Article

2003-07-26 Afghanistan

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Fred Pruitt 2003-07-26 00:28|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 The Religion of Peaceâ¢ should be renamed the Mother of All Disinformationâ¢. This is classic Islam - the word is passed along (Islam has one helluva grapevine, eh?) from some frothing Imam (doesn't matter where) in his Friday Diatribeâ¢ that America is bent on killing all Muslims - and in some extremely remote little village in a vast rock garden the local mullah gets the word - and swallows it whole.

Poor saps. It actually makes me feel sorry for them - and that took some doing.

Posted by PD 2003-7-26 1:02:04 AM|| 2003-7-26 1:02:04 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 It's not without precedent in a budding democracy.

Supporters of John Adams spread word that the notorious 'free thinker' Thomas Jefferson would ban Bibles during the Election of 1796 and many New Englanders buried their Bibles 'just in case' Jefferson won.

Posted by JDB 2003-7-26 1:18:17 AM|| 2003-7-26 1:18:17 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Ah, religion. The ultimate bastion of deep thought.

Posted by PD 2003-7-26 1:26:48 AM|| 2003-7-26 1:26:48 AM|| Front Page Top

Poor saps. It actually makes me feel sorry for them - and that took some doing.

It's hard to NOT pity slaves. Be they intellectual, religious or physical.

Posted by Celissa 2003-7-26 2:19:53 AM|| [http://www.celissasblog.com/] 2003-7-26 2:19:53 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 But the best way to counter it is exactly what the soldiers did. Hand them back, explain in depth that such was not the case. Makes that old Iman look like a liar and a fool, our soldiers look like decent folks.

Posted by Ben 2003-7-26 4:28:27 AM|| 2003-7-26 4:28:27 AM|| Front Page Top

#6 JDB:

Interesting about Adams/Jefferson. Got a specific reference on that? I'd like to read about it.

Posted by Whiskey Mike 2003-7-26 5:59:25 AM|| 2003-7-26 5:59:25 AM|| Front Page Top

#7 From such acts, trust and understanding arise. Until next Friday, anyway.

Posted by PD 2003-7-26 6:02:39 AM|| 2003-7-26 6:02:39 AM|| Front Page Top

#8 Maybe even beyond next Friday. Happens once, twice, and by the third time people will get the idea that someone is not telling the truth.

Posted by Rafael 2003-7-26 7:25:59 AM|| 2003-7-26 7:25:59 AM|| Front Page Top

#9 Rafael - Maybe... 'slam has been humming along for 1400 years without a shred of proof that it makes any sense whatsoever or contains even one iota of truth. These guys have been indoctinated from birth. Everyone they know and have ever known buys it - and there are consequences in Islam for having doubts. You have to be contemplating a long lonely one-way trip to get out.

Still, I hope you're right: that they'll believe their own eyes and ears and experience the next time they encounter a "non-believer."

Y'know, the Soviets sure didn't help.

Posted by PD 2003-7-26 9:02:09 AM|| 2003-7-26 9:02:09 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 PD> I don't think that religions are very much into things like "proof". They use blind faith instead -- and that goes for pretty much every religion. Once upon a time there were pretty big consequences for doubting Christianity also (e.g. you could be burned for heresy).

So, yeah, Islam's been humming along 1400 years without a shred of proof that it makes any sense, but then again Christianity's been humming along for 2000 years and it doesn't make any shred of sense either (God being punished somehow alleviates the sins of the world? Eating a piece of fruit condemns the descendants of those who ate it? Having an infant's parents arrange to have water sprinkled on you somehow ensures that it will go to heaven, but if they don't do that, the outcome is uncertain?)

To tell the truth, in the relatively little I know of Islam I can also find fewer absurdities in it. Mind you there's the occasional greater *evil* as well, but atleast it's reasonably expected evil coming from a military-religious leader, Muhammed, determined to spread his power and influence and "divine word" throughout the world... Seen as nothing more than an attempt to concentrate power (to a single gender, to a single religious group), Islam seems to make sense... Women subordinated to men. Everyone else subordinated to muslims. Some shreds of tolerance towards the "peoples of the Book" which we may want to occasionally be friendly to, for tactical purposes. And all muslims subordinated to clerics, who are ofcourse subordinated to the word of the Koran (aka Muhammad).

But some of the things that the Christians believe in... schizophrenia seems to be the only explanation. Or at least a mad attempt to combine more than one thousands years of Hebrew Scripture+New Testament teaching into a single consistent philosophy, which however doesn't make much sense either... If it *had* made sense there wouldn't be a thousand different Christian denominations, I think.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2003-7-26 11:15:18 AM|| 2003-7-26 11:15:18 AM|| Front Page Top

#11 Aris - You won't get a defense of any religion from me - and I'll leave it at that.

One thing I have noticed, however, is that there is a total lack of "elegance" in Islam - a matter of opinion, of course. What I mean is that there are hundred of suras / hadiths / yadda3 and it's all very petty and pedantic. Do this and you burn. Do that and you burn. Don't do this, on Friday, under a fool moon, while the cock crows, and you burn. Pretty silly shit.

The Christians did, at least, have a more manageable number (though Mel Brooks implied there were 15 Commandments, but one of the tablets was dropped and, well...) of rules and a few of their truisms are actually profound, such as the "Do unto others..."

I might finish that saying, myself, with "first and often...", but the original has the ring of truth - so I'll give credit where due. I'm still looking for something in Islam's game worth remembering - and I have read the Koran I bought in SA back in '92 all the boring way through.

As for the idea of schizophrenia and flavors of religion - hey, that's rampant in ALL of the religions that have been around more than about 30 minutes. Islam tried to stop this with a standardization of Islamic text, the usual post-dated revisionist "cleaning" of history", of course - so their flavors are in interpretation, once you get past that massive split down the middle between Shi'a and Sunni.

Isn't religion, Peshawar, the answer for those fearful of death? Just a thought.

Posted by PD 2003-7-26 11:56:28 AM|| 2003-7-26 11:56:28 AM|| Front Page Top

#12 The greatest gift from God (if there is a God) is that you can talk to God. Of course you could deny it and not talk to God. Your choice. You can't kill for God, talk for God, think for God. You can't do anything for God. But you can talk to God. The Bible is full of prayers to God. It's overriding theme, to me, is to have that relationship with God. I reject Islam outright due to it's submission qualities. And I wouldn't drink grape cool-aid for some learned christian or whatever.

Posted by Lucky 2003-7-26 12:16:16 PM|| 2003-7-26 12:16:16 PM|| Front Page Top

#13 PD---thanks for pointing it out!

Islam's answer to MOAB:

MOAD---Mother of All Disinformationâ¢

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-7-26 12:29:54 PM|| 2003-7-26 12:29:54 PM|| Front Page Top

#14 Criticize religion all you want but it works for me. Belief in a higher power and answered prayer has carried me through combat, divorce, death of loved ones, loss of employment and a long and painful cancer treatment for my darling wife.

Throughout history, man has believed in a higher power. When religions become organized and codified, things muddle, the religious heirarchies seem to forget they are in the religion business of love, faith, peace and understanding and try to ram their faith down peoples throats.

It defies logic that the three major religions share supposedly, a common base, a common God, the same religious shrines and much of the same religious texts and teachings and yet one of them wants to wipe the other two off the planet and the other two at one time or another has tried to return the favor.

My life has become happier and richer with more fullness and meaning when I chose to believe in God and recognized that Jesus Christ was the messiah and my saviour. I recommend it highly as a cure for the empty, "is that all there is" feeling that people who do not have faith have.

You can debate, ridicule and otherwise try to debase my faith and the tenents of my religion but you will not succeed....nothing man does ever really makes sense and God did give us Free Will.

Posted by SOG475 2003-7-26 12:51:47 PM|| 2003-7-26 12:51:47 PM|| Front Page Top

#15 Believing in God, or not, is a personal thing and thats the end of story. Problems develop when one guy says "I'm right and you're wrong" and then shoves an AK47 up your ass to make his point.
A point to ponder however is this: if you make jokes about Jesus in front of some Catholics in the middle of St. Peter's square in the Vatican, the worst that would happen is they would roll their eyes and gently move away from you. If you make fun of Mohammed in downtown Mecca (assuming for the moment you're allowed inside) in front of some Muslims, what do you think would happen to you? (assuming for the moment you live long enough to find out).

Posted by Rafael 2003-7-26 1:25:41 PM|| 2003-7-26 1:25:41 PM|| Front Page Top

#16 SOG475 - I don't believe, but that's me. Its my conclusion - and don't mean nuthin to nobody but me.

I have 3 rules about "beliefs" for others:
1) The belief system should bring peace of mind - not incite and use that anger for its own ends
2) Believers shouldn't impose their beliefs on anyone else - including their children
3) Believers shouldn't harm anyone else in the practice of their religion

That's it. So from the hundreds of Islam to 10+ on Christianity down to 3, for me. I have a number of tougher requirements I place upon myself, (e.g. be an asset, or be gone; keep your word or keep your mouth shut, etc.) but this is all I have ever asked of others.

Posted by PD 2003-7-26 1:42:56 PM|| 2003-7-26 1:42:56 PM|| Front Page Top

#17 To tell the truth, in the relatively little I know of Islam I can also find fewer absurdities in it.

Aris likes Islam because it's internally consistent. Nazism and Communism were internally consistent, too. Wipe out all the racially-impure/non-believers and establish paradise on earth. Typical of Aris's murderous proclivities - he doesn't have any problem with killing - he just doesn't like it when either Christians or Jews are winning.

Posted by Zhang Fei 2003-7-26 1:44:08 PM|| 2003-7-26 1:44:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#18 Rafael> True, but that wasn't always the case - I wouldn't feel free of making of fun of Jesus during the time of the Spanish Inquisition.

Zhang Fei> How cute of you to YET AGAIN pull supposed comments of mine out your big fat ass. I now supposedly "like Islam"?

Moron. Asshole. Fucking jerk. Is it when I called it a military-religious tool for subordinating the world to a single man's whims, that your puny brain translated it into "I like Islam"?

But I guess that religious freaks like yourself don't actually care for facts.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2003-7-26 2:20:47 PM|| 2003-7-26 2:20:47 PM|| Front Page Top

#19 Might I step in and suggest a cease-fire on personal attacks?

Posted by Frank G 2003-7-26 4:04:08 PM|| 2003-7-26 4:04:08 PM|| Front Page Top

#20 I will not speak about (or to) Zhang Fei, in any manner whatsoever, in any thread where he hasn't *first* spoken about (or to) me with his lying mouth.

I think that's a good enough ceasefire, if Zhang Fei will accept it. It'll make him the instigator in any other dispute that will arise between us.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2003-7-26 4:38:38 PM|| 2003-7-26 4:38:38 PM|| Front Page Top

#21 I doubt any here would wish to be placed into a position of having to defend their beliefs, whatever they are. We become defensive, and in most cases, beligerant. The problem is, ONE religion demands that we accept it by decree, not by any personal experience or belief. None of the world's major religions, other than Islam, demand belief. That makes it a totalitarian dictatorship dressed up as a religion, and it needs to be faced down and, if necessary, even destroyed. This is not just a war on terrorism - this is a war on whether mankind has free will (the ability to choose what we think, what we believe, how we worship, how we choose to govern ourselves, who we work for, etc.) or is the slave of God (in whatever form he/she/it takes to the believer). Islam insists upon the latter. I will NEVER willingly be a slave.

Posted by Old Patriot 2003-7-26 5:18:20 PM|| [http://users.codenet.net/mweather/default.htm] 2003-7-26 5:18:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#22 Not sure how you claim that none of the world's major religions (other than Islam) demand belief, when most Christian sects say that you'll burn in hell if you don't believe. Perhaps you mean that most of those religions don't have anymore the secular power to force us to believe -- in which case I'll respond that it wasn't so long ago that they did have that power. How many non-Christians do you think could worship freely and publicly in the medieval ages?

As for being a "slave of god", you do understand hopefully, that this is the expression Paul repeatedly uses in his letters and stuff to describe himself and all other Christians, don't you? Of course most English translations repeatedly sugarcoat this into a *servant* of God, but the original Greek word is very clear: "doulos", meaning "slave".

Indeed in the Greek Orthodox Church the word is repeatedly used - even in wedding ceremonies e.g. "O doulos tou Theou [insert name] nymfevetai tin douli tou Theou [insert name]." : The (male) Slave of God [insert name] is being married to the (female) Slave of God [insert name].

Never willingly be a slave -- aye, I'd agree with that. But if so, I think Christianity is probably not that good for you either... To be a good Christian you must be a willing slave of God's will.

Posted by Aris Katsaris 2003-7-26 6:15:46 PM|| 2003-7-26 6:15:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#23 Aris - promise of "burning in hell" have little effect on non-believers, hacking/exploding/bullets in the current "veil of tears" matter to most of the living, and especially those of us Kaffirs. I am sorry for what my Catholic religion has done wrong and promise my strongest efforts to reform those wrongs - I cannot undo what was done in the past, and surely promote punishment (especially in this life - I have no doubts what awaits after) of the clergy who have caused so much harm - but the Islamic faith does not have such a sense of wroooong, apparently. How to convey that? I don't know

Posted by Frank G 2003-7-26 6:49:27 PM|| 2003-7-26 6:49:27 PM|| Front Page Top

#24 Whiskey Mike--

I tried "googling" for some anecdotes of anti-Jeffersonism and there's just too much stuff!

One piece you might enjoy was from The Atlantic and is a reprint of an 1873 article on the Election of 1800. The author is sympathetic to Jefferson as he recounts Federalist charges (e.g. Sally Hemmings, the abolition of Christianity, etc.)

http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/policamp/parton.htm

Here's an excerpt:

"Tradition reports, that when the news of his election reached New England, some old ladies, in wild consternation, hung their Bibles down the well in the butter-cooler."

I read (somewhere!) of New Englanders hiding Bibles as fact. Oh, well.

Anyway, as SecDef Rumsfeld pointed out in his remarks around July 4th, giving birth to democracy is not without it's labor pains. The Election of 1800 is a fascinating period. Hope you like the article.

Posted by JDB 2003-7-26 8:39:46 PM|| 2003-7-26 8:39:46 PM|| Front Page Top

#25 Islam is NOT internally consistent.

eg: Mohammed's early teachings were more peaceful, and about spreading religion by persuasion.

His latter teachings were about spreading it by the sword, by jihad, by submission.

It is reconciled by some muslim thought as: The later teachings are newer, therefore they override the earlier teachings as newer versions are always better and revised.

Though why an omnipotent god should ever need to make his prophet revise his work (implying error) I do not think they ask themselves.

Posted by Anon1 2003-7-26 10:11:48 PM|| 2003-7-26 10:11:48 PM|| Front Page Top

#26 Islam is NOT internally consistent.

eg: Mohammed's early teachings were more peaceful, and about spreading religion by persuasion.

His latter teachings were about spreading it by the sword, by jihad, by submission.

It is reconciled by some muslim thought as: The later teachings are newer, therefore they override the earlier teachings as newer versions are always better and revised.

Though why an omnipotent god should ever need to make his prophet revise his work (implying error) I do not think they ask themselves.

Posted by Anon1 2003-7-26 10:16:07 PM|| 2003-7-26 10:16:07 PM|| Front Page Top

01:35 Ernest Brown
23:45 Ed Becerra
23:40 Ed Becerra
23:39 michael
23:34 Anon1
23:25 michael
23:19 whitecollar redneck
23:01 Anon1
22:50 Anon1
22:44 Steve White
22:40 Anon1
22:16 Anon1
22:12 stevey robinson
22:11 Anon1
21:30 Watcher
20:39 JDB
20:08 Frank G
20:07 Frank G
19:48 Rafael
19:39 Frank G
19:07 Frank G
19:04 Frank G
19:03 Phil B
19:03 Beau - CA Escapee