L
legendario
Guest
- Thread starter
- #241
Fits a thermaltake volcano 9 + arctic silver 3 to Summos head 
sorted.
sorted.
X
xane
Guest
- Thread starter
- #242
The problem is that, most of the fundementalists, in Islam, Judaism and Christianity, refer to revisionist writings, most of which were produced in the last two centuries, which dramatically skew the original dogma. Some Islamic revisionist scholars proposed that the west has moved so far away from its Christian roots they can safely be considered "infidels" again.
Iran was a classic example of following these revisionist writings, some penned by Khomeni himself, labelling the west as unbelievers and America specifically as "the great Satan", modern fundementalist Islam does not consider western Christianity (and to a lesser extent western Judaism) to fall under "people of the book".
The American constitution specifically outlaws a "state religion", and there are laws that prevent any religion being a priority above others, dispite what you may think, America is not a "christian country" by exact definition.
S
stu
Guest
- Thread starter
- #243
True about fundamentalism - which is why I specifically mentioned it. It's not an exclusively Islamic retreat, there's nutters in every religion - it's just we quietly ignore the Jewish nutters (for example). The Ayatollah Khomeni was, to put it bluntly a fucking psycho.
w/r to constitutional separation of church and state... yes, the Constitution does outlaw it. But the Pledge of Allegiance also contains the phrase "Under God". And American currency bears the phrase "In God We Trust". When a US Court recently tried to have the phrase removed from the Pledge of Allegiance, half of Congress almost cried. Plus America is far more "Christian" than most other Western countries, a huge swathe of it isn't called the 'Bible Belt' for no reason. In fact, it's far more 'religious' than most other Western countries, as there's a bucketload of American Jews and (surprisingly) American Muslims as well.
w/r to constitutional separation of church and state... yes, the Constitution does outlaw it. But the Pledge of Allegiance also contains the phrase "Under God". And American currency bears the phrase "In God We Trust". When a US Court recently tried to have the phrase removed from the Pledge of Allegiance, half of Congress almost cried. Plus America is far more "Christian" than most other Western countries, a huge swathe of it isn't called the 'Bible Belt' for no reason. In fact, it's far more 'religious' than most other Western countries, as there's a bucketload of American Jews and (surprisingly) American Muslims as well.
P
prime1
Guest
- Thread starter
- #244
Ive been reading through these posts with great interest. It seems to me there is a very strong argument on both sides.
I am not going to counteract anyones specific argument, im just going to throw a few of my imediate knee jerk thoughts on what I have read.
Firstly, with regards to previous US policies and involvements, I agree, that this is a large part of what has lead them to this point today. However what hasnt so far been considered is this : what would have happened, if they had not gotten involved? Of course noone can answer this question, but there was always a reason for getting involved, usually several and although some of the reasons may have been wrong, some of them would also have been correct. I am of the oppinion, that if they had not gotten invovled previously, things today may be a lot worse than they already are. Of course it is also possible they would be better, I just dont *feel* that way.
I agree with some of what Stazbumpa was saying, although not in its execution. The biggest problem and cause of fundamentalism, is that in thier oppinion Islams goal is to make the world Islam (christianity also wishes to make the world christian i dont doubt) but that they cannot understand why the muslim states are not the powerful states. Im having trouble forming the words to explain this so bare with me.
To a fundamentalist thier interpretation of the koran is that the islam will be (is?) the most powerful and glorious nation (Islam considers itself a nation as well as a religion), that it simply *has* to be because they are the *true* followers of the *true* god (i am unrelgious myself). The fact that they are not is confusing and frustrating to them, when they look at the West, and see a predominaitely non islam faction as the most powerful and prosperous *nation* they tend to indentify that this is therefore a challenge from *god* and that it is their job to perform *gods will* and make Islam the most powerful etc. This is the view of the fundamentalists, not the normal everyday believers in Islam. The problem is that the fundamentalists have gotten themselves in to a position of power within *many* Arabic/Islamic states, there are also many fundamentalist clerics who either formed their own extremist oppinions or have been leaned on to make it public that they dom whether they do or not.
Religion is *far* more potent in pollitics in Islamic states than in the west (yes it takes part in the west - much to my annoyance, but not to the same degree). Therfore these people are able to command considerable power. What I mentioned before, and what was ingored is this :
The arabic/islamic states primary (and it is vastly dominant) industry is oil production, that is pretty much their sole supply of wealth (look at the problems Iraq us having supplying itself - even Britain could at best keep its people alive when under blocakde in ww2 (things were made more comfortable by supplies arriving by ship admittedly, but compare the 2 and theres a vast difference). Oil is a finite resource, and estiamtes are that supplies will last 20-25 years (last estiamte i was aware of anyway). When oil goes, what will these states do? My concern is this : they will look elsewhere for resources before the supplies run dry. Id like to think otherwise but I cant see these states simply sitting back and saying "oh well, that was nice while it lasted now we will just degenerate in to nothingness". There is an underlying fear throughout the western/non islamic world, that we are heading for a showdown with Islam (this was evident before 9/11). I say underlying because its more of a "what if" nagging concern. With the fundamentalists growing in power (helped to some extent by us policy il admit - but i also beleive this would happen with out without US help) and tensions cosntantly rising, a showdown seems almost inevitable. I suspect that some people in washington/london etc have simialr concerns (the US is looking now to Russia to supply oil to it, for example).
The other area that i see lending wait to this fear, is that the lure of the west, is typically a lure away from religion (just see how much power and influence the church has lost in this country in the last 50 years alone), this lure has begun to take hold in Islamic states as well, as general levels of strict faithful followers begin to wane, and more liberal attitudes began to encroach (look at the conflict within Iran, between the moderate government and the fundamentalist power brokers/religous heads etc). They see teh west as a direct threat on their power and authoity and this causes them to hate the west. They will denounce the west and make the west out to be "the great satan" in an attempt to scare those who may consider losing their faith or becoming more moderate back in to strict abidance.
This is a simplistic view on it, and I acknowledge that there are hundreds of other reasons and triggers for what is goign on now. My oppinion is that we are heading for a showdown with Islam, and there is not much we can do about it. I do hope this isnt the case, but its certainly pause for thought (incidently i was always concerned about this before 9/11).
here is something else, a few years a go i read one of those "nostradamus explained" books, this quite a while as i was still fairly young. One of the chapters concentrated on the 3rd great war. The *interpretation* there read that this war woud take palce in the early part of the 21st century (first 3 decades). The conflict would onvolve Europe being invaded by the muslims from africa, chemical weapons would be used. A coalition of northern europeans would stop the advance and push them back (interpreted as German and UK forces, Germany would then go on and spread its forces throughout the remnants of Europe (this sounded odd to me - coudl be a policing force i suppose but who knows). Im not presentign thsi as an argument, as that would be pointless because i know how easy it is to debunk the nostradamus predictions past and present, but its an interesting conversation peice ;p
I am not going to counteract anyones specific argument, im just going to throw a few of my imediate knee jerk thoughts on what I have read.
Firstly, with regards to previous US policies and involvements, I agree, that this is a large part of what has lead them to this point today. However what hasnt so far been considered is this : what would have happened, if they had not gotten involved? Of course noone can answer this question, but there was always a reason for getting involved, usually several and although some of the reasons may have been wrong, some of them would also have been correct. I am of the oppinion, that if they had not gotten invovled previously, things today may be a lot worse than they already are. Of course it is also possible they would be better, I just dont *feel* that way.
I agree with some of what Stazbumpa was saying, although not in its execution. The biggest problem and cause of fundamentalism, is that in thier oppinion Islams goal is to make the world Islam (christianity also wishes to make the world christian i dont doubt) but that they cannot understand why the muslim states are not the powerful states. Im having trouble forming the words to explain this so bare with me.
To a fundamentalist thier interpretation of the koran is that the islam will be (is?) the most powerful and glorious nation (Islam considers itself a nation as well as a religion), that it simply *has* to be because they are the *true* followers of the *true* god (i am unrelgious myself). The fact that they are not is confusing and frustrating to them, when they look at the West, and see a predominaitely non islam faction as the most powerful and prosperous *nation* they tend to indentify that this is therefore a challenge from *god* and that it is their job to perform *gods will* and make Islam the most powerful etc. This is the view of the fundamentalists, not the normal everyday believers in Islam. The problem is that the fundamentalists have gotten themselves in to a position of power within *many* Arabic/Islamic states, there are also many fundamentalist clerics who either formed their own extremist oppinions or have been leaned on to make it public that they dom whether they do or not.
Religion is *far* more potent in pollitics in Islamic states than in the west (yes it takes part in the west - much to my annoyance, but not to the same degree). Therfore these people are able to command considerable power. What I mentioned before, and what was ingored is this :
The arabic/islamic states primary (and it is vastly dominant) industry is oil production, that is pretty much their sole supply of wealth (look at the problems Iraq us having supplying itself - even Britain could at best keep its people alive when under blocakde in ww2 (things were made more comfortable by supplies arriving by ship admittedly, but compare the 2 and theres a vast difference). Oil is a finite resource, and estiamtes are that supplies will last 20-25 years (last estiamte i was aware of anyway). When oil goes, what will these states do? My concern is this : they will look elsewhere for resources before the supplies run dry. Id like to think otherwise but I cant see these states simply sitting back and saying "oh well, that was nice while it lasted now we will just degenerate in to nothingness". There is an underlying fear throughout the western/non islamic world, that we are heading for a showdown with Islam (this was evident before 9/11). I say underlying because its more of a "what if" nagging concern. With the fundamentalists growing in power (helped to some extent by us policy il admit - but i also beleive this would happen with out without US help) and tensions cosntantly rising, a showdown seems almost inevitable. I suspect that some people in washington/london etc have simialr concerns (the US is looking now to Russia to supply oil to it, for example).
The other area that i see lending wait to this fear, is that the lure of the west, is typically a lure away from religion (just see how much power and influence the church has lost in this country in the last 50 years alone), this lure has begun to take hold in Islamic states as well, as general levels of strict faithful followers begin to wane, and more liberal attitudes began to encroach (look at the conflict within Iran, between the moderate government and the fundamentalist power brokers/religous heads etc). They see teh west as a direct threat on their power and authoity and this causes them to hate the west. They will denounce the west and make the west out to be "the great satan" in an attempt to scare those who may consider losing their faith or becoming more moderate back in to strict abidance.
This is a simplistic view on it, and I acknowledge that there are hundreds of other reasons and triggers for what is goign on now. My oppinion is that we are heading for a showdown with Islam, and there is not much we can do about it. I do hope this isnt the case, but its certainly pause for thought (incidently i was always concerned about this before 9/11).
here is something else, a few years a go i read one of those "nostradamus explained" books, this quite a while as i was still fairly young. One of the chapters concentrated on the 3rd great war. The *interpretation* there read that this war woud take palce in the early part of the 21st century (first 3 decades). The conflict would onvolve Europe being invaded by the muslims from africa, chemical weapons would be used. A coalition of northern europeans would stop the advance and push them back (interpreted as German and UK forces, Germany would then go on and spread its forces throughout the remnants of Europe (this sounded odd to me - coudl be a policing force i suppose but who knows). Im not presentign thsi as an argument, as that would be pointless because i know how easy it is to debunk the nostradamus predictions past and present, but its an interesting conversation peice ;p
S
stu
Guest
- Thread starter
- #245
The sad fact is fundamentalism really has nothing to do with religion. It's an excuse. Just as Protestantism or Catholacism really has nothing to do with the kind of violence that goes on in Ireland. Religion is exploited by fanatics to justify what they do.
Re: Nostradamus. I shouldn't put much stock in it if I were you. People frequently quote Notradamus as if he somehow predicted the future. What they don't tell you is that he wrote 15 entire volumes of this nonsense. Added to which, it was in Ancient French. Now, it's hard enough translating Olde English - give me 15 volumes of Chaucerian prose and I can probably retroactively predict the weather tomorrow. Take a vast source of a primitive language we know next to nothing about, and you can translate it to mean pretty much anything you want.
Re: Nostradamus. I shouldn't put much stock in it if I were you. People frequently quote Notradamus as if he somehow predicted the future. What they don't tell you is that he wrote 15 entire volumes of this nonsense. Added to which, it was in Ancient French. Now, it's hard enough translating Olde English - give me 15 volumes of Chaucerian prose and I can probably retroactively predict the weather tomorrow. Take a vast source of a primitive language we know next to nothing about, and you can translate it to mean pretty much anything you want.
D
doh_boy
Guest
- Thread starter
- #246
Well IMHO if the USA did nothing I doubt much would be different. If something was so bad it was obvious that intervention someone else (UN?) would have done. I figure the only difference would be that the americans would have killed less people and not too many nations would dislike america.
As for the nostrodamus bit; what you're saying is that there will be a war and afterwards the us will invade most of europe? I say invade america!!!!!
As for the nostrodamus bit; what you're saying is that there will be a war and afterwards the us will invade most of europe? I say invade america!!!!!
P
prime1
Guest
- Thread starter
- #247
No the nostradamus bit didnt mention the US ;p
P
prime1
Guest
- Thread starter
- #248
I agree with you on how easy it is to debunk the nostradamus thing, its just a coincidence that this interpretation was there, it doesnt seem as though we are , in all reality, that far away from it. It appeared in a book written decades ago, thats why i thought it was interesting.
S
Stazbumpa
Guest
- Thread starter
- #249
Actually, you couldn't be more wrong.
If there was a way out of this situation without actually killing people then I am 100% behind it. But it seems fairly clear to me that one of the loudest religions on the planet can't seem to listen to anything any bugger ever says. You can't reason with them, you can't negotiate and they are quite prepared to die for what they believe in, albeit in the most ridiculous ways.
I stand by my statement though. Name one Islamic country that even glances at Human Rights. Name one Islamic ruler that isn't insane and wants to annihilate people for his god. The Islamic religion is indeed one based on peace and tolerance and respect for others (I happen to work with a Muslim Cleric on a regular basis). But unfortunately it seems that Islam only reaches this stage in a Western society where respect for Human Rights is backed up by law, and also a freedom of speech to question when this does not seem so.
Islam is not the religion that the extremists portray it as being, but why does it seems that the "normal" Muslims are in the minority?
PS: Bohdi is god
S
Stazbumpa
Guest
- Thread starter
- #250
Just read this post. Bloody good point and very well made.
S
Shocko
Guest
- Thread starter
- #251
Turkey.
Mohammad Khatami. Who is the [liberal] president of Iran, you know, that "evil" country which wants to kill us all
I stand by my previously stated views; You speak much, about which you know little.
D
Durzel
Guest
- Thread starter
- #252
"Human rights" is subjective anyway. If tradition and culture dictates (for example) that women are excluded from certain decision making processes, and/or are forced to wear clothes that cover their entire body apart from their eyes - is this against "human rights" ?
B
bodhi
Guest
- Thread starter
- #253
Originally posted by Shocko
Turkey.
Mohammad Khatami. Who is the [liberal] president of Iran, you know, that "evil" country which wants to kill us all
I stand by my previously stated views; You speak much, about which you know little.
Tbh, those two nations are the exception rather than the rule. For every Iran, there's an Iraq, an Afghanistan and a Libya. So if I were you mate I'd hush before you look even sillier in your half-assed and poorly thought out attempts to be patronising.
B
bodhi
Guest
- Thread starter
- #254
Interesting point, but at the end of the day, just because they live in another part of the world doesn't mean they aren't entitled to the basic human rights we take for granted.
S
Shocko
Guest
- Thread starter
- #255
One of our human rights, is the right to life. They don't have that in America - They must be evil religous extremists!!
How many Islamic states are there in the middle east? For a start, Iraq isn't really an Islamic state... As has been stated earlier in the thread, there are extremists in every religion; Sticking with the middle east:
Isreal - Lots of Jewish extremists there, allthough hardly surprising considering they think that their religous books entitle them to their own country. They don't hate the west so much, more their own neighbours
Lebbanon - We all know about about the massacre in 1982, where Christian militia massacred well over a thousand Palestinean refugees.
How many Islamic states are there in the middle east? For a start, Iraq isn't really an Islamic state... As has been stated earlier in the thread, there are extremists in every religion; Sticking with the middle east:
Isreal - Lots of Jewish extremists there, allthough hardly surprising considering they think that their religous books entitle them to their own country. They don't hate the west so much, more their own neighbours
Lebbanon - We all know about about the massacre in 1982, where Christian militia massacred well over a thousand Palestinean refugees.
O
old.ignus
Guest
- Thread starter
- #256
to give you my completely uneducated and childish view on this (you see what I did there? I put myself down before the do-gooders and arabs in disguise could) Religion is a stupid thing and is perhaps the worlds stupidest invention for people who just couldn't handle the fact that there is no answer to the why and how are we here. The amount of lives lost over people fighting for their "god" without proof of his/her/its existence is beyond belief to a none believer such as myself. Although its arguable that so many people died on Sept 11th because of a difference in religion, it does seem to be the main cause. I think extremists are just fools who have nothing in their feeble lives and have to devote it to something that doesn't exist, (IMO) the islamic religion just seems to be full of these fools who need locking up before they harm not so much themselves but other people. In christinanity you get these fools who stand up in the middle of church or a chapel or whatever and just shout "halleluija!" or "praise the lord!" for no apparant reason (I know I've been there and seen it and could not stop laughing) They force it down the throats of children and others in a hope to make them a believer people like me just reject it like week old pizza or cider. These people should also be locked up.
to summerise:
Religion is evil
extremists are fool and should be shot
I don't know what Im talking about
to summerise:
Religion is evil
extremists are fool and should be shot
I don't know what Im talking about
B
bigbb
Guest
- Thread starter
- #257
Shocko, i'm afraid you've now incurred a fine for the over use of the smiley. Your daily quota has been exceeded.
smiley. Your daily quota has been exceeded.
S
Scooba Da Bass
Guest
- Thread starter
- #258
I thought he'd just subbed for Embattle.
Shocko start posting BBC news threads!
Shocko start posting BBC news threads!
D
doh_boy
Guest
- Thread starter
- #259
Relgion isn't the reason why people like Bin laden kill, religion is used to ratify what they're doing (i.e. to show people "its right and proper"). Also most of the charity work done is done by people of one religion or another and the extremists are still in minority, even in Islam. As for "fools who stand up in the middle of church or a chapel or whatever and just shout "halleluija!" or "praise the lord!" for no apparant reason" can't you just leave them be? They're not harming anyone and they feel what they are doing is right, why the hell were you there if didn't value whaty they were about? You ridicule people with values you don't understand, why? Can you not just live and let live?
Also do people realise that attacking Iraq will be an unprovoked attack. We say we're launching a pre-emptive strike due to the fact that iraq poses a threat. That we need to "fight for our freedom". Yet things haven't changed, a lot, in iraq in a couple of years so why now. Instead of confronting the reasons why the americans were attacked (a bullish and arrogant foreign policy) they decide the only way to react is to hit back. Considering that is what is keeping the killing in Isreal and palestine going it seems like for more than the obvious reason that it will increase hatred of the west in the arab countries another reason it is unwise is that it tells the rest of the world they can do it to.
S
stu
Guest
- Thread starter
- #260
You didn't read that article did you. Go on, admit it. You didn't.
Bangladesh. Brunei. Egypt. Jordan. Kazahkstan. Kuwait. Lebanon. Maldives. Mali. Nigeria. Senegal. Off the top of my head.
That is so laughably ignorant it's untrue. Considering that 'Western society' has spent the past 500 years or so constantly trying to destroy anything which isn't considered 'Western society' (and, by fucking up time and time again, actually putting most of these tinpot dictatorships in place).
Like I said, foamy-mouthed rantings.
O
old.Jas
Guest
- Thread starter
- #261
Looks like they got another guy -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2256993.stm
Checkout this arogant twat -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/2256993.stm
Checkout this arogant twat -
O
old.ignus
Guest
- Thread starter
- #262
Ah but they are harming people, the reason why I was there was because we were tricked into going by the local youth club, at the time I'd have been about 7 an vulnerable. They tried to poison my mind with complete crap and change my beliefs. The damaged my already delicate pyshce. I ridicule them because its what I've been brought up to believe, make fun of the different. And don't say you haven't done it because you would be such a liar.
M
Mavoric
Guest
- Thread starter
- #263
Human rights Moslem style
http://rawa.false.net/handcut3.htm
http://rawa.false.net/photo7.htm
http://rawa.false.net/photo10.htm
Such nice folk NOT
http://rawa.false.net/handcut3.htm
http://rawa.false.net/photo7.htm
http://rawa.false.net/photo10.htm
Such nice folk NOT
S
Scooba Da Bass
Guest
- Thread starter
- #264
That site points out the actions were done by Fundamentalists, are you STILL not aware of the difference between fundamentalists and those who practice a religion normally?
Would you like me to post victims of religion motivated killings in Ireland? Would that make a statement like 'Christian style retribution?' anymore correct?
What is it with the influx of idiots lately?
Would you like me to post victims of religion motivated killings in Ireland? Would that make a statement like 'Christian style retribution?' anymore correct?
What is it with the influx of idiots lately?
G
GDW
Guest
- Thread starter
- #265
Scooba I for once actually agree with you here, but just for the record the killings in Northern Ireland are not actually religious. Yes maybe on the surface as is often portrayed in the media, but deep down its just really bitter nationalism. Few of the people supporting the violence and terrorism over the years have an incling of religion.
Having been brought up through the troubles I think Im qualified enough to make that comment
Having been brought up through the troubles I think Im qualified enough to make that comment
O
old.ignus
Guest
- Thread starter
- #266
if you read the caption under the last picture it tells you it done by the so called "government". As they werent voted in western stylee they had to bully their way into power, this suggests there had to be a lot of them to do this, probably more than half the population.
S
Scooba Da Bass
Guest
- Thread starter
- #267
It takes a lot of people to bully themselves into power?? I thought just having guns and hanging intellectuals would do it...
N
Nos-
Guest
- Thread starter
- #268
You'd think by now there'd be some sort of IQ test that you had to pass before being allowed to create a forum account, as obviously registration itself is not deterrent enough.
S
stu
Guest
- Thread starter
- #269
Human rights Christian style
http://www.hrw.org/reports/2001/kosovo/
Human rights Christian AND Jewish style
http://www.sabra-shatila.be/english/
Human rights Jewish style
http://www.sis.gov.eg/online/html7/o100822i.htm
Obviously an accurate reflection of 55% of the world's population (number of Christians + Jews + Muslims)
Now shut up imbecile
M
Mavoric
Guest
- Thread starter
- #270
As you seem to find the West such a terrible place just fuck off to one of the marvelous Islamic states you go on about.