting the presence and activities of Muslims and their "religious" organizations on our shores - only the best.
If Islam is dominated by the militant, intolerant, xenophobic elements within it(which the evidence strongly suggests that it is), then the movement itself or what biologist might call, the "active aspect" of Islam is wholly characterized by the element in control and the non-active elements are operatively irrelevent. Therefore, to try to deal "piecemeal" with Muslims who follow and adhere to and support the greater efforts of their organization is futile, since they are aligned with and support the activities of their group as if it was monolithic.
To suggest that such a thing as selective engagement with "non-violent Muslims" is possible, is to suggest that perhaps the error of diplomacy in WWII was that we did not identify and communicate effectively with "those Nazis who weren't all that thrilled with the idea of world-domination, genocide and murderous pogroms". I doubt that this would have been effective then with 20th century Nazis, and I doubt that it can be done now with 21st century ones.
If "moderate" Muslims were serious about participating in a religion that truly expressed their desire to be non-violent and peaceful, perhaps they could reconsider Islam as that vehicle? Just as those Germans who did not wish to assent to the meanness of the Nazis, would have been better advised to simply take off the brown shirts and stop going to the meetings than, to have tried to "work within the Nazi system".
The Great Reforms of Christianity took place when large numbers of Christians migrated from their previous church organizations and started their own apart. The Protestants, Presbyterians, Baptists, Lutherans, etc., all rejected the domination of the prevailing administrations based upon moral conflict with their doctrines/policies, and formed their own sects, no longer giving money or support to their former peers in search of worshiping God in a way closer to their true hearts.
That is obviously what Islam needs if it is not to collapse as an institution altogether - a reformation movement that will empower their non-violent members to march beyond the diseased, decrepit leadership of their present state into a New Age of Enlightenment. Muslims clearly need to change their alliegenice and affiliations dramtically in order to become the types of People that a Loving God will bless as his children, and not curse as a fraternity of savage, violence-addicted, power-mad mass-murderers rampaging around the planet (and pressumably, the universe eventually) like ravenous reptiles or insects, and doing it all in His name.
If there really is a God, he must hate, hate, hate Islam as it exists today, dominated and utterly controlled by terrorism-supporting members who use His name like a "magic shield" against criticism or resistance as they advance their wanton, secular political/xenophobic agendas, suitably disguised as a "religion".
Hell, if I ascribe to the doctrines of Genghis Khan or Alstair Crowley and just slap a label on it that says it's now a "religion," does that suddenly make it a legitimate religion? Anyone with any system of beliefs can always claim to be a legitimate "religion". But as in all things in life, simply claiming that we are something does not necessarily make it so... I love to call myself "rich", but so far, no bank has been overly-anxious to endorse that view as legitimate.
Last edited on Fri May 25th, 2007 03:16 am by
|
Roy
Quasi-Infallible Egocentric Tyrant
| Joined: | Mon Apr 4th, 2005 |
| Location: | Washington USA |
| Posts: | 4324 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 04:19 am |
|
YES, PG, YOU ARE AFRAID OF DISCUSSING THE FALINGS OF THE CHURCH.
I lived through hell as did Helgi and perhaps Corvus. Why don't you think about this?
 
Early Christianity causes WW1 and WW2-- Well argued!, April 28, 1998
Reviewer: Roy from San Francisco, CA. USA
I read the book almost 22 years ago, and after living in Europe, having grown up Catholic, it is painfully obvious that the theological failure of the Church (Roman and Protestant) is primarily responsible for the failed spiritualization of Europe and consequently, the West.
Students of Jung, Ouspensky and Gurdjieff, and Castaneda or even fans of the book Jesus, The Man, will find this book a confirmation of the idea that real spirituality in the West has been subverted historically by a group of narrow power-oriented "lawyers" (read: theologians and church bureaucrats) who created a monstrous doctrine out of the Christian experience that could not withstand the ravages of science, and whose failure opened the floodgates for nationalism, for the magnification of unredeemed ego expression through the industrialization of war. It is not necessary to believe in reincarnation to embrace the central thesis of this well-written, fascinating book.
I posted that at Yahoo when I got back from Europe after ten years of living there.
Yes, Christianity's failure to spiritualize Europe led to all those wars and atrocities and my own problematic life. Not to whine and complain because dealing with all this is clearly my karma. I accept the challenge.
But what kind of Christian are you? Do you attend church? Do you think Jesus is literally a son of God, not a realized human who embodies that truth? What is a Christian?
I repeat: what is a Christian? Who is a Christian? And is Christianity not responsible for condemning the warrior? Isn't that a lot of the reason why we have become lemmings?
So, you don't understand Gurdieff and Jung or you just disagree and want to go back to some previous century?
____________________
"The force and degree of a man's inner benevolence evokes in others a proportionate degree of ill-will" - Gurdjieff
"In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act." — George Orwell
|
Psycho Gizmo
Guest
| Joined: | |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 05:32 am |
|
O.K. We'll talk about your new topic here since it's so important to you, Roy. But don't complain if I start talking about the dangers of fundie Islam when you take Constantinople to task some time.
All I will say to that at this point is that I think it is a mistake in logic to say that because the modern world failed to spiritualize (as you put it) enough to prevent the onset of WWI and WWII it was ergo, "Christianity's fault".
Also, there are a lot of factors in how World Wars start. Some say it was a conspiracy of industrialists with the cooperation of foolish political zealots played as pawns. Who is to say conclusively which social condition is the most-contributory to the onslaught of open hostilities in those wars? One may speculate perhaps, but is it possible to scientifically assign "cause" to any one factor, such as the spiritual values of the society? Psycho-history, (such as Azimov character Harry Seldon's creation), is an interesting myth (at least to me).
True that enlightened people are not inclined to start wars of aggression. But is it also true that the Jungian psychological movement consists of "true Jungians" and bogus pseudo Jungians" neither of whom is likely to acknowledge the validity of the other?
Why must suddenly organized Christianity, of all the world's prevailing doctrines or philosophical systems, be the ONLY ONE THAT IS TO BE HELD ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE FAILURE OF THE WORLD TO AVOID WWI and WWII?? I guess I just don't get the logical progression for that purport.
Last edited on Fri May 25th, 2007 05:41 am by
|
Clemsy
Honored Fellow Grover
| Joined: | Mon Nov 14th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 138 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 11:09 am |
|
The Great Reforms of Christianity took place when large numbers of Christians migrated from their previous church organizations and started their own apart. The Protestants, Presbyterians, Baptists, Lutherans, etc., all rejected the domination of the prevailing administrations based upon moral conflict with their doctrines/policies, and formed their own sects, no longer giving money or support to their former peers in search of worshiping God in a way closer to their true hearts.
That is obviously what Islam needs if it is not to collapse as an institution altogether - a reformation movement that will empower their non-violent members to march beyond the diseased, decrepit leadership of their present state into a New Age of Enlightenment.
Very true. I agree with this 100%. How are they best going to do this? By living in industrialized, first world countries with all the amenities: TV, Internet, central air, large book stores with snack bars where they can read great science fiction, v-neck blouses, rock-n-roll, string bikinis , decent education, political discourse from the ugly to the sublime, etc. (Did I mention string bikinis?)
But catching up to the 21st century will take a little while and will, no doubt, be difficult, if not downright violent, at times.
One of our own largest flaws is a pathological lack of patience, and this will literally require the patience of Ghandi.
I think a big problem for many of the Mideast countries is also one of ours but for a different reason: oil. Oil economies have no reason to utilize, therefore educate, their human resources, keeping the people medieval at best. We need to minimize the oil in the equation.
Of course the biggest problem for those countries are totalitarian states which limit the people's access to information and basic rights, which keep them from their own period of Enlightenment.
But it is a huge mistake to believe these things can be 'gifted' from without. It needs to result from an internal desire.
I consider it a huge mistake that the West is currently stirring the Middle East with a big stick. This will only maintain a status quo of chaos and despair in which people with access to lots of explosives feel themselves to have nothing to lose and heaven to gain, and are directed by their own leaders to blame their problems on external factors rather than... their own leaders.
Interesting that there is one country over there with a history of secular democracy and an internal movement to liberalize. However, it also has a powerful nationalistic reflex, which should make the wise pause to consider the most effective manner of foreign intervention.
Last edited on Fri May 25th, 2007 11:13 am by Clemsy
____________________
“There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box.” ~Admiral William Fallon
|
*Phil*
Opinionated Interventionist
| Joined: | Thu Apr 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | North Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 3587 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: |  |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 01:42 pm |
|
Roy, Europe was nearly %100 Christian with some minorities. To say Christians in Europe killed poeple is a feature of Christianity is a false distinction. People organizie killing other people for all sorts of ideological and personal reasons. The question must be explicity stated at the outset - what is it?
Clemsey, You claim torturing and murdering women and children are equivalent to torturing terrorists. Apparently you use an unspoken similarity criteria, I'd like you to explain it so I can understand how you come to this assertion. It seems to me you are saying in muslim culture torturing the innocent is morally ok and in Western Christian culture has stronger subject selection criteria. Are you taking a multiculturalism stance? It seems to me that identifying the differences between these two cultures is vital to understanding where and how to bridge this fatal gap.
Between Roy and Clemsey I'm tempted to assert that Western consciousness, on average, is higher than Muslim.
My esteemed collegues of the Grove Gentlemen's Club
If we grace the Muslim world with our formidable presence, we will show the Arabs and the Persians, the anthromorphics, the sodomites, the Lifeboaters, and the common riffraff, that our Grove is truly dignified. Being Gentlemen a gentle and genteel solution is to be preferred. We shall lead the unwashed masses by example. Perhaps eventually through exposure to ourselves, the plebes will one day acquire some of the superior manners and bearing of Gentlemen.
____________________
Pecca fortiter, sed fortius fide et gaude in Christo!
Galactic Signature: Blue Self-Existing Monkey
|
Clemsy
Honored Fellow Grover
| Joined: | Mon Nov 14th, 2005 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 138 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 07:24 pm |
|
Clemsey, You claim torturing and murdering women and children are equivalent to torturing terrorists. Apparently you use an unspoken similarity criteria, I'd like you to explain it so I can understand how you come to this assertion. It seems to me you are saying in muslim culture torturing the innocent is morally ok and in Western Christian culture has stronger subject selection criteria.
Oh my no. I said:
I do wonder, however, if this isn't an expression of human nature and we would be doing ourselves a disservice by focusing all our attention on on one demographic when we are just as prone to similar behavior ourselves.
I also said:
Most certainly, though, addressing the issue should be lensed through justice, and justice is never visceral.
Acceptance of terrorism, torture and abuse is visceral.
Accepting torture of anyone is not that far from accepting torture of everyone. Once that door is open no one is safe. Once the door to terrorism is open, no one is safe.
Now at the risk of annoying the hell out of everyone, let me say that one's terrorism is another's acceptable method of conducting war. Whether one targets civilians or kills them by mistake matters little and, as far as I'm concerned, neither is justifiable as each guarantees the continuation of more civilian deaths. (As an aside for the moment, as a target, at least a civilian is awarded a certain value. As 'collateral damage', one's value is zero.)
My point is that human beings have a tendency to engage in this behavior. According to the polls noted above by PG and myself, the majority of people do not support this behavior. Differences in culture are important. When it comes to the MidEastern Muslim mind, we're in the Middle Ages and beyond. However, regardless of culture, the behavior we engage in is human behavior, and selecting out one group as prone to this while "we're not" is dangerous. Civilians killed by high tech ordinance is just as dead as those killed by a car or suicide bomb. Those grieving because of those deaths are just as angry and just as prone towards revenge.
One being military does not change the value of the death being wrong, even if we convince ourselves that we're right. When terrorism is the response, just as unjustifiable and immoral, it takes a certain amount of courage to admit this is a dance that all sides engage in.
What would Ghandi do? What would Jesus do?
____________________
“There are several of us trying to put the crazies back in the box.” ~Admiral William Fallon
|
Nocturne
Honored Fellow Grover
| Joined: | Wed Apr 6th, 2005 |
| Location: | United Kingdom |
| Posts: | 676 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 08:57 pm |
|
Jesus would quite literally weep at the whole mess... Old testament God would turn us all to salt or bring back... 'The flood' (which might just happen  )
as for Ghandi... who knows, its a different world these days, everything has changed, oil, weapons, communications.
____________________
when will all this end?
|
*Phil*
Opinionated Interventionist
| Joined: | Thu Apr 21st, 2005 |
| Location: | North Carolina USA |
| Posts: | 3587 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
| Mana: | |
|
Posted: Fri May 25th, 2007 11:37 pm |
|
| Jesus was all about what we do individually - love your neighbor. He never paid much attention to the State except when a Centurion or Tax collector showed up - love them and go the extra mile for them.
____________________
Pecca fortiter, sed fortius fide et gaude in Christo!
Galactic Signature: Blue Self-Existing Monkey
|
Current time is 10:55 pm | Page: 1 2 3   |
|
|
|
|
