Are Muslims Making You Nervous?
5 views
Skip to first unread message
Slip Disc
Dec 11, 2009, 2:04:54 AM12/11/09
to "Minds Eye"
Religion is still driving it's wedge into the world. I'm beginning to
become very wary of the intent of Muslim Immigrants. Little seeds are
being planted around the world and Muslim populations are growing.
With the shootings by Muslim Hasan in Fort Hood Texas and now the
Arrest of 5 Muslim teenagers in Pakistan who supposedly are American,
I reject the idea that they were ever American, I'm suspect that
Muslims around the world are simply carrying out a long term
infiltration tactic without any desire for citizenship but only for
the goal of the Muslim world. It may take 50 more years but by then
the Muslim population will be very imposing.
What do you think of all this Muslim turmoil around the world? I know
it's hard to be politically correct and non judgmental but history is
littered with attempts at world domination. Truth is I'm beginning to
get nervous and simply do not trust Muslims and wonder about their
true motive. Is it just paranoia, I don't think so.
Excerpt:
The citizens of the United States and Canada, as well as many within
various echelons of law enforcement, might be surprised to learn that
active paramilitary training of Islamic terrorists, who are focused on
bringing jihad or holy war into America on a large scale, are
currently operating in the United States and Canada. In fact, they
have existed inside North America since at least 1980.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover061107h.htm
The Islamic "jihadist" Army in our Midst
The most astute researchers of Islamic terrorist activities might
believe that the so-called "Virginia jihad network," often referred to
as the "paintball jihad network," was the first paramilitary training
of its kind in America. The "paintball jihad network" consisted of
nearly a dozen Muslim men, including Randall "Ismail" Royer, an
American convert to Islam and former official of the Council on
American Islamic Relations (CAIR), who honed their combat skills
through the use of paintball gun exercises with other like-minded
Muslims, according to the federal indictment and his subsequent
conviction. Others might cite the case of Ernest James UJAAMA, a/k/a
Bilal AHMED, (a Muslim convert born James Earnest Thompson), who,
according to court documents, attempted to set up an Afghanistan-style
terrorist training camp near Bly, Oregon in 1999 as a precursor to
physical jihad training in America.
become very wary of the intent of Muslim Immigrants. Little seeds are
being planted around the world and Muslim populations are growing.
With the shootings by Muslim Hasan in Fort Hood Texas and now the
Arrest of 5 Muslim teenagers in Pakistan who supposedly are American,
I reject the idea that they were ever American, I'm suspect that
Muslims around the world are simply carrying out a long term
infiltration tactic without any desire for citizenship but only for
the goal of the Muslim world. It may take 50 more years but by then
the Muslim population will be very imposing.
What do you think of all this Muslim turmoil around the world? I know
it's hard to be politically correct and non judgmental but history is
littered with attempts at world domination. Truth is I'm beginning to
get nervous and simply do not trust Muslims and wonder about their
true motive. Is it just paranoia, I don't think so.
Excerpt:
The citizens of the United States and Canada, as well as many within
various echelons of law enforcement, might be surprised to learn that
active paramilitary training of Islamic terrorists, who are focused on
bringing jihad or holy war into America on a large scale, are
currently operating in the United States and Canada. In fact, they
have existed inside North America since at least 1980.
http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover061107h.htm
The Islamic "jihadist" Army in our Midst
The most astute researchers of Islamic terrorist activities might
believe that the so-called "Virginia jihad network," often referred to
as the "paintball jihad network," was the first paramilitary training
of its kind in America. The "paintball jihad network" consisted of
nearly a dozen Muslim men, including Randall "Ismail" Royer, an
American convert to Islam and former official of the Council on
American Islamic Relations (CAIR), who honed their combat skills
through the use of paintball gun exercises with other like-minded
Muslims, according to the federal indictment and his subsequent
conviction. Others might cite the case of Ernest James UJAAMA, a/k/a
Bilal AHMED, (a Muslim convert born James Earnest Thompson), who,
according to court documents, attempted to set up an Afghanistan-style
terrorist training camp near Bly, Oregon in 1999 as a precursor to
physical jihad training in America.
Lee
Dec 11, 2009, 4:42:51 AM12/11/09
to "Minds Eye"
Simply put No, Muslims do not make me nervouse. I know many, I work
with some, and they are all decent people, intergrated, in fact most
of them need not attempt to intergrate as they were born here in the
UK, respectfull of others belifes, willing to enter into dialogue
about thier faith and the diffeances between others, in short normal
people.
We are all well aware of fundementalists and the effect they are
having on the world, but I belive that these people are a tiny
minority. Personaly I have a great dislike for the Christian church,
however again, many Christians I know are fine people, and in the end
it is people that practice religion so we can ignore a large part of
dogma, if we find that large numbers of followers simply do not
practice it, like jihad for example.
with some, and they are all decent people, intergrated, in fact most
of them need not attempt to intergrate as they were born here in the
UK, respectfull of others belifes, willing to enter into dialogue
about thier faith and the diffeances between others, in short normal
people.
We are all well aware of fundementalists and the effect they are
having on the world, but I belive that these people are a tiny
minority. Personaly I have a great dislike for the Christian church,
however again, many Christians I know are fine people, and in the end
it is people that practice religion so we can ignore a large part of
dogma, if we find that large numbers of followers simply do not
practice it, like jihad for example.
archytas
Dec 11, 2009, 5:43:13 AM12/11/09
to "Minds Eye"
I want to agree with Lee, but in the end I don't these days. We have
over-done immigration and the idea of religious tolerance. Islam is
the modern political religion, replacing Xtianity in this century and
obviously pitted against it for around 1000 years. Religion is not
generally important to most people who practise and so I generally
have no problems with people on its account as it's something they do
away from me and my life. Skin colour and the rest has always seemed
bunk. Yet now I do feel threatened, perhaps by religion generally,
but Islam is to the fore in this. Mixed in are the fears that we have
gone too far down the immigration route and the associated feelings
that political correctness prevents my views being openly discussed.
over-done immigration and the idea of religious tolerance. Islam is
the modern political religion, replacing Xtianity in this century and
obviously pitted against it for around 1000 years. Religion is not
generally important to most people who practise and so I generally
have no problems with people on its account as it's something they do
away from me and my life. Skin colour and the rest has always seemed
bunk. Yet now I do feel threatened, perhaps by religion generally,
but Islam is to the fore in this. Mixed in are the fears that we have
gone too far down the immigration route and the associated feelings
that political correctness prevents my views being openly discussed.
gabbydott
Dec 11, 2009, 7:20:07 AM12/11/09
to "Minds Eye"
American by blood, by birth, by soil, by ideology? Good question, my
slippy fish. I read through Obama's speech in Oslo and agree that he
argues on the same timeline as the muslim leaders act. The dimension
of world war is slowly but surely understood outside Europe, is how
explain this legging [sic!] behind.
slippy fish. I read through Obama's speech in Oslo and agree that he
argues on the same timeline as the muslim leaders act. The dimension
of world war is slowly but surely understood outside Europe, is how
explain this legging [sic!] behind.
rigsy03
Dec 11, 2009, 8:49:39 AM12/11/09
to "Minds Eye"
I really have no problems with "others" here at home or on travels but
reserve my fears for criminals of any color or faith and dislike the
fact that so many areas of the city are out of bounds for a woman. As
a second pod of American born Muslim terrorists have turned up in
Pakistan, I would agree that we are naive to discount the long range
plans of militant Muslim terrorists. Their violence has to touch us
unless you are immune to the photos and ages of our dead and wounded
troops.
> > > physical jihad training in America.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
reserve my fears for criminals of any color or faith and dislike the
fact that so many areas of the city are out of bounds for a woman. As
a second pod of American born Muslim terrorists have turned up in
Pakistan, I would agree that we are naive to discount the long range
plans of militant Muslim terrorists. Their violence has to touch us
unless you are immune to the photos and ages of our dead and wounded
troops.
>
> - Show quoted text -
Pat
Dec 11, 2009, 8:58:37 AM12/11/09
to "Minds Eye"
> Religion is still driving it's wedge into the world. I'm beginning to
> become very wary of the intent of Muslim Immigrants. Little seeds are
> being planted around the world and Muslim populations are growing.
> With the shootings by Muslim Hasan in Fort Hood Texas and now the
> Arrest of 5 Muslim teenagers in Pakistan who supposedly are American,
> I reject the idea that they were ever American, I'm suspect that
> Muslims around the world are simply carrying out a long term
> infiltration tactic without any desire for citizenship but only for
> the goal of the Muslim world. It may take 50 more years but by then
> the Muslim population will be very imposing.
> What do you think of all this Muslim turmoil around the world? I know
> it's hard to be politically correct and non judgmental but history is
> littered with attempts at world domination. Truth is I'm beginning to
> get nervous and simply do not trust Muslims and wonder about their
> true motive. Is it just paranoia, I don't think so.
>
Islam IS the fastest growing faith and has been for quite some time.
> become very wary of the intent of Muslim Immigrants. Little seeds are
> being planted around the world and Muslim populations are growing.
> With the shootings by Muslim Hasan in Fort Hood Texas and now the
> Arrest of 5 Muslim teenagers in Pakistan who supposedly are American,
> I reject the idea that they were ever American, I'm suspect that
> Muslims around the world are simply carrying out a long term
> infiltration tactic without any desire for citizenship but only for
> the goal of the Muslim world. It may take 50 more years but by then
> the Muslim population will be very imposing.
> What do you think of all this Muslim turmoil around the world? I know
> it's hard to be politically correct and non judgmental but history is
> littered with attempts at world domination. Truth is I'm beginning to
> get nervous and simply do not trust Muslims and wonder about their
> true motive. Is it just paranoia, I don't think so.
>
This is, mostly, due to the fact that Muslims have Muslim children
(funnily enough) and the growth rate is more down to general
population growth than conversion rates; that said, there are more and
more converts as well. So why, then, is that? [that's not a
rhetorical question but an invitation to fully investigate Islam for
yourself to discover what there is about it that might attract people
TO it.]
What is it about Islam that worries you? The religion itself does not
promote terrorism, but change through dialogue, so the 'terrorists'
aren't REALLY 'true Muslims'--they are apostates who have been led
astray--they are as brainwashed as any follower of Jim Jones or David
Koresh. Don't be afraid of Muslims--they are simply people who
acknowledge that it is God that runs the show here on Earth (and, as
far as I can tell, that is a correct belief!). Rather, be afraid of
fundamentalism of any variety, for it is fundamentalism--that branch
of any faith that says, "We're correct and everyone else needs to die
so that only those that think correctly are left." That was never the
premiss of Islam, as the Qur'an itself states that religion should not
be forced on anyone. These fundamentalists feed on our fears. So,
you're playing into their hands with your mistrust of Muslims, as they
are, for the vast majority, just like everyone else on the planet--
trying to just get through another day. Take each one as they present
themselves to you. If you want to react in a Christian fashion
towards them, then that would be: Judge not, lest ye be judged.
Muslims worship God by being mindful of Him in many ways throughout
the day, and Jesus said that loving God was the greatest commandment.
So they follow that teaching--probably beter than most Westerners who
consider themselves Christian. The second greates commandment
(according to Jesus) was "to love your neighbour as yourself". But
you are mistrusting/distrusting people and the only thing you may know
about them is that they are Muslim. How fair is that?
It's my belief that God will judge us by certain standards. Some of
those standards we set ourselves. That is, he will judge us as fairly
as we have judged others. In that way, injustice can always be
redressed in the Hereafter. This life is only a test for an eternal
existence. Don't let the fundamentalists of ANY faith turn you
against other believers of that faith who are NOT fundamentalists. It
could be a dangerous practice; after all, Jesus warned: judge not,
lest ye be judged (similarly). Don't play into the hands of the
fundamentalists by fearing and mis/distrusting Muslims, as that is
what they hope will be the divisive reaction that grants them the
grounds for claiming general bias.
I encounter Muslims on a daily basis. At work, at the local shop, in
taxis, etc. And NONE of them have ever acted in a way that I would
consider problematic. What makes ME nervous is people taking a
dislike to people they don't know simply because they are different--
when, really, we are ALL different; because it's THAT attitude that
both Christian and Muslim fundamentalists are hoping will bring us to
the all-glorious Armageddon that they both think they'll win. They
can't BOTH be right; but, they could both be wrong, in that there ARE
no winners of Armageddon.
If, as you are tending towards, you think that Muslims will out-number
the rest of the population in the foreseeable future, then that will
change the world. But that doesn't, of necessity, mean that that
change would be bad. It all comes down to implementation. And there
are Islamic prophecies that indicate that, before Islam does become
the predominant religion on Earth, it will be 'set back onto the
straight path' by a 'Clarifier', the Mahdi, or Al-Qa'im. Muslims
await this individual because they know that there are corrections (to
the practices of the faith) that need to be made (the abolition of
female circumcision throughout Islamic Africa would be the first thing
that leaps out in my mind...but there is a longer list). So wait WITH
them and watch out FOR him, for it is just THAT kind of individual
that needs to come onto the world scene fairly soon, as the numbers,
as you point out, are nearing the mark.
PS 'Chanukkah Tovah' for all the Jewish readers out there!!
gabbydott
Dec 11, 2009, 10:57:04 AM12/11/09
to "Minds Eye"
Ah well, when we are discussing how the muslims are the New Jews, it
is exactly the waiting point that we would disagree with.
> consider themseles Chhristian. The second greates commandment
> (according to Jesus) was "tolove yoour neighbour as yourself". But
is exactly the waiting point that we would disagree with.
> (according to Jesus) was "tolove yoour neighbour as yourself". But
> you are mistrusting/distrusting people and the only thing you may know
> about them is that they are Muslim. How fair is that?
> It's my belief that God will judge us by certain standards. Some of
> those standards we set ourselves. That is, he will judge us as fairly
> as we have judged others. In that way, injustice can always be
> redressed in the Hereafter. This life is only a test for an eternal
> existence. Don't let the fundamentalists of ANY faith turn you
> against other believers of that faith who are NOT fundamentalists. It
> could be a dangerous practice; after all, Jesus warned: judge not,
> lest ye be judged (similarly). Don't play into the hands of the
> fundamentalists by fearing and mis/distrusting Muslims, as that is
> what they hope will be te ddivisive reaction that grants them the
> about them is that they are Muslim. How fair is that?
> It's my belief that God will judge us by certain standards. Some of
> those standards we set ourselves. That is, he will judge us as fairly
> as we have judged others. In that way, injustice can always be
> redressed in the Hereafter. This life is only a test for an eternal
> existence. Don't let the fundamentalists of ANY faith turn you
> against other believers of that faith who are NOT fundamentalists. It
> could be a dangerous practice; after all, Jesus warned: judge not,
> lest ye be judged (similarly). Don't play into the hands of the
> fundamentalists by fearing and mis/distrusting Muslims, as that is
> grounds for claiming general bias.
> I encounter Muslims on a daily basis. At work, at the local shop, in
> taxis, etc. And NONE of them have ever acted in a way that I would
> consider problematic. What makes ME nervous is people taking a
> dislike to people they don't know simply because they are different--
> when, really, we are ALL different; because it's THAT attitude that
> both Christian and Muslim fundamentalists are hoping will bring us to
> the all-glorious Armageddon that they both think they'll win. They
> can't BOTH be right; but, they could both be wrong, in that there ARE
> no winners of Armageddon.
>
> If, as you are tending towards, you think that Muslims will out-number
> the rest of the population in the foreseeable future, then that will
> change the world. But that doesn't, of necessity, mean that that
> change would be bad. It all comes down to implementation. And there
> are Islamic prophecies that indicate that, before Islam does become
> the predominant religion on Earth, it will be 'set back onto the
> straight path' by a 'Clarifier', the Mahdi, or Al-Qa'im. Muslims
> await this individual because theyknow thatt there are correctins (tto
> I encounter Muslims on a daily basis. At work, at the local shop, in
> taxis, etc. And NONE of them have ever acted in a way that I would
> consider problematic. What makes ME nervous is people taking a
> dislike to people they don't know simply because they are different--
> when, really, we are ALL different; because it's THAT attitude that
> both Christian and Muslim fundamentalists are hoping will bring us to
> the all-glorious Armageddon that they both think they'll win. They
> can't BOTH be right; but, they could both be wrong, in that there ARE
> no winners of Armageddon.
>
> If, as you are tending towards, you think that Muslims will out-number
> the rest of the population in the foreseeable future, then that will
> change the world. But that doesn't, of necessity, mean that that
> change would be bad. It all comes down to implementation. And there
> are Islamic prophecies that indicate that, before Islam does become
> the predominant religion on Earth, it will be 'set back onto the
> straight path' by a 'Clarifier', the Mahdi, or Al-Qa'im. Muslims
> the practices of the faith) that need to be made (the abolition of
> female circumcision throughout Islamic Africa would be the first thing
> that leaps out in my mind...but there is a longer list). So wait WITH
> them and watch out FOR him, for it is just THAT kind of individual
> that needs to come onto the world scene fairly soon, as the numbers,
> as you point out, are nearing the mark.
>
> PS 'Chanukkah Tovah' for all the Jewish readers out there!!
>
> > Excerpt:
> > The citizens o the Unittd Staates and Canada, as well as many within
> female circumcision throughout Islamic Africa would be the first thing
> that leaps out in my mind...but there is a longer list). So wait WITH
> them and watch out FOR him, for it is just THAT kind of individual
> that needs to come onto the world scene fairly soon, as the numbers,
> as you point out, are nearing the mark.
>
> PS 'Chanukkah Tovah' for all the Jewish readers out there!!
>
> > Excerpt:
> > various echelons of law enforcement, might be surprised to learn that
> > active paramilitary training of Islamic terrorists, who are focused on
> > bringing jihad or holy war into America on a large scale, are
> > currently operating in the United States and Canada. In fact, they
> > have existed inside North America since at least 1980.
>
> >http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover061107h.htm
>
> > The Islamic "jihadist" Army in our Midst
> > The most astute researchers of Islamic terrorist activities might
> > elieve tthat the so-called "Virginia jihad network," often referred to
> > active paramilitary training of Islamic terrorists, who are focused on
> > bringing jihad or holy war into America on a large scale, are
> > currently operating in the United States and Canada. In fact, they
> > have existed inside North America since at least 1980.
>
> >http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover061107h.htm
>
> > The Islamic "jihadist" Army in our Midst
> > The most astute researchers of Islamic terrorist activities might
> > as the "paintball jihad network," was the first paramilitary training
> > of its kind in America. The "paintball jihad network" consisted of
> > nearly a dozen Muslim men, including Randall "Ismail" Royer, an
> > American convert to Islam and former official of the Council on
> > American Islamic Relation (CAIIR), who honed their combat skills
> > of its kind in America. The "paintball jihad network" consisted of
> > nearly a dozen Muslim men, including Randall "Ismail" Royer, an
> > American convert to Islam and former official of the Council on
> > through the use of paintball gun exercises with other like-minded
> > Muslims, according to the federal indictment and his subsequent
> > conviction. Others might cite the case of Ernest James UJAAMA, a/k/a
> > Bilal AHMED, (a Muslim convert born James Earnest Thompson), who,
> > according to court documents, attempted to et upp an Afghanistan-style
> > Muslims, according to the federal indictment and his subsequent
> > conviction. Others might cite the case of Ernest James UJAAMA, a/k/a
> > Bilal AHMED, (a Muslim convert born James Earnest Thompson), who,
Slip Disc
Dec 11, 2009, 1:11:17 PM12/11/09
to "Minds Eye"
You make is sound so relaxing, Pat. I have to add that I do not know
any Muslims and have never met any Muslims which may be one of the
reasons for my apprehensions. However, it is not without any basis,
ie; the Muslim Major Hasan seemed by "ALL" accounts to be one of the
peace loving Muslim persons of whom you speak. Didn't people know him
as such, wasn't he in the US Army? Didn't he shoot and kill US
Soldiers? Was he a fundamentalist, a radical terrorist?
Are we being duped is the real question, are you?
any Muslims and have never met any Muslims which may be one of the
reasons for my apprehensions. However, it is not without any basis,
ie; the Muslim Major Hasan seemed by "ALL" accounts to be one of the
peace loving Muslim persons of whom you speak. Didn't people know him
as such, wasn't he in the US Army? Didn't he shoot and kill US
Soldiers? Was he a fundamentalist, a radical terrorist?
Are we being duped is the real question, are you?
Chris Jenkins
Dec 11, 2009, 4:06:47 PM12/11/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
They don't make 'em like Ibn Rushd anymore...
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to mind...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
archytas
Dec 11, 2009, 5:23:39 PM12/11/09
to "Minds Eye"
My grandson is sleeping over at a Muslim house tonight. I have much in
common with what Pat says - yet I agree with Slip - what is the real
question here? There are miserable intolerants everywhere, including
many well versed in political correctness. Living in the Middle East
I found it very easy to sympathise with Muslim anti-western idiot
capitalism and much of communal Islam. I do here for that matter.
Pat's known me too long to think I'll be casting the PC remark in his
direction - the question for me is why the hostilities that are around
come about. Some of the answers lie in Gabby's 'fascism of the blue
eye', but we discount too quickly to racism (on any side) too quickly
as a rule.
> > minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com<minds-eye%2Bunsubscribe@googlegroups .com>
> > .
common with what Pat says - yet I agree with Slip - what is the real
question here? There are miserable intolerants everywhere, including
many well versed in political correctness. Living in the Middle East
I found it very easy to sympathise with Muslim anti-western idiot
capitalism and much of communal Islam. I do here for that matter.
Pat's known me too long to think I'll be casting the PC remark in his
direction - the question for me is why the hostilities that are around
come about. Some of the answers lie in Gabby's 'fascism of the blue
eye', but we discount too quickly to racism (on any side) too quickly
as a rule.
> > .
Justintruth
Dec 12, 2009, 4:57:57 AM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
When Tim McVeigh blew up the building in Oklahoma did it make you feel
that Christians were the problem?
One thing for sure you are promoting with this post the thing you
should be afraid of. You are promoting a fear or "them" Muslim's by
"us" non-muslim's and that fear can, and has!, been used to justify
lethal force used against innocent people.
Islam is surrender to the will of God. How could that make you afraid?
What a wonderful religion! What wonderful people! Do you not get the
Haj? Are you really so completely stupid that you do not see the
meaning of it? Surrender to the will of God! Its a very simple idea.
The way things work, its just really practical advice, you should be
writing posts on whether you think a British or American military
presence that objectively kills many more innocent Muslims that all of
the terrorists in the world combined have killed, makes Muslims afraid
of YOU! Because it is precisely that fear in them that will lead to a
trumped up justification of their "taking action" even "heroic action"
to attack you, or other innocents. It is that "trumped up inspiration
to heroic action" taken by someone that is convinced that they are a
"victim" (or in the latest theory even "might" be a victim) against a
"perpetrator" that is exactly the problem.
"Hope over fear" remains the answer even if its political
insubstantiation has not been exactly thrilling or complete. The
religions have taught the answers. You need only remove the log from
your own eye and turn the other cheek or- to be honest - just be
decent and stop beating the drums of war.
Only if we, who are the innocents on both sides, attack the killing of
innocent people BY OUR OWN SIDES will the problem end. The best way is
for you to leave the criticism of Muslim's, and your fear aside, and
focus instead on the actions of your own "identity group". If you do
that and innocent Muslim's criticize the killing of innocent non-
Muslim's maybe we can get some where. Defend those not in your group!
What you have written is a incitement of fear. What is necessary is
for all who read it to reject it wholeheartedly in the literal sense
of the word, to realize that it is what must be attacked, attack the
fear, and work with all good people to end this endless cycle of fear
and attack that is justified by people like you who promote it.
You, sir, are a cad! There are innocent people being killed all the
time - even children! Stop your fear mongering! If you are afraid of
immigrant Muslims meet with them. As the Dali Lama says: It starts in
the mind, then on the lips and finally in action. That is the path
evil takes. In you it is at the second step in this post, but in the
context of the battle that is ongoing it has broken out an killed
thousands and thousands of innocent people.
Why not find a kind Imam who can help you. One day maybe you will even
know enough truth and have enough humility to kneel and bow facing
Mecca as good Muslims do in order to signify their prostration to
God's will. Find an Imam - convert. It will do you good. Then, through
the medium of that religion, perhaps you can find the understanding of
what religion lives and how good it is for our minds, our search for
truth, and our common desire to survive and prosper.
that Christians were the problem?
One thing for sure you are promoting with this post the thing you
should be afraid of. You are promoting a fear or "them" Muslim's by
"us" non-muslim's and that fear can, and has!, been used to justify
lethal force used against innocent people.
Islam is surrender to the will of God. How could that make you afraid?
What a wonderful religion! What wonderful people! Do you not get the
Haj? Are you really so completely stupid that you do not see the
meaning of it? Surrender to the will of God! Its a very simple idea.
The way things work, its just really practical advice, you should be
writing posts on whether you think a British or American military
presence that objectively kills many more innocent Muslims that all of
the terrorists in the world combined have killed, makes Muslims afraid
of YOU! Because it is precisely that fear in them that will lead to a
trumped up justification of their "taking action" even "heroic action"
to attack you, or other innocents. It is that "trumped up inspiration
to heroic action" taken by someone that is convinced that they are a
"victim" (or in the latest theory even "might" be a victim) against a
"perpetrator" that is exactly the problem.
"Hope over fear" remains the answer even if its political
insubstantiation has not been exactly thrilling or complete. The
religions have taught the answers. You need only remove the log from
your own eye and turn the other cheek or- to be honest - just be
decent and stop beating the drums of war.
Only if we, who are the innocents on both sides, attack the killing of
innocent people BY OUR OWN SIDES will the problem end. The best way is
for you to leave the criticism of Muslim's, and your fear aside, and
focus instead on the actions of your own "identity group". If you do
that and innocent Muslim's criticize the killing of innocent non-
Muslim's maybe we can get some where. Defend those not in your group!
What you have written is a incitement of fear. What is necessary is
for all who read it to reject it wholeheartedly in the literal sense
of the word, to realize that it is what must be attacked, attack the
fear, and work with all good people to end this endless cycle of fear
and attack that is justified by people like you who promote it.
You, sir, are a cad! There are innocent people being killed all the
time - even children! Stop your fear mongering! If you are afraid of
immigrant Muslims meet with them. As the Dali Lama says: It starts in
the mind, then on the lips and finally in action. That is the path
evil takes. In you it is at the second step in this post, but in the
context of the battle that is ongoing it has broken out an killed
thousands and thousands of innocent people.
Why not find a kind Imam who can help you. One day maybe you will even
know enough truth and have enough humility to kneel and bow facing
Mecca as good Muslims do in order to signify their prostration to
God's will. Find an Imam - convert. It will do you good. Then, through
the medium of that religion, perhaps you can find the understanding of
what religion lives and how good it is for our minds, our search for
truth, and our common desire to survive and prosper.
archytas
Dec 12, 2009, 5:31:43 AM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
Much to agree with Justin - yet I've long been afraid of Xtians, not
least because they screw up my Xmases with tedious singing and gauche
trinkets. There is an endless cycle of fear, though this surely
extends into the way we live on a day-to-day basis, some for what can
be swept from the floor, others for riches that can only be spent on
obscene luxury whilst other starve. I would have to contest any idea
that religion can provide answers, even in promoting personal
integrity - how does this arise from lies and myths of origin, and
clergies with rotten records on child abuse? I rather favour the
experiment of Slip converting - not had enough laughs of late - though
a little more seriously my nephew did convert to marry. There are
important issues in what you say, but sadly a lot wrong and
misguided. I know Slip is a cad and smart-arse - this because we go
to the same club. If you really knew what you are saying Justin,
you'd reflect on just what projections are flying about. You have
confused some very good points (such as all the current Western
killing), with a typical line of political correctness that will not
brook the truth at all.
Some of us do want to try and see these matters with blinkers, whether
those of our own political-economic propaganda, or any religious
trance. There is something to see in religious experience, but it is
by no means all good, even in the Dali Lama (here I am as sickened by
the crass supplication of priests to visiting worthies as I am by nuns
raising eyes to heaven as brides of Christ). All sorts of carnage and
personal damage have been done by 'god's will'. Slip is trying to get
at the real argument, not come up with posturing lines or incitement,
though Justin's response shows just how confused the argument is and
how difficult it is to argue when religion is involved.
The First Cohort of the Queen's 'In Defence of Slip' Cavalry ride
out! No horses or tanks though Slip, in these days of MOD bungling
and deficits!
least because they screw up my Xmases with tedious singing and gauche
trinkets. There is an endless cycle of fear, though this surely
extends into the way we live on a day-to-day basis, some for what can
be swept from the floor, others for riches that can only be spent on
obscene luxury whilst other starve. I would have to contest any idea
that religion can provide answers, even in promoting personal
integrity - how does this arise from lies and myths of origin, and
clergies with rotten records on child abuse? I rather favour the
experiment of Slip converting - not had enough laughs of late - though
a little more seriously my nephew did convert to marry. There are
important issues in what you say, but sadly a lot wrong and
misguided. I know Slip is a cad and smart-arse - this because we go
to the same club. If you really knew what you are saying Justin,
you'd reflect on just what projections are flying about. You have
confused some very good points (such as all the current Western
killing), with a typical line of political correctness that will not
brook the truth at all.
Some of us do want to try and see these matters with blinkers, whether
those of our own political-economic propaganda, or any religious
trance. There is something to see in religious experience, but it is
by no means all good, even in the Dali Lama (here I am as sickened by
the crass supplication of priests to visiting worthies as I am by nuns
raising eyes to heaven as brides of Christ). All sorts of carnage and
personal damage have been done by 'god's will'. Slip is trying to get
at the real argument, not come up with posturing lines or incitement,
though Justin's response shows just how confused the argument is and
how difficult it is to argue when religion is involved.
The First Cohort of the Queen's 'In Defence of Slip' Cavalry ride
out! No horses or tanks though Slip, in these days of MOD bungling
and deficits!
Vamadevananda
Dec 12, 2009, 7:23:17 AM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
" ... we discount too quickly to racism (on any side) too quickly as
a rule."
The kind of racism you may be speaking of, as I understand, is
biological - cultural. You might as well be discussing why we have
affiliation to our respective families.
We can only shed such prejudices through an outgrowing process, not by
wishing away or mere indoctrination.
> > >http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.- Hide quoted text -
a rule."
The kind of racism you may be speaking of, as I understand, is
biological - cultural. You might as well be discussing why we have
affiliation to our respective families.
We can only shed such prejudices through an outgrowing process, not by
wishing away or mere indoctrination.
archytas
Dec 12, 2009, 10:10:42 AM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
Your last bit is simply true Vam. The outbreaks of killings around
the world amongst peoples who have lived together for decades in
apparent peace surely demonstrate that lip service or indoctrination
are not enough. I believe we can transcend our biology, or at least
channel its directions. This is just much more difficult than many
understand. Many have learned only to show they are anti-racist, anti-
sexist and the rest - they have not really worked on the basics of it
all. Some of the nastiest racists are not those mouthing the wrong
words, but hiding what they are even from themselves.
We have a case going through court in the UK in which Orthodox Jews
are contending that an automatic security light should be removed
because it traps them in their flat on the Sabbath because it comes on
if they do, thus breaching their rules on 'lighting fires'. The claim
that religion somehow allows this kind of farce in law makes me sick.
I do not believe religion should be allowed to interfere in society in
any way and believe we make a serious mistake in inventing laws to
protect on a religious or even racists basis. We should all be
protected by an enforceable code of decency. If people want to live
separately they should take the consequences of that and receive no
support or concession other than a right to the limited privacy we all
enjoy. These should not be public matters, though separatism should
concern us because it is historically fractious. Children should go
to the same schools and deep questions should be asked of those who
want to do otherwise. We cannot allow some things and should not shy
away from challenging them because of religion - sadly there already
is a politically correct movement trying to stop the voicing of this
concern.
> ...
>
> read more »
the world amongst peoples who have lived together for decades in
apparent peace surely demonstrate that lip service or indoctrination
are not enough. I believe we can transcend our biology, or at least
channel its directions. This is just much more difficult than many
understand. Many have learned only to show they are anti-racist, anti-
sexist and the rest - they have not really worked on the basics of it
all. Some of the nastiest racists are not those mouthing the wrong
words, but hiding what they are even from themselves.
We have a case going through court in the UK in which Orthodox Jews
are contending that an automatic security light should be removed
because it traps them in their flat on the Sabbath because it comes on
if they do, thus breaching their rules on 'lighting fires'. The claim
that religion somehow allows this kind of farce in law makes me sick.
I do not believe religion should be allowed to interfere in society in
any way and believe we make a serious mistake in inventing laws to
protect on a religious or even racists basis. We should all be
protected by an enforceable code of decency. If people want to live
separately they should take the consequences of that and receive no
support or concession other than a right to the limited privacy we all
enjoy. These should not be public matters, though separatism should
concern us because it is historically fractious. Children should go
to the same schools and deep questions should be asked of those who
want to do otherwise. We cannot allow some things and should not shy
away from challenging them because of religion - sadly there already
is a politically correct movement trying to stop the voicing of this
concern.
>
> read more »
Slip Disc
Dec 12, 2009, 10:17:16 AM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
Let's nip it at the bud. The post for one is not a promotion nor
incitement, rather it is one of expression and inquiry to others
thoughts and feelings and further the allusion that I might be biased
toward xtians is non sequitor. I provided a link which is one of
hundreds of such revealing links.
My disenchantment with xtianity and religion as a whole is well known
and has been posted many times by me, you should know, we've argued
many points
So before you go off on a long winded diatribe try getting the real
basis of my concern. It's not like I'm standing alone on this issue,
government(s) and many others are wary of Muslim intent.
Take your name calling attacks and the rest of your bloated boorish
rant to Allah because I'm unaffected by it. But thanks for the laugh
anyway!
I'm glad others had the sense to perceive the post for what is really
is and respond accordingly.
I'm more scared now than I was before, lol.
incitement, rather it is one of expression and inquiry to others
thoughts and feelings and further the allusion that I might be biased
toward xtians is non sequitor. I provided a link which is one of
hundreds of such revealing links.
My disenchantment with xtianity and religion as a whole is well known
and has been posted many times by me, you should know, we've argued
many points
So before you go off on a long winded diatribe try getting the real
basis of my concern. It's not like I'm standing alone on this issue,
government(s) and many others are wary of Muslim intent.
Take your name calling attacks and the rest of your bloated boorish
rant to Allah because I'm unaffected by it. But thanks for the laugh
anyway!
I'm glad others had the sense to perceive the post for what is really
is and respond accordingly.
I'm more scared now than I was before, lol.
frantheman
Dec 12, 2009, 11:51:23 AM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
Personally, I'm not particularly worried about "political" Islam here
in Europe. The extremists are, and will remain, a small minority among
Muslims and every religion will produce its share of extremist,
dangerous fanatics. In this sense I see little difference between
Christianity and Islam (or Judaism - looking at some of the extremist
orthodox groups in Israel - either).
More important considerations arise when we pose the question as to
what kind of society we want to live in. Der Speigel has a good
article on the wider aspects of the encounter between Europe and Islam
this week:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,666448,00.html
Here are a couple of excerpts:
"An estimated 15 million Muslims currently live in the European Union,
or roughly 3 percent of the population. But this is more than at any
other time in the past. Immigrants, most of whom came as guest workers
decades ago, have brought Islam to Europe.
Can Europe still be Europe if, for instance, in 2050 most young people
under the age of 15 in Austria are Muslims? And when Muhammad today is
already the most common name for newborn boys in Brussels and
Amsterdam, and the third most common in England?"
"American author and journalist Christopher Caldwell ... says that
Muslims are a small minority, but Europe is changing its structures
because of them: "When an insecure, malleable, relativistic culture
meets a culture that is anchored, confident and strengthened by common
doctrines, it is generally the former that changes to suit the
latter.""
"Dealing with Islam is perhaps the greatest challenge facing Europe.
If the Continent manages to preserve its own values without
discriminating against Muslims, then a consensus on values can be
achieved and European Muslims could become a model for the Islamic
world. If it fails, however, Europe could betray its own values, and
the populists could win and their simple solutions would fan the
flames of the clash of cultures."
This is, for me, the central point. Caldwell's analysis that European
[western] culture is "insecure" is a challenge. Those of us who
espouse a view of society which is open, tolerant and secular must be
prepared to stand up for these values and our view that they are
superior to exclusivist, doctrine-based world-views. We must make
clear that our fundamental values are NOT negotiable and that
tolerance demands a tolerant response and does not imply a laissez-
faire attitude to intolerance.
A final, somewhat ironic observation in the article with respect to
the Swiss referendum:
" ...sometimes fears are stronger than facts, and sometimes a ban on
minarets has nothing to do with minarets. In the Swiss cities where
Muslims and Christians have been coexisting for ages, the citizens'
initiative failed to garner the majority of votes. In the mountain
canton of Appenzell-Innerrhoden, where only 500 Muslims live, 71
percent of voters supported the minaret ban."
According to Wikipedia, "The population of the canton was 15,471 as of
2007, of which 1,510 (or 9.76%) were foreigners. Due to the split of
Appenzell along religious lines, the population (as of 2000) is nearly
all Roman Catholic (81%), with a small Protestant minority (10%)."
Francis
in Europe. The extremists are, and will remain, a small minority among
Muslims and every religion will produce its share of extremist,
dangerous fanatics. In this sense I see little difference between
Christianity and Islam (or Judaism - looking at some of the extremist
orthodox groups in Israel - either).
More important considerations arise when we pose the question as to
what kind of society we want to live in. Der Speigel has a good
article on the wider aspects of the encounter between Europe and Islam
this week:
http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,666448,00.html
Here are a couple of excerpts:
"An estimated 15 million Muslims currently live in the European Union,
or roughly 3 percent of the population. But this is more than at any
other time in the past. Immigrants, most of whom came as guest workers
decades ago, have brought Islam to Europe.
Can Europe still be Europe if, for instance, in 2050 most young people
under the age of 15 in Austria are Muslims? And when Muhammad today is
already the most common name for newborn boys in Brussels and
Amsterdam, and the third most common in England?"
"American author and journalist Christopher Caldwell ... says that
Muslims are a small minority, but Europe is changing its structures
because of them: "When an insecure, malleable, relativistic culture
meets a culture that is anchored, confident and strengthened by common
doctrines, it is generally the former that changes to suit the
latter.""
"Dealing with Islam is perhaps the greatest challenge facing Europe.
If the Continent manages to preserve its own values without
discriminating against Muslims, then a consensus on values can be
achieved and European Muslims could become a model for the Islamic
world. If it fails, however, Europe could betray its own values, and
the populists could win and their simple solutions would fan the
flames of the clash of cultures."
This is, for me, the central point. Caldwell's analysis that European
[western] culture is "insecure" is a challenge. Those of us who
espouse a view of society which is open, tolerant and secular must be
prepared to stand up for these values and our view that they are
superior to exclusivist, doctrine-based world-views. We must make
clear that our fundamental values are NOT negotiable and that
tolerance demands a tolerant response and does not imply a laissez-
faire attitude to intolerance.
A final, somewhat ironic observation in the article with respect to
the Swiss referendum:
" ...sometimes fears are stronger than facts, and sometimes a ban on
minarets has nothing to do with minarets. In the Swiss cities where
Muslims and Christians have been coexisting for ages, the citizens'
initiative failed to garner the majority of votes. In the mountain
canton of Appenzell-Innerrhoden, where only 500 Muslims live, 71
percent of voters supported the minaret ban."
According to Wikipedia, "The population of the canton was 15,471 as of
2007, of which 1,510 (or 9.76%) were foreigners. Due to the split of
Appenzell along religious lines, the population (as of 2000) is nearly
all Roman Catholic (81%), with a small Protestant minority (10%)."
Francis
Vamadevananda
Dec 12, 2009, 1:10:27 PM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
" Many have learned only to show they are anti-racist, anti - sexist
and the rest - ..."
I would term retention of such negativity and failure, as so
determining of our attitude or values, as an inability to reach out or
wake up into success.
This, while I empathise with your experience. Your view of ' others '
therefore seems natural, rational. But, there is more, a larger issue
or other, when we recognise the success of others who are not racist,
not sexist, not the rest. When we really have no time for failure,
except our own. It is this that is the hardest ... not to be
determined by that which appears, even of ourself. What is, is yet
unaffected, not the least impeded, ever ready to greet the one who yet
rose.
" I do not believe religion should be allowed to interfere in
society ... "
Like it or not, it will. Always. Because, religion determines the
individual, forms the individual's identity, knowledge and beliefs.
That is what the individual will bring to the table.
" ... we make a serious mistake in inventing laws to protect on a
cause behind the human need for religion or racist prejudices.
Declaring the grand intent would be puerile, an impotent thing that
adds nothing, changes nothing.
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
and the rest - ..."
I would term retention of such negativity and failure, as so
determining of our attitude or values, as an inability to reach out or
wake up into success.
This, while I empathise with your experience. Your view of ' others '
therefore seems natural, rational. But, there is more, a larger issue
or other, when we recognise the success of others who are not racist,
not sexist, not the rest. When we really have no time for failure,
except our own. It is this that is the hardest ... not to be
determined by that which appears, even of ourself. What is, is yet
unaffected, not the least impeded, ever ready to greet the one who yet
rose.
" I do not believe religion should be allowed to interfere in
Like it or not, it will. Always. Because, religion determines the
individual, forms the individual's identity, knowledge and beliefs.
That is what the individual will bring to the table.
" ... we make a serious mistake in inventing laws to protect on a
religious or even racists basis."
For that, we should be capable ( institutionally ) of addressing the
cause behind the human need for religion or racist prejudices.
Declaring the grand intent would be puerile, an impotent thing that
adds nothing, changes nothing.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Justintruth
Dec 12, 2009, 3:47:08 PM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
Justintruth
Dec 12, 2009, 3:55:01 PM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
I think I understand most of what you are saying but I am confused on
worthies .. if I imagine you mean "higher level clergy" and not "the
sick, old, or lonely"... they often visit the latter and not the
former you know....(if you mean the latter by the word "worthies I do
not understand at all though).... but I just can't fathom why you are
"sickened" by "nuns raising eyes to heaven as brides of Christ". The
mystical union can be sexual of course... but I am totally
"mystified" (if you excuse the play on words) as to why that is
sickening. Is it its sexual nature that disturbs you? Or ...? Just
don't get what it is...honestly....To me it is a wonderful human
possibility and I hope for them as much of the joy and depth and
richness of love that exists in such a relationship. Why the word
"sicken"? I get some of the post but not that????
one point for sure: You wrote:
"I am as sickened by
> the crass supplication of priests to visiting worthies as I am by nuns
> raising eyes to heaven as brides of Christ
Now I can understand the part of being sickened by priests visiting
"I am as sickened by
> the crass supplication of priests to visiting worthies as I am by nuns
> raising eyes to heaven as brides of Christ
worthies .. if I imagine you mean "higher level clergy" and not "the
sick, old, or lonely"... they often visit the latter and not the
former you know....(if you mean the latter by the word "worthies I do
not understand at all though).... but I just can't fathom why you are
"sickened" by "nuns raising eyes to heaven as brides of Christ". The
mystical union can be sexual of course... but I am totally
"mystified" (if you excuse the play on words) as to why that is
sickening. Is it its sexual nature that disturbs you? Or ...? Just
don't get what it is...honestly....To me it is a wonderful human
possibility and I hope for them as much of the joy and depth and
richness of love that exists in such a relationship. Why the word
"sicken"? I get some of the post but not that????
Slip Disc
Dec 12, 2009, 4:01:08 PM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
I like the Speigel view, at what point does a country cease to exist
and at what point does the invading horde restructure political power
to overrule and dictate thereby claiming title to the land, as in the
legal expression, possession is nine tenths of the law. There is an
intertwining of threads here when you consider the immigration issues
and signage threads. At what point does America become Mexico? If I
visit Austria will I be in Austria or a Muslim country? It would be
the same with "ANY" example. If the Chinese emigrated to Spain to the
point of becoming 90% of the population, would I be visiting Spain or
China, given that the signage and cultural exhibitions would have
transitioned over time to Chinese?
Where does a sovereign nation draw the line? More importantly the
issue at hand is a culture that is bent on changing the world to
conform to it's religious fanaticisms which unfortunately breed
extremists who use terror as a tactic.
When I'm confronted by any religious people will I be perceived as the
devil because I do not ascribe to their beliefs?
and at what point does the invading horde restructure political power
to overrule and dictate thereby claiming title to the land, as in the
legal expression, possession is nine tenths of the law. There is an
intertwining of threads here when you consider the immigration issues
and signage threads. At what point does America become Mexico? If I
visit Austria will I be in Austria or a Muslim country? It would be
the same with "ANY" example. If the Chinese emigrated to Spain to the
point of becoming 90% of the population, would I be visiting Spain or
China, given that the signage and cultural exhibitions would have
transitioned over time to Chinese?
Where does a sovereign nation draw the line? More importantly the
issue at hand is a culture that is bent on changing the world to
conform to it's religious fanaticisms which unfortunately breed
extremists who use terror as a tactic.
When I'm confronted by any religious people will I be perceived as the
devil because I do not ascribe to their beliefs?
Justintruth
Dec 12, 2009, 4:30:47 PM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
Your original post was about being afraid of Muslim immigrants not
"xtians" which is a phrase that is certainly contemporary and not one
I am familiar with. I responded to your original post on whether we
should fear a subclass of immigrants - namely Islamic ones. I tried to
point out the the fear itself is what is most dangerous and promoting
it was wrong. Did you not realize that your post would have the effect
of promoting that fear?
So what is the real basis of your fear? Surely you do not base it on
the fact of what the police think? We all know that they are a segment
of the population most susceptible for many reasons to the distortions
of the human misery and dis-function that exists whether it be common
murder, political assasination, or a host of other "problems" that
occur due to evil. The police are a segment that needs to be
"restrained" carefully for their legitimate purpose to be fulfilled.
They know that too often, and good cops support civilian review and
careful constraint on police power balanced of course by the realities
of what they face and the protection that they need. Saying "I am
afraid because the police are afraid" does that make sense? Shouldn't
we try to diffuse the situation instead of stirring it up? You are not
patrolling the streets - you were writing a post.
The police are also afraid? Were they afraid in Selma Alabama? How
about in India when they took on Gahndi? At the democratic convention
in Chicago? The police are afraid?! What about those whose heads are
busted by them... and this is something I know about... I have talked
to many of them... One described... with a kind of glee... how he
stood across from a line of protesters in San Francisco and smiled at
one man and said "You're my target" and then attacked him and cracked
his head hard enough so he was bleeding profusely... Another woman I
know described the police hiding their badges so that they could not
be identified before attacking protesters... this really happens.
Working in jail as a psychologist with a particularly hard case who
was abusing her verbally she initially was miffed and refused to put
him in a kind of protective program of suicide watch...as she was
walking away another inmate: "Please, sister, if you do not (put him
on suicide watch) they will kill him. Who did they mean? The guards.
She turned right around and put him on suicide watch. Why? Not because
she was afraid of he would do to himself but because she was very
afraid of what the police would do to him. He had been very abusive of
the guards and they planned payback...And what about the predator
drones... do you not see that they cause fear? Wouldn't you be afraid
if you were in their shoes? Perhaps you would even sign up to fight
the invading element. Its all so crazy. Why focus on the fear that you
focus on and not the fear that the others see- see in a real sense -
they are not paranoid- there are lots of bodies around - Why not focus
on that fear that is caused by a force mustered as a result of
political manipulation of the precise fear you describe? Why assist in
magnifying the fear that is fueling the conflict?
Your rejection of religion - in its true form - also makes no sense to
me. Take Christianity for example (I wish I knew Islam enough to give
an example from there) but I know that the ethic of Christianity
involves returning good for evil. As an engineer I realize that if
everyone returns evil for evil and adds even a slight increase it will
go critical and the world will descend into chaos but if good is
returned for evil? A lot can happen.
Please do not strawman me by reducing my position to absurdity by
exagerating what I am saying. I am simply saying that in the current
context your words in your original post are inflammatory and you are
fear mongering - that is the effect. Why do it?
"xtians" which is a phrase that is certainly contemporary and not one
I am familiar with. I responded to your original post on whether we
should fear a subclass of immigrants - namely Islamic ones. I tried to
point out the the fear itself is what is most dangerous and promoting
it was wrong. Did you not realize that your post would have the effect
of promoting that fear?
So what is the real basis of your fear? Surely you do not base it on
the fact of what the police think? We all know that they are a segment
of the population most susceptible for many reasons to the distortions
of the human misery and dis-function that exists whether it be common
murder, political assasination, or a host of other "problems" that
occur due to evil. The police are a segment that needs to be
"restrained" carefully for their legitimate purpose to be fulfilled.
They know that too often, and good cops support civilian review and
careful constraint on police power balanced of course by the realities
of what they face and the protection that they need. Saying "I am
afraid because the police are afraid" does that make sense? Shouldn't
we try to diffuse the situation instead of stirring it up? You are not
patrolling the streets - you were writing a post.
The police are also afraid? Were they afraid in Selma Alabama? How
about in India when they took on Gahndi? At the democratic convention
in Chicago? The police are afraid?! What about those whose heads are
busted by them... and this is something I know about... I have talked
to many of them... One described... with a kind of glee... how he
stood across from a line of protesters in San Francisco and smiled at
one man and said "You're my target" and then attacked him and cracked
his head hard enough so he was bleeding profusely... Another woman I
know described the police hiding their badges so that they could not
be identified before attacking protesters... this really happens.
Working in jail as a psychologist with a particularly hard case who
was abusing her verbally she initially was miffed and refused to put
him in a kind of protective program of suicide watch...as she was
walking away another inmate: "Please, sister, if you do not (put him
on suicide watch) they will kill him. Who did they mean? The guards.
She turned right around and put him on suicide watch. Why? Not because
she was afraid of he would do to himself but because she was very
afraid of what the police would do to him. He had been very abusive of
the guards and they planned payback...And what about the predator
drones... do you not see that they cause fear? Wouldn't you be afraid
if you were in their shoes? Perhaps you would even sign up to fight
the invading element. Its all so crazy. Why focus on the fear that you
focus on and not the fear that the others see- see in a real sense -
they are not paranoid- there are lots of bodies around - Why not focus
on that fear that is caused by a force mustered as a result of
political manipulation of the precise fear you describe? Why assist in
magnifying the fear that is fueling the conflict?
Your rejection of religion - in its true form - also makes no sense to
me. Take Christianity for example (I wish I knew Islam enough to give
an example from there) but I know that the ethic of Christianity
involves returning good for evil. As an engineer I realize that if
everyone returns evil for evil and adds even a slight increase it will
go critical and the world will descend into chaos but if good is
returned for evil? A lot can happen.
Please do not strawman me by reducing my position to absurdity by
exagerating what I am saying. I am simply saying that in the current
context your words in your original post are inflammatory and you are
fear mongering - that is the effect. Why do it?
Slip Disc
Dec 12, 2009, 8:19:43 PM12/12/09
to "Minds Eye"
First off you brought up Xtians with your Tim McVeigh analogy but I
still don't see it as a connection to my post. Next>
The fact is that America does have a problem with Homegrown Militant
Islam. The Muslim community is growing and Muslim youth, whether
through Islamic Internet Propaganda or Anger over Post 9/11 anti-
Muslim immigration sentiments, are increasingly resorting to Militant
means to vent their angers. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are
being used as a tool to portray an American War on Islam. America has
it's own Al Qaeda spokesperson Adam Gadahn who puts the strain on
relations with "Incitements" such as "Islams blood is on our hands".
The US and Britain are specific targets of this character.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Yahiye_Gadahn
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/192165/adam_yahiye_gadahn/
And so you think it is wrong that I should be worried about Muslims,
after the slaughter of my brethren at Fort Hood and the arrest of
these teenagers who used our resources for education and advancement
to run off to Pakistan to "KILL" Americans.
The notion that Muslims in the world are not going to be a huge
problem in the future is clear denial. I think it is the unsuspected
catalyst of World War Three and the problem is they are all over the
planet in every country making demands and causing trouble. It won't
be long before it all blows up in your face. Why? Because the problem
is this: Several issues concerning Muslims are going to cause more of
them to change from the peaceful sheep to the howling wolf, one being
increasing distrust of Muslims and the increase in "Local" militant
attacks. People are going to start killing people. If I were still
in business I wouldn't even consider hiring a Muslim because of the
fear that he/she could go postal on me or other employees, The
government is going to step up screening of Muslims for obviously very
good reasons.
Tell you what Just, you write a letter to the government and everyone
else who is worried about Muslims and see if you can change their
minds because the "FACT IS" that I'm on the low end of the totem pole,
the last link on the chain and many come before me in this Muslim
worry wart. If they change then I'll change.
I never really worried about Muslims before but now that I have seen
these American teenagers, probably children of peaceful Muslim
immigrants, going militant I can see the reality of the situation,
they aren't the first, they wont be the last and their ingrate
attitude will spread, even if it is just teenage angst there will be
damage.
May I remind you that this is Minds Eye, a free focus forum where
opinions, expressions, thoughts and considerations are welcome for
exploration, dissection, rearrangement and reconsideration by the
global community. My thread is not something that I just came up
with but a pre-existing issue to which I am not adding to or
detracting from, what it is already exists and not a product of my
creation. I don't expect to be attacked every time I express my
concern about "hot button topics" like Racism, Immigration, Terrorism,
Religion, Sexuality or any other Social Sensitivity.
I would be more than happy to explore Muslim contentions with anyone
capable of rational non extremist views but the problem is that I'm
not subscribing to the religion path in life, I have other means of
living and doing rather well without it but I still have an open mind
to at least hear and understand where others stand on issues. I don't
have to agree.
> ...
>
> read more »
still don't see it as a connection to my post. Next>
The fact is that America does have a problem with Homegrown Militant
Islam. The Muslim community is growing and Muslim youth, whether
through Islamic Internet Propaganda or Anger over Post 9/11 anti-
Muslim immigration sentiments, are increasingly resorting to Militant
means to vent their angers. The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are
being used as a tool to portray an American War on Islam. America has
it's own Al Qaeda spokesperson Adam Gadahn who puts the strain on
relations with "Incitements" such as "Islams blood is on our hands".
The US and Britain are specific targets of this character.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adam_Yahiye_Gadahn
http://www.metacafe.com/watch/192165/adam_yahiye_gadahn/
And so you think it is wrong that I should be worried about Muslims,
after the slaughter of my brethren at Fort Hood and the arrest of
these teenagers who used our resources for education and advancement
to run off to Pakistan to "KILL" Americans.
The notion that Muslims in the world are not going to be a huge
problem in the future is clear denial. I think it is the unsuspected
catalyst of World War Three and the problem is they are all over the
planet in every country making demands and causing trouble. It won't
be long before it all blows up in your face. Why? Because the problem
is this: Several issues concerning Muslims are going to cause more of
them to change from the peaceful sheep to the howling wolf, one being
increasing distrust of Muslims and the increase in "Local" militant
attacks. People are going to start killing people. If I were still
in business I wouldn't even consider hiring a Muslim because of the
fear that he/she could go postal on me or other employees, The
government is going to step up screening of Muslims for obviously very
good reasons.
Tell you what Just, you write a letter to the government and everyone
else who is worried about Muslims and see if you can change their
minds because the "FACT IS" that I'm on the low end of the totem pole,
the last link on the chain and many come before me in this Muslim
worry wart. If they change then I'll change.
I never really worried about Muslims before but now that I have seen
these American teenagers, probably children of peaceful Muslim
immigrants, going militant I can see the reality of the situation,
they aren't the first, they wont be the last and their ingrate
attitude will spread, even if it is just teenage angst there will be
damage.
May I remind you that this is Minds Eye, a free focus forum where
opinions, expressions, thoughts and considerations are welcome for
exploration, dissection, rearrangement and reconsideration by the
global community. My thread is not something that I just came up
with but a pre-existing issue to which I am not adding to or
detracting from, what it is already exists and not a product of my
creation. I don't expect to be attacked every time I express my
concern about "hot button topics" like Racism, Immigration, Terrorism,
Religion, Sexuality or any other Social Sensitivity.
I would be more than happy to explore Muslim contentions with anyone
capable of rational non extremist views but the problem is that I'm
not subscribing to the religion path in life, I have other means of
living and doing rather well without it but I still have an open mind
to at least hear and understand where others stand on issues. I don't
have to agree.
>
> read more »
Vamadevananda
Dec 13, 2009, 1:40:44 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
" The notion that Muslims in the world are not going to be a huge
problem in the future is clear denial."
That perhaps is not the argument, as I understand. The point is, if it
problem in the future is clear denial."
is indeed so, what are we going to do about ?
Justin reads " fear mongering," a sort of panic expression that
infects and spreads among others, fosters exacerbatiing attitudes,
irrational reactions and disproportionate responses ... the kind of
jingoistic attitudes we saw from Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld, Blair and
EU / Japan / Australia following.
It is often said : no deal is better than a bad deal. Likewise, it
may be said here ... no solution is better than a bad solution.
We cannot undo the past. But we can learn from it, make amends where
we may, constantly mindful of this servo - loop that ends with us
looking for more inclusive solutions.
The attitude that I know the best may give us a fair start, but it
best ends when the other guy agrees it is ' better !' It is obvious
that the ' other ' nations and people are sources of huge problems. It
is also agreed that much of the problem erupt from internal
contradictions of those ' others.' But, juvenile attitudes have only
led to battles, war and ' world wars.' Actions that discriminate
against, or treaties that coerce and humiliate, nations or people are
not forgotten.
So, if we must prevent the problems in future, we need to understand
the limited efectiveness of power and destructive attempts to cast the
world in one's own image, except as it would through consensus and
would allow through agreement.
There is a need to begin with the premise that what I want and what
would be preferred are and shall remain different for a long, long
time on historical scale, both in the context of the individual and
state.
Slip Disc
Dec 13, 2009, 4:33:44 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
Ah, very good Vam, a clear refocusing on issue to solutions. If it
were in the hands of this community I'm sure the problems could easily
be resolved but the powers that be have different ideas. One being
the entrenchment in old methodologies and logistics ie; the
acquisition of peace through war. Unfortunately the idea, on both
sides, is that killing the enemy is the solution and peaceful
negotiations are not possible. I'm all for everyone on the planet
laying down their arms and sitting down at the feast to talk it out,
that is if we could quell the machinations of the military industrial
complex and the archaic attitudes anchored in a modernist world.
I don't know that much can be changed by all this bloodshed, the days
of going to battle and coming out a victor seem obsolete. There are
still suicide bombings in Baghdad and else were killing thousands so I
think the invasion really just cost lives on both sides. Thousands of
soldiers lost their lives and thousands of Iraqis are dead while
thousands of families grieve their loss; still the killing goes on as
before. It is not a traditional war because you can't kill an idea, a
belief or a tradition by killing people. A large part of my
disappointment and what I found disturbing is that the teenagers
actually think that joining up with the death machine is somehow a
solution to the problem. All I see happening is the "maintenance" of
war.
> ...
>
> read more »
were in the hands of this community I'm sure the problems could easily
be resolved but the powers that be have different ideas. One being
the entrenchment in old methodologies and logistics ie; the
acquisition of peace through war. Unfortunately the idea, on both
sides, is that killing the enemy is the solution and peaceful
negotiations are not possible. I'm all for everyone on the planet
laying down their arms and sitting down at the feast to talk it out,
that is if we could quell the machinations of the military industrial
complex and the archaic attitudes anchored in a modernist world.
I don't know that much can be changed by all this bloodshed, the days
of going to battle and coming out a victor seem obsolete. There are
still suicide bombings in Baghdad and else were killing thousands so I
think the invasion really just cost lives on both sides. Thousands of
soldiers lost their lives and thousands of Iraqis are dead while
thousands of families grieve their loss; still the killing goes on as
before. It is not a traditional war because you can't kill an idea, a
belief or a tradition by killing people. A large part of my
disappointment and what I found disturbing is that the teenagers
actually think that joining up with the death machine is somehow a
solution to the problem. All I see happening is the "maintenance" of
war.
>
> read more »
Justintruth
Dec 13, 2009, 4:40:37 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
Your analysis is not in question it is whether your initial post
contributes to a solution or exacerbates the situation.
You write:
And so you think it is wrong that I should be worried about Muslims,
> after the slaughter of my brethren at Fort Hood and the arrest of
> these teenagers who used our resources for education and advancement
> to run off to Pakistan to "KILL" Americans.
What about all of your Muslim brethren that have been killed in
Afganistan, Pakistan, and Iraq?
I don't expect to be attacked every time I express my
> concern about "hot button topics" like Racism, Immigration, Terrorism,
> Religion, Sexuality or any other Social Sensitivity.
You are, of course, right about this. I am sorry if I did this as it
was not my intent.
But the attitude that you express is in my opinion lethally dangerous
and must be stopped politically. I must resist the idea that Muslim
immigrants need be feared as Muslim militants must be. I must also
attack the selective nature of your protest. You do not mention the
innocent being killed on the other side of your identity group. It is
as if they are incidental to you. I also must attack the fact that you
seem to be more afraid of Islamic militants that a heart attack or
cancer.
I am left with the obvious conclusion that your original post, in the
context of the "war" that is ongoing in Afganistan, and Pakistan and
in fact in the world is not *in effect* just an innocent attempt at
objective dialog but rather a kind of jingoistic group thought fear
mongering that is dangerous because it has seriously distorted public
opinion to the point where others can hijack foreign policy and
control of the military forces and conduct a series of killings of
innocent people that is - even today - on going.
My assessment is that your attitudes have been distorted by the fear
mongering deliberately created to inspire political support for the
political position that something violent must be done. Your post is
not innocent. This is a public forum and you are essentially yelling
fire in a theater - and not just warning everyone to get out but - I
admit your post does not do this literaly but it exists *in context*
and the obvious conclusions that can be drawn is that we *must* do
something or "our" survival will be at stake - and that something we
*must do* in the end will be organized killing.
I am happy to discus this rationally with you but I assure you that
the "fear" that you feel is the irrational element that will have to
be removed, or better, put in the context of all else that you need
fear and in the context of life and its possibilities. Only by
understanding the reality of *all* the sentient beings that are
affected - not just the ones in your identity group, and by
understanding the meaning and value of their lives, and the process of
sub-speciation and its result in the distortion of national and
religious identity can we rationally discus the subject.
I am not attacking you. I am attacking your position and exposing
your fear mongering for what it is
> ...
>
> read more »
contributes to a solution or exacerbates the situation.
You write:
And so you think it is wrong that I should be worried about Muslims,
> after the slaughter of my brethren at Fort Hood and the arrest of
> these teenagers who used our resources for education and advancement
> to run off to Pakistan to "KILL" Americans.
Afganistan, Pakistan, and Iraq?
I don't expect to be attacked every time I express my
> concern about "hot button topics" like Racism, Immigration, Terrorism,
> Religion, Sexuality or any other Social Sensitivity.
was not my intent.
But the attitude that you express is in my opinion lethally dangerous
and must be stopped politically. I must resist the idea that Muslim
immigrants need be feared as Muslim militants must be. I must also
attack the selective nature of your protest. You do not mention the
innocent being killed on the other side of your identity group. It is
as if they are incidental to you. I also must attack the fact that you
seem to be more afraid of Islamic militants that a heart attack or
cancer.
I am left with the obvious conclusion that your original post, in the
context of the "war" that is ongoing in Afganistan, and Pakistan and
in fact in the world is not *in effect* just an innocent attempt at
objective dialog but rather a kind of jingoistic group thought fear
mongering that is dangerous because it has seriously distorted public
opinion to the point where others can hijack foreign policy and
control of the military forces and conduct a series of killings of
innocent people that is - even today - on going.
My assessment is that your attitudes have been distorted by the fear
mongering deliberately created to inspire political support for the
political position that something violent must be done. Your post is
not innocent. This is a public forum and you are essentially yelling
fire in a theater - and not just warning everyone to get out but - I
admit your post does not do this literaly but it exists *in context*
and the obvious conclusions that can be drawn is that we *must* do
something or "our" survival will be at stake - and that something we
*must do* in the end will be organized killing.
I am happy to discus this rationally with you but I assure you that
the "fear" that you feel is the irrational element that will have to
be removed, or better, put in the context of all else that you need
fear and in the context of life and its possibilities. Only by
understanding the reality of *all* the sentient beings that are
affected - not just the ones in your identity group, and by
understanding the meaning and value of their lives, and the process of
sub-speciation and its result in the distortion of national and
religious identity can we rationally discus the subject.
I am not attacking you. I am attacking your position and exposing
your fear mongering for what it is
>
> read more »
archytas
Dec 13, 2009, 5:04:55 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
People should have no need of supplication Justin - it might just be
allowable in private jollies (not my bag), but to bring it into public
roles disgusts me. We learn a lot through disgust, though without
some understanding are easily confused by its power. Seeing some poor
soul on his knees giving up the supplicant look to some worthy given
his job at 6 years of age makes me physically sick. The dumb and
expectant worship of idols generally does. I hope you know Justin
that none of this means I would dislike you because of religion - I
genuinely believe we may need something of it and I'd say it's
undeniable that parts of the brain respond very strongly.
Talking to a senior cop in Liverpool, I discovered he had deep fears
about Somali culture in the city, describing some of the crime he was
dealing with as 'more or less tribal'. I doubt that British
colonialism was or is much different. What can be done in the name of
Islam is often tribal in real origin. Anti-gay legislation is now
rife around Africa. There are Islamist groupings around that want to
prevent any education of women. Civilizing forces are often merely
colonising ones.
When it comes to religion I don't want to have to deny that I despise
most of its effects, though this neglects strong desires for social
cohesion and a need to believe there is some reason to struggle with
life and find ways to relish it. We have a great deal of trouble with
any kind of expression of what is going wrong in our society. I doubt
any of the great traditions is all wrong and think the aim of a
rational grok on our situation is broadly wrong because it contains an
assumption we can all achieve it. We have to start with a more open
reception of the facts.
In English Law, one can't claim truth as a defence against a charge of
criminal libel. To say some of the things Slip or I have said to
'cause a riot' leading to hostilities against Muslims (Xtians, Jews
and so on) would be illegal, even though true. Free speech is and
should be limited by caution, yet this should not prevent open
dialogue. Freedom of religion is not absolute either, freedom itself
a duality of freedom to and freedom from. Vam was at his best in the
post above. Yet after the 'start' we must discuss what is really felt
and being seen to happen with some means to experience forces of
prejudice rather than exclude them to a festering subjectivity that
only seeks argument for its own purposes. Diplomacy is really only
war by other means and in no sense objective or seeking an inter-
subjectivity of being at one. I believe more of us in the West should
find ways of dropping our 'superiority', but we can't do this by
conceding all problems and even horrors to an excuse of cultural or
religious relativism.
My view is this - we need to recognise none of us if free of prejudice
and find ways for us to air our projections and put them right.
Strong views don't lead to some of us becoming enemies or hating each
other. We can usually dig down and find agreement (of some sort).
Many can hardly do this because they only seek confirmation of the
world-view they hold rather than what might disturb and even change
that. We should be looking for some minimal values (the most
important though) we do agree on that are flexible enough to allow
reasonable diversity and decide what isn't reasonable. There is a
form of logic that supports this - defeasible logic (logic that can
admit it's wrong and allows for particularism). We need something
like this in order not to argue from positions that are incompatible.
This is not how our public debates work.
One might add that the lack of Muslim voices in groups like this makes
me nervous.
> ...
>
> read more »
allowable in private jollies (not my bag), but to bring it into public
roles disgusts me. We learn a lot through disgust, though without
some understanding are easily confused by its power. Seeing some poor
soul on his knees giving up the supplicant look to some worthy given
his job at 6 years of age makes me physically sick. The dumb and
expectant worship of idols generally does. I hope you know Justin
that none of this means I would dislike you because of religion - I
genuinely believe we may need something of it and I'd say it's
undeniable that parts of the brain respond very strongly.
Talking to a senior cop in Liverpool, I discovered he had deep fears
about Somali culture in the city, describing some of the crime he was
dealing with as 'more or less tribal'. I doubt that British
colonialism was or is much different. What can be done in the name of
Islam is often tribal in real origin. Anti-gay legislation is now
rife around Africa. There are Islamist groupings around that want to
prevent any education of women. Civilizing forces are often merely
colonising ones.
When it comes to religion I don't want to have to deny that I despise
most of its effects, though this neglects strong desires for social
cohesion and a need to believe there is some reason to struggle with
life and find ways to relish it. We have a great deal of trouble with
any kind of expression of what is going wrong in our society. I doubt
any of the great traditions is all wrong and think the aim of a
rational grok on our situation is broadly wrong because it contains an
assumption we can all achieve it. We have to start with a more open
reception of the facts.
In English Law, one can't claim truth as a defence against a charge of
criminal libel. To say some of the things Slip or I have said to
'cause a riot' leading to hostilities against Muslims (Xtians, Jews
and so on) would be illegal, even though true. Free speech is and
should be limited by caution, yet this should not prevent open
dialogue. Freedom of religion is not absolute either, freedom itself
a duality of freedom to and freedom from. Vam was at his best in the
post above. Yet after the 'start' we must discuss what is really felt
and being seen to happen with some means to experience forces of
prejudice rather than exclude them to a festering subjectivity that
only seeks argument for its own purposes. Diplomacy is really only
war by other means and in no sense objective or seeking an inter-
subjectivity of being at one. I believe more of us in the West should
find ways of dropping our 'superiority', but we can't do this by
conceding all problems and even horrors to an excuse of cultural or
religious relativism.
My view is this - we need to recognise none of us if free of prejudice
and find ways for us to air our projections and put them right.
Strong views don't lead to some of us becoming enemies or hating each
other. We can usually dig down and find agreement (of some sort).
Many can hardly do this because they only seek confirmation of the
world-view they hold rather than what might disturb and even change
that. We should be looking for some minimal values (the most
important though) we do agree on that are flexible enough to allow
reasonable diversity and decide what isn't reasonable. There is a
form of logic that supports this - defeasible logic (logic that can
admit it's wrong and allows for particularism). We need something
like this in order not to argue from positions that are incompatible.
This is not how our public debates work.
One might add that the lack of Muslim voices in groups like this makes
me nervous.
>
> read more »
Slip Disc
Dec 13, 2009, 5:32:10 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
Your opinion is well noted but I don't think I'm alone in not agreeing
with all you put out, especially perceiving my post as fear mongering,
as Vam put it, ".......a sort of panic expression that
infects and spreads among others, fosters exacerbating attitudes,
irrational reactions and disproportionate responses ......."
I did mention in my post before this one, the needless deaths of many
but I didn't mention it as the main issue or to redirect focus from
the thread. I abhor war and violence and see it as wasted energy
without any positive outcome, unfortunately it is humanity's curse.
You admit that you are drawing conclusions through your own
interpretations of my post, the only person so far to do so.
"obvious conclusions" and your turning me into some kind of radical
calling for the death of these people when I'm just getting a bit
nervous. Fact is that the "yelling" has already taken place, it
already exists, I'm simply recognizing it and experiencing an
emotional response to it. I'm not calling anyone up to arms nor am I
trying incite action for or against. These problems exist already,
people are waring over it, people are dying and for whatever reason
the truth is that some Muslims are calling for death and killing
people by whatever means available including suicide bombings. "The
Theater Burned Down Already" in case you haven't noticed.
Here is some disturbing information:
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/cnn-exposes-nyc-jihadis-by-interviewing-terror-linked-imam-video/
Now what am I supposed to do, ignore it?
How about this:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,565365,00.html
Have you written any letters to CNN and FOX news about their "Fear
Mongering"? I didn't think so, it's easier to jump on Slip for
expressing his concern and looking for others opinions and ideas.
I'm sure everyone is Running for their Lives after reading my posts.
LOL!
Gabby, you can come out of the bomb shelter now!!
I think you are exaggerating my expressions, my fear is not one that
has me walking about nervously or keeping me in a state of worry or
intermittent panic. My world is extremely peaceful and happy, I just
got out of my Jacuzzi before writing this post and it is near 4:30
am, nothing like having a glass of wine, sitting in a warm massaging
tub under the star lit sky on a cool night, ahhhhh.
*snap* where was I? Oh Yeah, "The Muslims are coming, the Muslims
are coming, the Muslims are coming, everyone run for your
lives"............. {;-)
> ...
>
> read more »
with all you put out, especially perceiving my post as fear mongering,
as Vam put it, ".......a sort of panic expression that
infects and spreads among others, fosters exacerbating attitudes,
irrational reactions and disproportionate responses ......."
I did mention in my post before this one, the needless deaths of many
but I didn't mention it as the main issue or to redirect focus from
the thread. I abhor war and violence and see it as wasted energy
without any positive outcome, unfortunately it is humanity's curse.
You admit that you are drawing conclusions through your own
interpretations of my post, the only person so far to do so.
You write:
This is a public forum and you are essentially yelling
fire in a theater - and not just warning everyone to get out but - I
admit your post does not do this literaly but it exists *in context*
and the obvious conclusions that can be drawn is that we *must* do
something or "our" survival will be at stake - and that something we
*must do* in the end will be organized killing.
This is clearly your individual and personal interpretation and
This is a public forum and you are essentially yelling
fire in a theater - and not just warning everyone to get out but - I
admit your post does not do this literaly but it exists *in context*
and the obvious conclusions that can be drawn is that we *must* do
something or "our" survival will be at stake - and that something we
*must do* in the end will be organized killing.
"obvious conclusions" and your turning me into some kind of radical
calling for the death of these people when I'm just getting a bit
nervous. Fact is that the "yelling" has already taken place, it
already exists, I'm simply recognizing it and experiencing an
emotional response to it. I'm not calling anyone up to arms nor am I
trying incite action for or against. These problems exist already,
people are waring over it, people are dying and for whatever reason
the truth is that some Muslims are calling for death and killing
people by whatever means available including suicide bombings. "The
Theater Burned Down Already" in case you haven't noticed.
Here is some disturbing information:
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2009/11/09/cnn-exposes-nyc-jihadis-by-interviewing-terror-linked-imam-video/
Now what am I supposed to do, ignore it?
How about this:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,565365,00.html
Have you written any letters to CNN and FOX news about their "Fear
Mongering"? I didn't think so, it's easier to jump on Slip for
expressing his concern and looking for others opinions and ideas.
I'm sure everyone is Running for their Lives after reading my posts.
LOL!
Gabby, you can come out of the bomb shelter now!!
I think you are exaggerating my expressions, my fear is not one that
has me walking about nervously or keeping me in a state of worry or
intermittent panic. My world is extremely peaceful and happy, I just
got out of my Jacuzzi before writing this post and it is near 4:30
am, nothing like having a glass of wine, sitting in a warm massaging
tub under the star lit sky on a cool night, ahhhhh.
*snap* where was I? Oh Yeah, "The Muslims are coming, the Muslims
are coming, the Muslims are coming, everyone run for your
lives"............. {;-)
>
> read more »
ornamentalmind
Dec 13, 2009, 6:18:55 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
“…In English Law, one can't claim truth as a defence against a charge
Somehow, we in the Colonies differentiate between libel and incitement
to riot. Truth being a defense in libel law but as I understand it a
more complex issue with incitement.
As an aside, decades ago in the Helter Skelter era, some of the
Orwellian legislation that first allowed crimes of thought (intent) to
surface arose. Now such an atrocious reality is accepted as normal.
of
criminal libel. To say some of the things Slip or I have said to
'cause a riot' leading to hostilities against Muslims (Xtians, Jews
and so on) would be illegal, even though true. …” – Neil
criminal libel. To say some of the things Slip or I have said to
'cause a riot' leading to hostilities against Muslims (Xtians, Jews
Somehow, we in the Colonies differentiate between libel and incitement
to riot. Truth being a defense in libel law but as I understand it a
more complex issue with incitement.
As an aside, decades ago in the Helter Skelter era, some of the
Orwellian legislation that first allowed crimes of thought (intent) to
surface arose. Now such an atrocious reality is accepted as normal.
ornamentalmind
Dec 13, 2009, 6:22:27 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
“…We can usually dig down and find agreement (of some sort).
All very sane. All very forward thinking. And, when core issues like
what constitutes life, when, if ever it is ok to kill etc. remain a
fully polarizing issue, I become disillusioned and mainly just wait
for a culling of the herd.
Many can hardly do this because they only seek confirmation of the
world-view they hold rather than what might disturb and even change
that. We should be looking for some minimal values (the most
important though) we do agree on that are flexible enough to allow
reasonable diversity and decide what isn't reasonable….” – Neil
world-view they hold rather than what might disturb and even change
that. We should be looking for some minimal values (the most
important though) we do agree on that are flexible enough to allow
All very sane. All very forward thinking. And, when core issues like
what constitutes life, when, if ever it is ok to kill etc. remain a
fully polarizing issue, I become disillusioned and mainly just wait
for a culling of the herd.
iam deheretic
Dec 13, 2009, 7:02:39 AM12/13/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
I have been reading the koran and the truth is I am not very far.. into just the third book.
What i have noticed is that there is a lot of added words (The version I am reading has it in aribic,, which there is no way I can read. and it is also pictures so I can not run it through a translator. http://www.quran.com/ and there is an international version which i am reading and they block in words they have added and a third version, which I glance over occasionally.
What I have noticed so far is that a lot of the blocked in words are for clarification as to who is speaking , I noticed the statement "O Mohammed" has been added a lot when it is not there at all, and an occasional word is inserted which changed the entire meaning of the segment when added. I am trying to figure out just who the "We" they keep referring to is?
There a lot of condemnation of non believers (oddly I get the feeling that does not mean a specific faith but those that do not follow Allah 'God" and that includes non believers within Islam.) Just because some one mouths the words it does not not mean they are a believer. Believers are determined on how they live their lives.
As this is supposed to be a clarification of the word of God The regulations involving divorce leave me confused and could many anything. In one time it sez women are free and the next breath it sez they have to have sex with their husband (specified and no choice). and then it sez they are nothing more than a field for the male seed, and they are the property of their husbands.
Now the third version which has had so much added it reminds me of an agenda, having little to do with what was said but more of how they want it to read. I admit I only glance at it occasionally
Positive side there is really a phenomenal concept of poverty and charity far beyond any of the concepts of xtianity. Included in are words that prohibit you from with holding your charity it still is not clear to me yet but I am impressed.
I have a long way to go and this is proving to be one of the most difficult things I am reading or have read. Sigh back to my reading.
Allan
--
(
)
I_D Allan
What i have noticed is that there is a lot of added words (The version I am reading has it in aribic,, which there is no way I can read. and it is also pictures so I can not run it through a translator. http://www.quran.com/ and there is an international version which i am reading and they block in words they have added and a third version, which I glance over occasionally.
What I have noticed so far is that a lot of the blocked in words are for clarification as to who is speaking , I noticed the statement "O Mohammed" has been added a lot when it is not there at all, and an occasional word is inserted which changed the entire meaning of the segment when added. I am trying to figure out just who the "We" they keep referring to is?
There a lot of condemnation of non believers (oddly I get the feeling that does not mean a specific faith but those that do not follow Allah 'God" and that includes non believers within Islam.) Just because some one mouths the words it does not not mean they are a believer. Believers are determined on how they live their lives.
As this is supposed to be a clarification of the word of God The regulations involving divorce leave me confused and could many anything. In one time it sez women are free and the next breath it sez they have to have sex with their husband (specified and no choice). and then it sez they are nothing more than a field for the male seed, and they are the property of their husbands.
Now the third version which has had so much added it reminds me of an agenda, having little to do with what was said but more of how they want it to read. I admit I only glance at it occasionally
Positive side there is really a phenomenal concept of poverty and charity far beyond any of the concepts of xtianity. Included in are words that prohibit you from with holding your charity it still is not clear to me yet but I am impressed.
I have a long way to go and this is proving to be one of the most difficult things I am reading or have read. Sigh back to my reading.
Allan
--
(
)
I_D Allan
archytas
Dec 13, 2009, 8:35:43 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
My thesis is pretty sad Bill. I can see how we might form useful
agreements, but rarely see this in practice. It seems very strange
that so many protesters have to be kept so far away from the worthies
inside the Copenhagen debate, almost in case they might sway matters.
What has happened to us when peace protesters have become a threat?
What Islam has (and is not alone in having) is collective charity and
responsibility. Yet as with our logics, this is honoured more in
breach than praxis.
On 13 Dec, 12:02, iam deheretic <dehere...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have been reading the koran and the truth is I am not very far.. into
> just the third book.
>
> What i have noticed is that there is a lot of added words (The version I am
> reading has it in aribic,, which there is no way I can read. and it is also
> pictures so I can not run it through a translator.http://www.quran.com/
agreements, but rarely see this in practice. It seems very strange
that so many protesters have to be kept so far away from the worthies
inside the Copenhagen debate, almost in case they might sway matters.
What has happened to us when peace protesters have become a threat?
What Islam has (and is not alone in having) is collective charity and
responsibility. Yet as with our logics, this is honoured more in
breach than praxis.
On 13 Dec, 12:02, iam deheretic <dehere...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I have been reading the koran and the truth is I am not very far.. into
> just the third book.
>
> What i have noticed is that there is a lot of added words (The version I am
> reading has it in aribic,, which there is no way I can read. and it is also
frantheman
Dec 13, 2009, 9:01:52 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
On 13 Dez., 11:04, archytas <archy...@live.co.uk> wrote:
>
> One might add that the lack of Muslim voices in groups like this makes
> me nervous.
>
have had occasional Muslim contributors. Some have only been
interested in preaching, some have tried to engage in dialogue for a
while but seemed to feel increasingly uncomfortable with us. Many have
complained, usually with reason, that they feel frequently forced to
refute views of Islam which they do not regard as correct. All have
quit, usually after pretty brief periods.
(On the other hand, the convinced Christians who continue to engage
here are also honourable exceptions.)
Speaking as someone who genuinely enjoys honest dialogue (and who is,
hopefully, not primarily interested in useless debating victories), I
regard this as a great pity. A lot may have to do with the combatative
nature of some of those non-Muslims posting, and this being -
generally incorrectly - interpreted as personal attacks. At the same
time, there is an aspect of Islam, as I frequently experience it,
which makes dialogue quite difficult; I mean by this the tendency to
see hard questions regarding basic tenets of Islam as insults to Allah
and his prophet and thus to abandon the dialogue. The Wafa Sultan
attempt to engage in discussion with a Muslim cleric and his reaction
(broadcast originally by Al Jazeera) which Chris referenced in the
Minaret thread is exemplary:
(http://www.spike.com/video/wafa-sultan-clashes/2703896) as is the
whole controversy surrounding the Danish Muhammad caricatures.
In this context, Al Jazeera is hopeful phenomenon, offering a forum
for dialogue within the Arab/Islamic world.
Curiously, the aggressive/insulted mindset often provoked among
Muslims by criticism of Allah or the prophet speaks against the view
of Christopher Caldwell, describing Islam as "a culture that is
anchored, confident and strengthened by common
doctrines," which I cited in an earlier post. In my opinion, this
confident anchoring in common doctrines is offset by a major
inferiority complex with regard to "western" thought modes (a complex
which has understandable roots in the history of the past two hundred
years).
What is necessary for real dialogue between western societies and the
Muslims who find themselves in these societies is a confident,
fearless expression of the values held by both sides and the
willingness to listen to and engage with each other, without
surrendering basic positions. If the result of such a dialogue should
be a recognition of mutual incompatibility, then, at least, the
situation has been cleared and possible consequences can be accepted.
So, are there any Muslims out there willing to engage with us?
Francis
Vamadevananda
Dec 13, 2009, 9:58:21 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
" We should be looking for some minimal values ..."
Sounds strategic like a Common Minimum Programme ... which, I
believe, would not really work in view of suspicions in the background
and the constant urge for upmanship, and the appeals of realpolitik.
Rather than " minimal values," I'd prefer to have everything on the
table. Yes, the stupendous nature of the task and massive chaos it
comes with should be there for us all to see and know.
And, rather than pick the least conflicting thing, we should be able
to take up the most fundamental, emotionally charged and deeply
divisive aspect or issue. And then commence the dialogue, one aspect
or issue at a time, on the premise that we are here to look at
differences, define their nature and content, state our respective
positions in mutually understandable terms, and continue to look for
inclusive realisations with transparence and honesty in our exigent
attempt to accept each other, if not love.
I also believe the ' sales ' paradigm would be at work : before I buy
the product or service, I'd have a good close look at the person
behind it, his understanding, values, integrity and commitment.
So ... shall we begin : What do we have, the one aspect or issue to
be taken up first ? I am the Muslim here, since I doubt anyone else
here is or has the benefit of living in a country with the second
largest muslim population and having a unbroken history of constant
interaction with the core, common and alternate streams of the faith,
its tenets and its culture.
Sounds strategic like a Common Minimum Programme ... which, I
believe, would not really work in view of suspicions in the background
and the constant urge for upmanship, and the appeals of realpolitik.
Rather than " minimal values," I'd prefer to have everything on the
table. Yes, the stupendous nature of the task and massive chaos it
comes with should be there for us all to see and know.
And, rather than pick the least conflicting thing, we should be able
to take up the most fundamental, emotionally charged and deeply
divisive aspect or issue. And then commence the dialogue, one aspect
or issue at a time, on the premise that we are here to look at
differences, define their nature and content, state our respective
positions in mutually understandable terms, and continue to look for
inclusive realisations with transparence and honesty in our exigent
attempt to accept each other, if not love.
I also believe the ' sales ' paradigm would be at work : before I buy
the product or service, I'd have a good close look at the person
behind it, his understanding, values, integrity and commitment.
So ... shall we begin : What do we have, the one aspect or issue to
be taken up first ? I am the Muslim here, since I doubt anyone else
here is or has the benefit of living in a country with the second
largest muslim population and having a unbroken history of constant
interaction with the core, common and alternate streams of the faith,
its tenets and its culture.
Vamadevananda
Dec 13, 2009, 10:15:11 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
" People should have no need of supplication ..."
Just to be clear, Neil, I do ... in the sense of respect, even
reverence, when I meet someone who has played a long innings in life,
who has led a virutous and transparent life in truth ( and honesty, to
himself ) despite suffering, who has found his way to love or
inclusive knowledge and is easy to smile and welcome.
Now, my descriptions above only reflect my sense of values, not
attainment, though I have lived through over half a century !
Just to be clear, Neil, I do ... in the sense of respect, even
reverence, when I meet someone who has played a long innings in life,
who has led a virutous and transparent life in truth ( and honesty, to
himself ) despite suffering, who has found his way to love or
inclusive knowledge and is easy to smile and welcome.
Now, my descriptions above only reflect my sense of values, not
attainment, though I have lived through over half a century !
Slip Disc
Dec 13, 2009, 10:29:41 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
Some informative sites:
http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=450
http://www.meforum.org/687/the-muslim-brotherhoods-conquest-of-europe
http://www.meetup.com/NYC-progressive-muslim/messages/boards/thread/1860674
Muslim Blogger;
http://groups.google.com/group/qiauai/browse_thread/thread/b3b0ff715b4c836a/3f711febd95748c2?hl=en&q=muslim#3f711febd95748c2
Someone might consider inviting this person to join ME's discussion.
http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=450
http://www.meforum.org/687/the-muslim-brotherhoods-conquest-of-europe
http://www.meetup.com/NYC-progressive-muslim/messages/boards/thread/1860674
Muslim Blogger;
http://groups.google.com/group/qiauai/browse_thread/thread/b3b0ff715b4c836a/3f711febd95748c2?hl=en&q=muslim#3f711febd95748c2
Someone might consider inviting this person to join ME's discussion.
Slip Disc
Dec 13, 2009, 10:53:57 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/34401704/ns/world_news-washington_post/
The young men's friends and spiritual advisers have said they never
saw any sign of radical activity or beliefs. << Is This the dilemma?
On Dec 13, 9:29 am, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Some informative sites:
>
> http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=450
>
> http://www.meforum.org/687/the-muslim-brotherhoods-conquest-of-europe
>
> http://www.meetup.com/NYC-progressive-muslim/messages/boards/thread/1...
>
> Muslim Blogger;
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/qiauai/browse_thread/thread/b3b0ff715b...
The young men's friends and spiritual advisers have said they never
saw any sign of radical activity or beliefs. << Is This the dilemma?
On Dec 13, 9:29 am, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Some informative sites:
>
> http://pewforum.org/docs/?DocID=450
>
> http://www.meforum.org/687/the-muslim-brotherhoods-conquest-of-europe
>
>
> Muslim Blogger;
>
> http://groups.google.com/group/qiauai/browse_thread/thread/b3b0ff715b...
Molly
Dec 13, 2009, 11:32:17 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
All of the collaborative efforts that I have organized or participated
in began with common purpose, declaring and combining resources, and a
willingness to set aside differences. One person coming into the room
as an obstructionist, or whose only intent is to dispute differences,
will only provide interference.
Can we really justify our racism by saying that we are not the only
racists? Can we defend statements of hate that hold entire religious
movements responsible for the acts of a small portion of terrorists
among them who may or may not practice the faith as it is organized
traditionally? Can we recognize our global problems, such as cultural
blending, and identify solutions without pointing fingers with blame?
Inflammatory language can do a great deal of damage and incite
enormous fear, and hiding behind first amendment (for those in the US)
or comparable legal rights is reprehensible.
We can spend all day exploring news links of hatred, violence and
racism. We can also spend the day exploring information on peace
keeping efforts, humanitarian efforts and scientific breakthroughs
that benefit mankind. We can even spend our time being a part of
these efforts. Certainly, our time is ours to spend and we do have
those rights. That blurry line that we cross when treating other
people with disdain and violence, even with our language, is where we
do not have the right, whether legal or moral. That often doesn't
stop us from expressing ourselves and revealing our own despicable
natures. Despicable, because by expressing our judgments and
superiority, we become what we judge, but don't see it.
> ...
>
> read more »
in began with common purpose, declaring and combining resources, and a
willingness to set aside differences. One person coming into the room
as an obstructionist, or whose only intent is to dispute differences,
will only provide interference.
Can we really justify our racism by saying that we are not the only
racists? Can we defend statements of hate that hold entire religious
movements responsible for the acts of a small portion of terrorists
among them who may or may not practice the faith as it is organized
traditionally? Can we recognize our global problems, such as cultural
blending, and identify solutions without pointing fingers with blame?
Inflammatory language can do a great deal of damage and incite
enormous fear, and hiding behind first amendment (for those in the US)
or comparable legal rights is reprehensible.
We can spend all day exploring news links of hatred, violence and
racism. We can also spend the day exploring information on peace
keeping efforts, humanitarian efforts and scientific breakthroughs
that benefit mankind. We can even spend our time being a part of
these efforts. Certainly, our time is ours to spend and we do have
those rights. That blurry line that we cross when treating other
people with disdain and violence, even with our language, is where we
do not have the right, whether legal or moral. That often doesn't
stop us from expressing ourselves and revealing our own despicable
natures. Despicable, because by expressing our judgments and
superiority, we become what we judge, but don't see it.
>
> read more »
archytas
Dec 13, 2009, 11:49:12 AM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
There are few enough women for that matter Francis. If I'm honest, I
do wonder how much religion I can really listen to, because I have
listened and keep hearing the same old stuff I reject - which includes
pretty close to absolute certainty that holy texts mean little. My
grandson comes out with a line when he doesn't know how to do things,
which seems to imply he still expects 'us' to magic the ability into
him! He is currently amazed by what I know, but has little knowledge
or respect for the amount of effort put in to 'get here'. I feel
something of the same with religious people who announce revelation as
though I haven't thought through the trite material coming forth. It
does seem worth looking into the deeply subjective experiences, but
when I have, I have found power relations I don't like. Dawkins seems
to seek out battles of wit with unarmed adversaries. It would be good
to get to new ground.
do wonder how much religion I can really listen to, because I have
listened and keep hearing the same old stuff I reject - which includes
pretty close to absolute certainty that holy texts mean little. My
grandson comes out with a line when he doesn't know how to do things,
which seems to imply he still expects 'us' to magic the ability into
him! He is currently amazed by what I know, but has little knowledge
or respect for the amount of effort put in to 'get here'. I feel
something of the same with religious people who announce revelation as
though I haven't thought through the trite material coming forth. It
does seem worth looking into the deeply subjective experiences, but
when I have, I have found power relations I don't like. Dawkins seems
to seek out battles of wit with unarmed adversaries. It would be good
to get to new ground.
ornamentalmind
Dec 13, 2009, 12:19:00 PM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
“…What has happened to us when peace protesters have become a
threat?...” – archy
As rhetorical as this ‘argument’ may be, since the other topics in
your post do not address peace directly, perhaps the meaning was to be
‘peaceful protesters’? Difficult to tell.
Regardless, as Zinn and others clearly reiterate, *all* protesters, by
their very existence and action *are* a threat. The questions to ask
include, threat to what?...to whom?...what is being suggested as an
alternative (if anything) and by whom?
One of the best results for a government using propaganda to direct
and control is to reduce the activities of protest, skepticism and
questioning into something no sane, patriotic person would ever
partake in. Thus my more radical character.
> > I_D Allan- Hide quoted text -
threat?...” – archy
As rhetorical as this ‘argument’ may be, since the other topics in
your post do not address peace directly, perhaps the meaning was to be
‘peaceful protesters’? Difficult to tell.
Regardless, as Zinn and others clearly reiterate, *all* protesters, by
their very existence and action *are* a threat. The questions to ask
include, threat to what?...to whom?...what is being suggested as an
alternative (if anything) and by whom?
One of the best results for a government using propaganda to direct
and control is to reduce the activities of protest, skepticism and
questioning into something no sane, patriotic person would ever
partake in. Thus my more radical character.
Molly
Dec 13, 2009, 1:24:37 PM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
Zinn was never a proponent of one group being against another group.
This marvelous historian encouraged all groups to stand together to
promote human rights, wherever they were being denied. To make a
historical cultural analogy to Slips original question, Zinn would
never have asked "do blacks make you nervous," but instead encouraged
all people of all colors and all ages to join together in a show of
unity to promote civil rights. He did the same with women's rights,
the rights of migrant workers, gay rights, the rights of those being
drafted into service for wars they did not believe in, etc,.
This marvelous historian encouraged all groups to stand together to
promote human rights, wherever they were being denied. To make a
historical cultural analogy to Slips original question, Zinn would
never have asked "do blacks make you nervous," but instead encouraged
all people of all colors and all ages to join together in a show of
unity to promote civil rights. He did the same with women's rights,
the rights of migrant workers, gay rights, the rights of those being
drafted into service for wars they did not believe in, etc,.
Vamadevananda
Dec 13, 2009, 1:49:52 PM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
Honesty, even of our prejudice ( hatred, etc. ), makes a dialogue
possible. It takes focus and decades, before we may even start. But we
need to go through our impatience and apprehension because there is no
option to honest dialogue between communities. The leaders, in a
democratic set up, are asked to take a stand in the light of simple
human values. Its finally happening here, in media and public fora,
among all other happenings ... the refusal to extend community or
religious affiliation to criminals and jihadis, terrorists and
suicides. The ideologues are now defensive, about past affiliations,
and now offensive, about their religious and cultural identity. Which
is a good thing, too.
Organised action, I agree, are best run on common programme.
Pat has offered some transparent views on Islamophobia. I would liken
it to constipation, where the truth remains undelivered.
possible. It takes focus and decades, before we may even start. But we
need to go through our impatience and apprehension because there is no
option to honest dialogue between communities. The leaders, in a
democratic set up, are asked to take a stand in the light of simple
human values. Its finally happening here, in media and public fora,
among all other happenings ... the refusal to extend community or
religious affiliation to criminals and jihadis, terrorists and
suicides. The ideologues are now defensive, about past affiliations,
and now offensive, about their religious and cultural identity. Which
is a good thing, too.
Organised action, I agree, are best run on common programme.
Pat has offered some transparent views on Islamophobia. I would liken
it to constipation, where the truth remains undelivered.
Slip Disc
Dec 13, 2009, 5:34:41 PM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
That is all very touching Molly but the facts still remain the same
and Vam is correct in stating that the exposure of deeper feelings of
distrust or fear of the opposition needs to be laid out on the table
in order to have constructive dialogue which hopefully will lead to
understanding and healing.
The Muslim situation for me is due to an increase in negative Muslim
behavior. The Killer of the four police officers in the Washington
coffee shop was hailed as a Muslim Martyr, the killing of the innocent
soldiers in Fort Hood was accomplished through a deceptive tactic by a
Muslim and now these five American Muslims hit the screen. All that
combined with the training camps and obvious Islamic hatreds lead me
to be very wary.
Sir William Muir wrote: “The sword of Muhammad and the Qur'an are the
most fatal enemies of civilization, liberty and truth which the world
has ever known - an unmitigated cultural disaster parading as God's
will.”
Winston Churchill wrote: “But the influence of the religion paralyzes
the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde
force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a
militant and proselytizing faith.”
John Quincy Adams (1761-1848): “In the seventh century of the
Christian era, a wandering Arab of the linage of Hagar, the Egyptian,
combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural
energy of a fanatic, and fraudulent spirit of an imposter, proclaimed
himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion
over an extensive portion of the earth.
“He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by
degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of
polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a
part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. The essence of
his doctrine was violence and lust: to exalt the brutal over the
spiritual part of human nature. While the merciless and dissolute
dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action,
there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.”
Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859): “I studied the Qur’an a great deal.
I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large
there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of
Mohammad. So far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the
decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd
than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in
my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of
decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism
itself.”
U.S. President George Washington: “If we desire to avoid insult, we
must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the
most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known
that we are at all times ready for war. I plead with you to maintain
your stance against the evil empire of darkness. I pray God to give
you strength, courage, and knowledge in spreading the truth. Islamic
followers are a formidable and dangerous enemy.”
So are these people morons to whom I should pay no attention to in
light of what is happening before my eyes?
Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi said, “There are signs that Allah will
grant victory to Islam in Europe without guns or conflict. The 52
million Muslims will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few
decades.” Note: European birthrates average 1.4 children while
European Muslims hit 8.1 children per woman.
FINALLY
Am I not to take this following piece seriously?
Fatwa world war: The new Islamic conquest began February 23 1998;
(Published) A Statement signed by many Islamic Jihad leaders from most
Muslim countries, first by Sheikh Osama Bin-Laden: ”In compliance with
Allah’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling
to kill the Americans and their allies, civilians and military, is an
individual duty for every Muslim who can, in any country in which it
is possible. We with Allah's help call on every Muslim who believes in
Allah and wishes to be rewarded, to comply with Allah's order to kill
the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find
it. Unless you go forth, Allah will punish you with a grievous
penalty, and put others in your place.” Muhammad, prophet of Islam
Hey IF I meet some neighbors that are Muslim and they are nice people
I'll treat them accordingly. It is NOT about the people, it IS about
the events.
and Vam is correct in stating that the exposure of deeper feelings of
distrust or fear of the opposition needs to be laid out on the table
in order to have constructive dialogue which hopefully will lead to
understanding and healing.
The Muslim situation for me is due to an increase in negative Muslim
behavior. The Killer of the four police officers in the Washington
coffee shop was hailed as a Muslim Martyr, the killing of the innocent
soldiers in Fort Hood was accomplished through a deceptive tactic by a
Muslim and now these five American Muslims hit the screen. All that
combined with the training camps and obvious Islamic hatreds lead me
to be very wary.
Sir William Muir wrote: “The sword of Muhammad and the Qur'an are the
most fatal enemies of civilization, liberty and truth which the world
has ever known - an unmitigated cultural disaster parading as God's
will.”
Winston Churchill wrote: “But the influence of the religion paralyzes
the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde
force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a
militant and proselytizing faith.”
John Quincy Adams (1761-1848): “In the seventh century of the
Christian era, a wandering Arab of the linage of Hagar, the Egyptian,
combining the powers of transcendent genius, with the preternatural
energy of a fanatic, and fraudulent spirit of an imposter, proclaimed
himself as a messenger from Heaven, and spread desolation and delusion
over an extensive portion of the earth.
“He poisoned the sources of human felicity at the fountain, by
degrading the condition of the female sex, and the allowance of
polygamy; and he declared undistinguishing and exterminating war, as a
part of his religion, against all the rest of mankind. The essence of
his doctrine was violence and lust: to exalt the brutal over the
spiritual part of human nature. While the merciless and dissolute
dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action,
there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.”
Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859): “I studied the Qur’an a great deal.
I came away from that study with the conviction that by and large
there have been few religions in the world as deadly to men as that of
Mohammad. So far as I can see, it is the principal cause of the
decadence so visible today in the Muslim world and, though less absurd
than the polytheism of old, its social and political tendencies are in
my opinion more to be feared, and I therefore regard it as a form of
decadence rather than a form of progress in relation to paganism
itself.”
U.S. President George Washington: “If we desire to avoid insult, we
must be able to repel it; if we desire to secure peace, one of the
most powerful instruments of our rising prosperity, it must be known
that we are at all times ready for war. I plead with you to maintain
your stance against the evil empire of darkness. I pray God to give
you strength, courage, and knowledge in spreading the truth. Islamic
followers are a formidable and dangerous enemy.”
So are these people morons to whom I should pay no attention to in
light of what is happening before my eyes?
Libyan leader Moammar Kadafi said, “There are signs that Allah will
grant victory to Islam in Europe without guns or conflict. The 52
million Muslims will turn it into a Muslim continent within a few
decades.” Note: European birthrates average 1.4 children while
European Muslims hit 8.1 children per woman.
FINALLY
Am I not to take this following piece seriously?
Fatwa world war: The new Islamic conquest began February 23 1998;
(Published) A Statement signed by many Islamic Jihad leaders from most
Muslim countries, first by Sheikh Osama Bin-Laden: ”In compliance with
Allah’s order, we issue the following fatwa to all Muslims: The ruling
to kill the Americans and their allies, civilians and military, is an
individual duty for every Muslim who can, in any country in which it
is possible. We with Allah's help call on every Muslim who believes in
Allah and wishes to be rewarded, to comply with Allah's order to kill
the Americans and plunder their money wherever and whenever they find
it. Unless you go forth, Allah will punish you with a grievous
penalty, and put others in your place.” Muhammad, prophet of Islam
Hey IF I meet some neighbors that are Muslim and they are nice people
I'll treat them accordingly. It is NOT about the people, it IS about
the events.
Slip Disc
Dec 13, 2009, 5:41:48 PM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
PS: I'm done, you people argue it out. ;-)
dj
Dec 13, 2009, 6:19:43 PM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
So True when You make a post as this. You need to be ready to discuss
it as an adults and reply back in of your knowlege of this topic.
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
it as an adults and reply back in of your knowlege of this topic.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
archytas
Dec 13, 2009, 9:40:42 PM12/13/09
to "Minds Eye"
I wish Molly was right. There is at least some kind of valid aim in
what she says. Yet the Macht-politik always seems to rear its ugly
head. Speaking of heads, one can turn the head of our discussion here
upside down. What is it to fear "us"?
Since the Battle of Vienna (around 1668 as memory serves), the
influence of empire has largely come from the West, involving many
imperialist wars and massive casualties. Our own democracies are
fragile and support many juntas around the world. What we have seems
supported through exploiting others, a 'guilt' that can be seen from
the genocides of the Athenian Democracy through all kinds of
colonisation. We even had Iran and Iraq at each others throats. What
do we look like from elsewhere?
> ...
>
> read more »
what she says. Yet the Macht-politik always seems to rear its ugly
head. Speaking of heads, one can turn the head of our discussion here
upside down. What is it to fear "us"?
Since the Battle of Vienna (around 1668 as memory serves), the
influence of empire has largely come from the West, involving many
imperialist wars and massive casualties. Our own democracies are
fragile and support many juntas around the world. What we have seems
supported through exploiting others, a 'guilt' that can be seen from
the genocides of the Athenian Democracy through all kinds of
colonisation. We even had Iran and Iraq at each others throats. What
do we look like from elsewhere?
>
> read more »
dj Briscoe
Dec 13, 2009, 10:42:40 PM12/13/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Spoken will.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to mind...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
Lee
Dec 14, 2009, 5:25:22 AM12/14/09
to "Minds Eye"
Wel Slip, I find this almost a fanatical belife you have myself.
This for example.
'The notion that Muslims in the world are not going to be a huge
problem in the future is clear denial.'
Is based on what? Your own skills at fortelling the furure? No sir
looks like fear to me.
Yet whatever it is I would not really say that it is a rational
thought. How can you possibly know? Well the answer to that must be
you can't, possibly 'know', so at best this is a guess and at
worst.......?
This for example.
'The notion that Muslims in the world are not going to be a huge
problem in the future is clear denial.'
Is based on what? Your own skills at fortelling the furure? No sir
looks like fear to me.
Yet whatever it is I would not really say that it is a rational
thought. How can you possibly know? Well the answer to that must be
you can't, possibly 'know', so at best this is a guess and at
worst.......?
ornamentalmind
Dec 14, 2009, 5:30:00 AM12/14/09
to "Minds Eye"
“…Is based on what?...” – Lee
It is based on a fallacy.
•Argument To The Future:
arguing that evidence will someday be discovered which will (then)
support
your point.
It is based on a fallacy.
•Argument To The Future:
arguing that evidence will someday be discovered which will (then)
support
your point.
Lee
Dec 14, 2009, 6:48:11 AM12/14/09
to "Minds Eye"
Ahhhhh like Mr Blair and his WMD you mean?
Lee
Dec 14, 2009, 7:00:10 AM12/14/09
to "Minds Eye"
Ahhh better, questions and not one statement of 'truth'.
My answer to your first questions would be.
What does it matter? Change IS inevitable, the UK I live in now is
not the same one as 700 years ago, not the same one as 20 years ago
even. People is the key point, sociaty is people, a country is the
people that dwell it that particular gelographical location. What
does it matter what language they speak, or what language their
signage is in?
What is a sovereign nation? What do you mean by that expression? Is
this idea of a 'Sovereign Nation' more important than the people who
enhabit the nation?
You do not ascribe to the belifes of my own faith, and I hardly see
you as a devil.
People, people, people! We are all differant, we don't see things the
same way, we are allowed to have these differances, it is how we deal
with them whioch is important. Also it is important to not forget, it
is people that we talk about here.
On 12 Dec, 21:01, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I like the Speigel view, at what point does a country cease to exist
> and at what point does the invading horde restructure political power
> to overrule and dictate thereby claiming title to the land, as in the
> legal expression, possession is nine tenths of the law. There is an
> intertwining of threads here when you consider the immigration issues
> and signage threads. At what point does America become Mexico? If I
> visit Austria will I be in Austria or a Muslim country? It would be
> the same with "ANY" example. If the Chinese emigrated to Spain to the
> point of becoming 90% of the population, would I be visiting Spain or
> China, given that the signage and cultural exhibitions would have
> transitioned over time to Chinese?
> Where does a sovereign nation draw the line? More importantly the
> issue at hand is a culture that is bent on changing the world to
> conform to it's religious fanaticisms which unfortunately breed
> extremists who use terror as a tactic.
> When I'm confronted by any religious people will I be perceived as the
> devil because I do not ascribe to their beliefs?
>
> On Dec 12, 10:51 am, frantheman <francis.h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Personally, I'm not particularly worried about "political" Islam here
> > in Europe. The extremists are, and will remain, a small minority among
> > Muslims and every religion will produce its share of extremist,
> > dangerous fanatics. In this sense I see little difference between
> > Christianity and Islam (or Judaism - looking at some of the extremist
> > orthodox groups in Israel - either).
>
> > More important considerations arise when we pose the question as to
> > what kind of society we want to live in. Der Speigel has a good
> > article on the wider aspects of the encounter between Europe and Islam
> > this week:
>
> >http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,666448,00.html
>
> > Here are a couple of excerpts:
>
> > "An estimated 15 million Muslims currently live in the European Union,
> > or roughly 3 percent of the population. But this is more than at any
> > other time in the past. Immigrants, most of whom came as guest workers
> > decades ago, have brought Islam to Europe.
>
> > Can Europe still be Europe if, for instance, in 2050 most young people
> > under the age of 15 in Austria are Muslims? And when Muhammad today is
> > already the most common name for newborn boys in Brussels and
> > Amsterdam, and the third most common in England?"
>
> > "American author and journalist Christopher Caldwell ... says that
> > Muslims are a small minority, but Europe is changing its structures
> > because of them: "When an insecure, malleable, relativistic culture
> > meets a culture that is anchored, confident and strengthened by common
> > doctrines, it is generally the former that changes to suit the
> > latter.""
>
> > "Dealing with Islam is perhaps the greatest challenge facing Europe.
> > If the Continent manages to preserve its own values without
> > discriminating against Muslims, then a consensus on values can be
> > achieved and European Muslims could become a model for the Islamic
> > world. If it fails, however, Europe could betray its own values, and
> > the populists could win and their simple solutions would fan the
> > flames of the clash of cultures."
>
> > This is, for me, the central point. Caldwell's analysis that European
> > [western] culture is "insecure" is a challenge. Those of us who
> > espouse a view of society which is open, tolerant and secular must be
> > prepared to stand up for these values and our view that they are
> > superior to exclusivist, doctrine-based world-views. We must make
> > clear that our fundamental values are NOT negotiable and that
> > tolerance demands a tolerant response and does not imply a laissez-
> > faire attitude to intolerance.
>
> > A final, somewhat ironic observation in the article with respect to
> > the Swiss referendum:
>
> > " ...sometimes fears are stronger than facts, and sometimes a ban on
> > minarets has nothing to do with minarets. In the Swiss cities where
> > Muslims and Christians have been coexisting for ages, the citizens'
> > initiative failed to garner the majority of votes. In the mountain
> > canton of Appenzell-Innerrhoden, where only 500 Muslims live, 71
> > percent of voters supported the minaret ban."
>
> > According to Wikipedia, "The population of the canton was 15,471 as of
> > 2007, of which 1,510 (or 9.76%) were foreigners. Due to the split of
> > Appenzell along religious lines, the population (as of 2000) is nearly
> > all Roman Catholic (81%), with a small Protestant minority (10%)."
>
> > Francis
> > > bringing jihad or holy war into America on a large scale, are
> > > currently operating in the United States and Canada. In fact, they
> > > have existed inside North America since at least 1980.
>
> > >http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover061107h.htm
>
> > > The Islamic "jihadist" Army in our Midst
> > > The most astute researchers of Islamic terrorist activities might
> > > believe that the so-called "Virginia jihad network," often referred to
> > > as the "paintball jihad network," was the first paramilitary training
> > > of its kind in America. The "paintball jihad network" consisted of
> > > nearly a dozen Muslim men, including Randall "Ismail" Royer, an
> > > American convert to Islam and former official of the Council on
> > > American Islamic Relations (CAIR), who honed their combat skills
> > > through the use of paintball gun exercises with other like-minded
> > > Muslims, according to the federal indictment and his subsequent
> > > conviction. Others might cite the case of Ernest James UJAAMA, a/k/a
> > > Bilal AHMED, (a Muslim convert born James Earnest Thompson), who,
> > > according to court documents, attempted to set up an Afghanistan-style
> > > terrorist training camp near Bly, Oregon in 1999 as a precursor to
> > > physical jihad training in America.- Hide quoted text -
My answer to your first questions would be.
What does it matter? Change IS inevitable, the UK I live in now is
not the same one as 700 years ago, not the same one as 20 years ago
even. People is the key point, sociaty is people, a country is the
people that dwell it that particular gelographical location. What
does it matter what language they speak, or what language their
signage is in?
What is a sovereign nation? What do you mean by that expression? Is
this idea of a 'Sovereign Nation' more important than the people who
enhabit the nation?
You do not ascribe to the belifes of my own faith, and I hardly see
you as a devil.
People, people, people! We are all differant, we don't see things the
same way, we are allowed to have these differances, it is how we deal
with them whioch is important. Also it is important to not forget, it
is people that we talk about here.
On 12 Dec, 21:01, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I like the Speigel view, at what point does a country cease to exist
> and at what point does the invading horde restructure political power
> to overrule and dictate thereby claiming title to the land, as in the
> legal expression, possession is nine tenths of the law. There is an
> intertwining of threads here when you consider the immigration issues
> and signage threads. At what point does America become Mexico? If I
> visit Austria will I be in Austria or a Muslim country? It would be
> the same with "ANY" example. If the Chinese emigrated to Spain to the
> point of becoming 90% of the population, would I be visiting Spain or
> China, given that the signage and cultural exhibitions would have
> transitioned over time to Chinese?
> Where does a sovereign nation draw the line? More importantly the
> issue at hand is a culture that is bent on changing the world to
> conform to it's religious fanaticisms which unfortunately breed
> extremists who use terror as a tactic.
> When I'm confronted by any religious people will I be perceived as the
> devil because I do not ascribe to their beliefs?
>
> On Dec 12, 10:51 am, frantheman <francis.h...@googlemail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Personally, I'm not particularly worried about "political" Islam here
> > in Europe. The extremists are, and will remain, a small minority among
> > Muslims and every religion will produce its share of extremist,
> > dangerous fanatics. In this sense I see little difference between
> > Christianity and Islam (or Judaism - looking at some of the extremist
> > orthodox groups in Israel - either).
>
> > More important considerations arise when we pose the question as to
> > what kind of society we want to live in. Der Speigel has a good
> > article on the wider aspects of the encounter between Europe and Islam
> > this week:
>
> >http://www.spiegel.de/international/europe/0,1518,666448,00.html
>
> > Here are a couple of excerpts:
>
> > "An estimated 15 million Muslims currently live in the European Union,
> > or roughly 3 percent of the population. But this is more than at any
> > other time in the past. Immigrants, most of whom came as guest workers
> > decades ago, have brought Islam to Europe.
>
> > Can Europe still be Europe if, for instance, in 2050 most young people
> > under the age of 15 in Austria are Muslims? And when Muhammad today is
> > already the most common name for newborn boys in Brussels and
> > Amsterdam, and the third most common in England?"
>
> > "American author and journalist Christopher Caldwell ... says that
> > Muslims are a small minority, but Europe is changing its structures
> > because of them: "When an insecure, malleable, relativistic culture
> > meets a culture that is anchored, confident and strengthened by common
> > doctrines, it is generally the former that changes to suit the
> > latter.""
>
> > "Dealing with Islam is perhaps the greatest challenge facing Europe.
> > If the Continent manages to preserve its own values without
> > discriminating against Muslims, then a consensus on values can be
> > achieved and European Muslims could become a model for the Islamic
> > world. If it fails, however, Europe could betray its own values, and
> > the populists could win and their simple solutions would fan the
> > flames of the clash of cultures."
>
> > This is, for me, the central point. Caldwell's analysis that European
> > [western] culture is "insecure" is a challenge. Those of us who
> > espouse a view of society which is open, tolerant and secular must be
> > prepared to stand up for these values and our view that they are
> > superior to exclusivist, doctrine-based world-views. We must make
> > clear that our fundamental values are NOT negotiable and that
> > tolerance demands a tolerant response and does not imply a laissez-
> > faire attitude to intolerance.
>
> > A final, somewhat ironic observation in the article with respect to
> > the Swiss referendum:
>
> > " ...sometimes fears are stronger than facts, and sometimes a ban on
> > minarets has nothing to do with minarets. In the Swiss cities where
> > Muslims and Christians have been coexisting for ages, the citizens'
> > initiative failed to garner the majority of votes. In the mountain
> > canton of Appenzell-Innerrhoden, where only 500 Muslims live, 71
> > percent of voters supported the minaret ban."
>
> > According to Wikipedia, "The population of the canton was 15,471 as of
> > 2007, of which 1,510 (or 9.76%) were foreigners. Due to the split of
> > Appenzell along religious lines, the population (as of 2000) is nearly
> > all Roman Catholic (81%), with a small Protestant minority (10%)."
>
> > Francis
>
> > On 11 Dez., 08:04, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Religion is still driving it's wedge into the world. I'm beginning to
> > > become very wary of the intent of Muslim Immigrants. Little seeds are
> > > being planted around the world and Muslim populations are growing.
> > > With the shootings by Muslim Hasan in Fort Hood Texas and now the
> > > Arrest of 5 Muslim teenagers in Pakistan who supposedly are American,
> > > I reject the idea that they were ever American, I'm suspect that
> > > Muslims around the world are simply carrying out a long term
> > > infiltration tactic without any desire for citizenship but only for
> > > the goal of the Muslim world. It may take 50 more years but by then
> > > the Muslim population will be very imposing.
> > > What do you think of all this Muslim turmoil around the world? I know
> > On 11 Dez., 08:04, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Religion is still driving it's wedge into the world. I'm beginning to
> > > become very wary of the intent of Muslim Immigrants. Little seeds are
> > > being planted around the world and Muslim populations are growing.
> > > With the shootings by Muslim Hasan in Fort Hood Texas and now the
> > > Arrest of 5 Muslim teenagers in Pakistan who supposedly are American,
> > > I reject the idea that they were ever American, I'm suspect that
> > > Muslims around the world are simply carrying out a long term
> > > infiltration tactic without any desire for citizenship but only for
> > > the goal of the Muslim world. It may take 50 more years but by then
> > > the Muslim population will be very imposing.
> > > What do you think of all this Muslim turmoil around the world? I know
> > > it's hard to be politically correct and non judgmental but history is
> > > littered with attempts at world domination. Truth is I'm beginning to
> > > get nervous and simply do not trust Muslims and wonder about their
> > > true motive. Is it just paranoia, I don't think so.
>
> > > Excerpt:
> > > The citizens of the United States and Canada, as well as many within
> > > various echelons of law enforcement, might be surprised to learn that
> > > active paramilitary training of Islamic terrorists, who are focused on
> > > littered with attempts at world domination. Truth is I'm beginning to
> > > get nervous and simply do not trust Muslims and wonder about their
> > > true motive. Is it just paranoia, I don't think so.
>
> > > Excerpt:
> > > The citizens of the United States and Canada, as well as many within
> > > various echelons of law enforcement, might be surprised to learn that
> > > bringing jihad or holy war into America on a large scale, are
> > > currently operating in the United States and Canada. In fact, they
> > > have existed inside North America since at least 1980.
>
> > >http://www.canadafreepress.com/2007/cover061107h.htm
>
> > > The Islamic "jihadist" Army in our Midst
> > > The most astute researchers of Islamic terrorist activities might
> > > believe that the so-called "Virginia jihad network," often referred to
> > > as the "paintball jihad network," was the first paramilitary training
> > > of its kind in America. The "paintball jihad network" consisted of
> > > nearly a dozen Muslim men, including Randall "Ismail" Royer, an
> > > American convert to Islam and former official of the Council on
> > > American Islamic Relations (CAIR), who honed their combat skills
> > > through the use of paintball gun exercises with other like-minded
> > > Muslims, according to the federal indictment and his subsequent
> > > conviction. Others might cite the case of Ernest James UJAAMA, a/k/a
> > > Bilal AHMED, (a Muslim convert born James Earnest Thompson), who,
> > > according to court documents, attempted to set up an Afghanistan-style
> > > terrorist training camp near Bly, Oregon in 1999 as a precursor to
> > > physical jihad training in America.- Hide quoted text -
Pat
Dec 14, 2009, 7:57:53 AM12/14/09
to "Minds Eye"
On 11 Dec, 18:11, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> You make is sound so relaxing, Pat. I have to add that I do not know
> any Muslims and have never met any Muslims which may be one of the
> reasons for my apprehensions. However, it is not without any basis,
> ie; the Muslim Major Hasan seemed by "ALL" accounts to be one of the
> peace loving Muslim persons of whom you speak. Didn't people know him
> as such, wasn't he in the US Army? Didn't he shoot and kill US
> Soldiers? Was he a fundamentalist, a radical terrorist?
> Are we being duped is the real question, are you?
>
Although I don't know Major Hasan, I can 'guess' (which is hardly
good) that there were conflicts of interest going on in his mind.
Muslims consider one another brothers--at least brothers in the
faith. Yet the army is sending U.S. Muslims to kill non-U.S.
Muslims. This is as much 'brother vs. brother' as we saw in the US
Civil War, when members of the same family fought on opposing sides.
It destroyed families for generations. In this case, it's caused a
conflict of interest in the minds of Muslims who have a duty to their
Muslim brothers AND a duty to their country. Not all people resolve
the issue in the same way and some, like Major Hasan I assume, crack
under the pressure. Remember Hasan's last words before the rampage?
"Allahu Akhbar", i.e. "God is greater"; i.e., his loyalty to Islam
took over, although he was so far gone mentally that, while he may
have got his allegiances correct, his actions were completely opposed
to the guidance given BY Islam. At that point, it seems he felt it
was better (and I disagree with him completely, BTW) to fight those
who were killing his Muslim brothers than to join with them and kill
his brother Muslims (and/or support the cause that kills his brother
Muslims). So he indiscriminately started shooting. An act that would
be considered reprehensible and punishable by death under Shari'a law,
as what he did was plain murder, i.e., needless killing. What Hasan
was was someone who cracked under the pressure. He failed the test.
To pass, he should have resigned his commission from the Army, under
ANY circumstances, and just gone back to civilian life. But it's
obvious, from his actions, that he wasn't thinking straight.
As far as his general motivations, again, I don't know the man. I can
reckon, though, from his actions that his loyalty to his Muslim
brothers outweighed his loyalty to the U.S. Army at the time of the
murders. Personally, I think he was on the verge of the cracking
point for months but something tipped him over the edge. Exactly
what, I have no idea.
Was he a terrorist, probably not, in the sense of an Al-Qaida
operative, while what he did certainly instilled terror. Was he a
fundamentalist, probably not, in the sense of the late Ayatollah
Khomeini or Osama Bin Laden, but held the fundamental belief that he
should not support, in any way, the indiscriminate slaughter of
innocent Muslims, which is a daily occurrence in the battlefields of
Afghanistan and Iraq. Did he shoot and kill U.S. soldiers? Yes. And
he was wrong by U.S. AND Islamic standards for doing so. He just
cracked and went postal, as it were. Does this action of his reflect
on anyone else? No, in no way, shape or form! We are all accountable
for ourselves. Should his actions make you nervous of other Muslims?
I don't think so. What needs to be looked at, though, is the
'reasoning' behind the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and, if they are
not valid (and we all know they're not), then stop the fighting and
prevent U.S. Muslims from having to support a war against their
brothers-in-faith. Imagine how many Jews would relish fighting a war
against Israel, or Irish-Americans fighting a war against Ireland?
But those wars aren't the ones we're presented with at the moment;
rather, the current wars put the spotlight on Muslims.
What we should be nervous about is entering into wars that,
invariably, pit men against men, and THAT will always bring out sub-
loyalties. There were plenty of Irish-Americans that lent support in
some fashion to either NI or the IRA. But do we castigate all Irish-
Americans because of it? Ahh, but they were all Christians. In
truth, there were IRA supporters that would tell you that the
Protestants were NOT Christians and the Protestants would tell you
that the Catholics in the south weren't Christian. So Christians were
fighting Christians, but they didn't recognise each other's
Christianity. In the case of Iraq and Afghanistan, though, there is
no mistake about it, the U.S. Army is forcing U.S. Muslims to either
directly kill or support the killing of other Muslims, about whom
there is NO doubt regarding their faith. This will cause problems--it
has and it will continue to do so. It's a complex problem with a
simple answer...stop fighting stupid wars and people won't have THAT
reason to get so distraught. But, as we all know, oil is more
important than a few (hundred...thousand...million) people. And, yes,
that previous sentence is seriously sarcastic.
> On Dec 11, 7:58 am, Pat <PatrickDHarring...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On 11 Dec, 07:04, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Religion is still driving it's wedge into the world. I'm beginning to
> > > become very wary of the intent of Muslim Immigrants. Little seeds are
> > > being planted around the world and Muslim populations are growing.
> > > With the shootings by Muslim Hasan in Fort Hood Texas and now the
> > > Arrest of 5 Muslim teenagers in Pakistan who supposedly are American,
> > > I reject the idea that they were ever American, I'm suspect that
> > > Muslims around the world are simply carrying out a long term
> > > infiltration tactic without any desire for citizenship but only for
> > > the goal of the Muslim world. It may take 50 more years but by then
> > > the Muslim population will be very imposing.
> > > What do you think of all this Muslim turmoil around the world? I know
> > > it's hard to be politically correct and non judgmental but history is
> > > littered with attempts at world domination. Truth is I'm beginning to
> > > get nervous and simply do not trust Muslims and wonder about their
> > > true motive. Is it just paranoia, I don't think so.
>
> > Islam IS the fastest growing faith and has been for quite some time.
>
>
> > On 11 Dec, 07:04, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Religion is still driving it's wedge into the world. I'm beginning to
> > > become very wary of the intent of Muslim Immigrants. Little seeds are
> > > being planted around the world and Muslim populations are growing.
> > > With the shootings by Muslim Hasan in Fort Hood Texas and now the
> > > Arrest of 5 Muslim teenagers in Pakistan who supposedly are American,
> > > I reject the idea that they were ever American, I'm suspect that
> > > Muslims around the world are simply carrying out a long term
> > > infiltration tactic without any desire for citizenship but only for
> > > the goal of the Muslim world. It may take 50 more years but by then
> > > the Muslim population will be very imposing.
> > > What do you think of all this Muslim turmoil around the world? I know
> > > it's hard to be politically correct and non judgmental but history is
> > > littered with attempts at world domination. Truth is I'm beginning to
> > > get nervous and simply do not trust Muslims and wonder about their
> > > true motive. Is it just paranoia, I don't think so.
>
> > This is, mostly, due to the fact that Muslims have Muslim children
> > (funnily enough) and the growth rate is more down to general
> > population growth than conversion rates; that said, there are more and
> > more converts as well. So why, then, is that? [that's not a
> > rhetorical question but an invitation to fully investigate Islam for
> > yourself to discover what there is about it that might attract people
> > TO it.]
> > What is it about Islam that worries you? The religion itself does not
> > promote terrorism, but change through dialogue, so the 'terrorists'
> > aren't REALLY 'true Muslims'--they are apostates who have been led
> > astray--they are as brainwashed as any follower of Jim Jones or David
> > Koresh. Don't be afraid of Muslims--they are simply people who
> > acknowledge that it is God that runs the show here on Earth (and, as
> > far as I can tell, that is a correct belief!). Rather, be afraid of
> > fundamentalism of any variety, for it is fundamentalism--that branch
> > of any faith that says, "We're correct and everyone else needs to die
> > so that only those that think correctly are left." That was never the
> > premiss of Islam, as the Qur'an itself states that religion should not
> > be forced on anyone. These fundamentalists feed on our fears. So,
> > you're playing into their hands with your mistrust of Muslims, as they
> > are, for the vast majority, just like everyone else on the planet--
> > trying to just get through another day. Take each one as they present
> > themselves to you. If you want to react in a Christian fashion
> > towards them, then that would be: Judge not, lest ye be judged.
> > Muslims worship God by being mindful of Him in many ways throughout
> > the day, and Jesus said that loving God was the greatest commandment.
> > So they follow that teaching--probably beter than most Westerners who
> > consider themselves Christian. The second greates commandment
> > (according to Jesus) was "to love your neighbour as yourself". But
> > you are mistrusting/distrusting people and the only thing you may know
> > about them is that they are Muslim. How fair is that?
> > It's my belief that God will judge us by certain standards. Some of
> > those standards we set ourselves. That is, he will judge us as fairly
> > as we have judged others. In that way, injustice can always be
> > redressed in the Hereafter. This life is only a test for an eternal
> > existence. Don't let the fundamentalists of ANY faith turn you
> > against other believers of that faith who are NOT fundamentalists. It
> > could be a dangerous practice; after all, Jesus warned: judge not,
> > lest ye be judged (similarly). Don't play into the hands of the
> > fundamentalists by fearing and mis/distrusting Muslims, as that is
> > what they hope will be the divisive reaction that grants them the
> > grounds for claiming general bias.
> > I encounter Muslims on a daily basis. At work, at the local shop, in
> > taxis, etc. And NONE of them have ever acted in a way that I would
> > consider problematic. What makes ME nervous is people taking a
> > dislike to people they don't know simply because they are different--
> > when, really, we are ALL different; because it's THAT attitude that
> > both Christian and Muslim fundamentalists are hoping will bring us to
> > the all-glorious Armageddon that they both think they'll win. They
> > can't BOTH be right; but, they could both be wrong, in that there ARE
> > no winners of Armageddon.
>
> > If, as you are tending towards, you think that Muslims will out-number
> > the rest of the population in the foreseeable future, then that will
> > change the world. But that doesn't, of necessity, mean that that
> > change would be bad. It all comes down to implementation. And there
> > are Islamic prophecies that indicate that, before Islam does become
> > the predominant religion on Earth, it will be 'set back onto the
> > straight path' by a 'Clarifier', the Mahdi, or Al-Qa'im. Muslims
> > await this individual because they know that there are corrections (to
> > the practices of the faith) that need to be made (the abolition of
> > female circumcision throughout Islamic Africa would be the first thing
> > that leaps out in my mind...but there is a longer list). So wait WITH
> > them and watch out FOR him, for it is just THAT kind of individual
> > that needs to come onto the world scene fairly soon, as the numbers,
> > as you point out, are nearing the mark.
>
> > PS 'Chanukkah Tovah' for all the Jewish readers out there!!
Slip Disc
Dec 14, 2009, 6:14:51 PM12/14/09
to "Minds Eye"
Well thanks for the variations in view and the enlightenment on the
situation as a whole, makes the most sense so far. It doesn't change
much for me though, I'm still concerned. The water supply and food
supply could easily be sabotaged by some radical, of course I'm not
implying just that particular strain, it could be any nut job to pull
that one off, like the shoe bomber, Richard Reid aka Abdul Raheem,
currently serving a life sentence. He converted to Islam in one of his
earlier prison stints. I've said it before in other threads, I think
the world would be a better place without religion, its segmentation
of societies and a root cause of indifference. My life is so much
more peaceful without it and this concern I have is really rooted in
religious ideology. I find it as annoying and irritating as the
Jehovah Witness knocking on my door on a Saturday morning. Shalom!
situation as a whole, makes the most sense so far. It doesn't change
much for me though, I'm still concerned. The water supply and food
supply could easily be sabotaged by some radical, of course I'm not
implying just that particular strain, it could be any nut job to pull
that one off, like the shoe bomber, Richard Reid aka Abdul Raheem,
currently serving a life sentence. He converted to Islam in one of his
earlier prison stints. I've said it before in other threads, I think
the world would be a better place without religion, its segmentation
of societies and a root cause of indifference. My life is so much
more peaceful without it and this concern I have is really rooted in
religious ideology. I find it as annoying and irritating as the
Jehovah Witness knocking on my door on a Saturday morning. Shalom!
gabbydott
Dec 15, 2009, 4:57:55 AM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
My life has become more peaceful now that my son has decided to
observe and try to copy the behaviour of his classmate, who is a
Jehovah's Witness. He is impressed how he manages to never get
involved into anything that really matters and therefore never gets
excited over anything. That helps me to learn my lesson, too.
> ...
>
> read more »
observe and try to copy the behaviour of his classmate, who is a
Jehovah's Witness. He is impressed how he manages to never get
involved into anything that really matters and therefore never gets
excited over anything. That helps me to learn my lesson, too.
>
> read more »
Lee
Dec 15, 2009, 5:37:56 AM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
More generalist stuff from you Slip?
While it may appear true that some religions foster segmentation, I am
happy to report that my own faith does no such thing and instead
concentrates on seeing God in all, so it is indeed opposite to such
segmentation.
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
While it may appear true that some religions foster segmentation, I am
happy to report that my own faith does no such thing and instead
concentrates on seeing God in all, so it is indeed opposite to such
segmentation.
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Slip Disc
Dec 15, 2009, 9:24:57 AM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
It remains the same Lee, your faith is segmented ie; not every
ascribes to your faith. Secondly it is not that religion itself is
fostering segmentation, it is just something of a byproduct. Many
religions are segmented within themselves by means of splinter
groups. Yours is not the only religion to see God in all but it has a
different name because in someway it is segmented.
> ...
>
> read more »
ascribes to your faith. Secondly it is not that religion itself is
fostering segmentation, it is just something of a byproduct. Many
religions are segmented within themselves by means of splinter
groups. Yours is not the only religion to see God in all but it has a
different name because in someway it is segmented.
>
> read more »
Slip Disc
Dec 15, 2009, 9:28:33 AM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
The experience of learning is always beneficial.
> ...
>
> read more »
>
> read more »
Lee
Dec 15, 2009, 10:00:05 AM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
Hah I guess then if that is the way you want to go, the same can be
said of any human idea. Your an Atheist, so you too are segmented, we
well know that not all atheists hold similar belives I.E. political so
that to is segmention, so I must wonder why you point the finger at
religion and level charges of segmentaion and nothing else.
You and I are more seperated idealogical by our politics than by my
faith and your lack of the same. would you say then that you think the
world would be a better place without politics, its segmentation
of societies and a root cause of indifference? Or perhaps the concept
of wealth? That is after all hugely segmentational. Or music, any
other of the arts, the list is seemingly endless, why pick just
religion I wonder?
said of any human idea. Your an Atheist, so you too are segmented, we
well know that not all atheists hold similar belives I.E. political so
that to is segmention, so I must wonder why you point the finger at
religion and level charges of segmentaion and nothing else.
You and I are more seperated idealogical by our politics than by my
faith and your lack of the same. would you say then that you think the
world would be a better place without politics, its segmentation
of societies and a root cause of indifference? Or perhaps the concept
of wealth? That is after all hugely segmentational. Or music, any
other of the arts, the list is seemingly endless, why pick just
religion I wonder?
Lee
Dec 15, 2009, 10:01:19 AM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
Heheh are you sure? What if you learn for instance of the crimes of
your father, or the sexual desire your partner has for your best
freind?
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
your father, or the sexual desire your partner has for your best
freind?
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
Pat
Dec 15, 2009, 11:50:53 AM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
On 15 Dec, 15:01, Lee <l...@rdfmedia.com> wrote:
> Heheh are you sure? What if you learn for instance of the crimes of
> your father, or the sexual desire your partner has for your best
> freind?
>
more difficult than the latter, as, in the latter case, the truth can
set you free. Knowing the truth, however 'bad' we may deem it to be,
is a far better ground from which to move forward than an unknown or,
worse, a lie.
Yesterday, I got a phone call from my middle son who was telling me of
how he and some other boys were picking on a classmate when his Muslim
friend realised that what they (including himself) were doing was
wrong and informed the teacher, who gave all but the Muslim boy a
'ticking off'. I asked my son if HE would appreciate being picked on;
to which he replied, "No." So I told him, then, what the boy did was
correct (by admitting to picking on the boy) and he realised that his
actions were wrong and took the chance to put it right. My son
eventually agreed that, whilst it may have seemed 'disloyal' to turn
in a friend to the teacher, the young Muslim boy WAS actually acting
in everyone's best interest and my son was far happier about the
situation after our brief chat.
I just thought I'd pass that on as a little tidbit to show that Muslim
values, while seeming to cross certain Western barriers (like
'grassing up' a mate for petty bullying), are, in fact, more morally
sound and even an 8 year-old can grasp that, when it's pointed out.
The last thing I wanted my son to do was to become 'nervous' of
Muslims who, for that vast majority, are actually genuinely good,
morally upstanding people.
Lee
Dec 15, 2009, 11:59:55 AM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
There may be some truth in what you say Pat. I figure though each
persons perception would be differant. Would I like to find out after
the death of my father that he was a peopdphile?(for example) Nope I
would rather just never know.
persons perception would be differant. Would I like to find out after
the death of my father that he was a peopdphile?(for example) Nope I
would rather just never know.
Pat
Dec 15, 2009, 12:53:39 PM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
On 15 Dec, 16:59, Lee <l...@rdfmedia.com> wrote:
> There may be some truth in what you say Pat. I figure though each
> persons perception would be differant. Would I like to find out after
> the death of my father that he was a peopdphile?(for example) Nope I
> would rather just never know.
>
Forewarned is forearmed (with respect to knowledge, in this case).
Nowadays, though, a man can't even say "I love kids" without
someone thinking the worst. It makes me wonder how many prospective
male teachers have to avoid saying such a phrase simply because of the
'state of fear' that exists. The term, paedophile, is a poor term
anyway, as 'philo-' means 'friendly love' not erotic love; that's what
'ero-' was for. In truth, the term is inaccurate, as few (there'll
always be SOME) people actually have a problem with people who are
friendly with children.
Molly
Dec 15, 2009, 12:54:01 PM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
I'm not sure that looking away from what comes into your experience is
ever the answer. What does not come into your experience - not sure
what that would be. If you imagine it, it is part of your experience,
even as fantasy. When we look away, what we look away from just keeps
coming back until we are willing to recognize, fully own, and move
into greater possibility. The same with what we stongly fear. We
just get more of it until we can bring ourselves to reconcile.
ever the answer. What does not come into your experience - not sure
what that would be. If you imagine it, it is part of your experience,
even as fantasy. When we look away, what we look away from just keeps
coming back until we are willing to recognize, fully own, and move
into greater possibility. The same with what we stongly fear. We
just get more of it until we can bring ourselves to reconcile.
gabbydott
Dec 15, 2009, 5:16:07 PM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
Oddly enough, it is not Lee that I read as having undergone a long and
serious looking away training. I find his each-person-a-different-
perception approach a very straight forward looking approach compared
to the duty of your forever re-cognizing and re-conciling.
loyaltty to Islam
> > > > > > > > took over, although hewas soofar goone mentally that, while he may
>
> Erfahren Sie mehr »
serious looking away training. I find his each-person-a-different-
perception approach a very straight forward looking approach compared
to the duty of your forever re-cognizing and re-conciling.
> > > > > > > > took over, although hewas soofar goone mentally that, while he may
> > > > > > > > have got his allegiances correct, his actions were completely opposed
> > > > > > > > to the guidance given BY Islam. At that point, it seems he felt it
> > > > > > > > was better (and I disagree with him completely, BTW) to fight those
> > > > > > > > who were killing his Muslim brothers than to join with them and kill
> > > > > > > > his brother Muslims (and/or support the cause that kills his brother
> > > > > > > > Muslims). So he indiscriminately started shooting. An act that would
> > > > > > > > be considered reprehensible and punishable by death under Shari'a law,
> > > > > > > > as what he did was plain murder, i.e., needless killing. What Hasan
> > > > > > > > was was someone who cracked under the pressure. He failed the test.
> > > > > > > > To pas, he should have resigned his commission from the Army, under
> > > > > > > > to the guidance given BY Islam. At that point, it seems he felt it
> > > > > > > > was better (and I disagree with him completely, BTW) to fight those
> > > > > > > > who were killing his Muslim brothers than to join with them and kill
> > > > > > > > his brother Muslims (and/or support the cause that kills his brother
> > > > > > > > Muslims). So he indiscriminately started shooting. An act that would
> > > > > > > > be considered reprehensible and punishable by death under Shari'a law,
> > > > > > > > as what he did was plain murder, i.e., needless killing. What Hasan
> > > > > > > > was was someone who cracked under the pressure. He failed the test.
> > > > > > > > ANY circumstances, and just gone back to civilian life. But it's
> > > > > > > > obvious, from his actions, that he wasn't thinking straight.
> > > > > > > > As far as his general motivations, again, I don't know the man. I can
> > > > > > > > reckon, though, from his actions that his loyalty to his Muslim
> > > > > > > > brothers outweighed his loyalty to the U.S. Army at the time of the
> > > > > > > > murders. Personally, I think he was on the verge of the cracking
> > > > > > > > point for months but something tipped him over the edge. Exactly
> > > > > > > > what, I have no idea.
> > > > > > > > Was he a terrorist, probably not, in the sense of an Al-Qaida
> > > > > > > > operative, while what he did certainly instilled terror. Was he a
> > > > > > > > fundamentalist, proably not, in the sense of the late Ayatollah
> > > > > > > > obvious, from his actions, that he wasn't thinking straight.
> > > > > > > > As far as his general motivations, again, I don't know the man. I can
> > > > > > > > reckon, though, from his actions that his loyalty to his Muslim
> > > > > > > > brothers outweighed his loyalty to the U.S. Army at the time of the
> > > > > > > > murders. Personally, I think he was on the verge of the cracking
> > > > > > > > point for months but something tipped him over the edge. Exactly
> > > > > > > > what, I have no idea.
> > > > > > > > Was he a terrorist, probably not, in the sense of an Al-Qaida
> > > > > > > > operative, while what he did certainly instilled terror. Was he a
> > > > > > > > Khomeini or Osama Bin Laden, but held the fundamental belief that he
> > > > > > > > should not support, in any way, the indiscriminate slaghterr of
> > > > > > > > innocent Muslims, which is a daily occurrence in the battlefields of
> > > > > > > > Afghanistan and Iraq. Did he shoot and kill U.S. soldiers? Yes. And
> > > > > > > > he was wrong by U.S. AND Islamic standards for doing so. He just
> > > > > > > > cracked and went postal, as it were. Does this action of his reflect
> > > > > > > > on anyone else? No, in no way, shape or form! We are all accountable
> > > > > > > > for ourselves. Should his actions make you nervous of other Muslims?
> > > > > > > > I don't think so. What needs to be looked at, though, is the
> > > > > > > > 'reasoning' behind the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and, if they are
> > > > > > > > not valid (and we all know they're not), then stop the fighting and
> > > > > > > > prevent U.S. Muslims from having to support a war against their
> > > > > > > > brothers-in-faith. Imagine how many Jews would relish fighting a war
> > > > > > > > against Israel, or Irish-Americans fighting a war against Ireland?
> > > > > > > > But those wars aren't the ones we're presented with at the moment;
> > > > > > > > rather, the current wars put the spotlight on Muslims.
> > > > > > > > What we should be nervous about is entering into wars that,
> > > > > > > > invariably, pit men against men, and THAT will always bring out sub-
> > > > > > > > loyalties. There were plenty of Irish-Americans that lent support in
> > > > > > > > some fashion to either NI or the IRA. But do we castigate all Irish-
> > > > > > > > Americans because of it? Ahh, but they were all Christians. In
> > > > > > > > truth, there were IRA supporters that would tell you that the
> > > > > > > > Protestants wee NNOT Christians and the Protestants would tell you
> > > > > > > > Afghanistan and Iraq. Did he shoot and kill U.S. soldiers? Yes. And
> > > > > > > > he was wrong by U.S. AND Islamic standards for doing so. He just
> > > > > > > > cracked and went postal, as it were. Does this action of his reflect
> > > > > > > > on anyone else? No, in no way, shape or form! We are all accountable
> > > > > > > > for ourselves. Should his actions make you nervous of other Muslims?
> > > > > > > > I don't think so. What needs to be looked at, though, is the
> > > > > > > > 'reasoning' behind the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq and, if they are
> > > > > > > > not valid (and we all know they're not), then stop the fighting and
> > > > > > > > prevent U.S. Muslims from having to support a war against their
> > > > > > > > brothers-in-faith. Imagine how many Jews would relish fighting a war
> > > > > > > > against Israel, or Irish-Americans fighting a war against Ireland?
> > > > > > > > But those wars aren't the ones we're presented with at the moment;
> > > > > > > > rather, the current wars put the spotlight on Muslims.
> > > > > > > > What we should be nervous about is entering into wars that,
> > > > > > > > invariably, pit men against men, and THAT will always bring out sub-
> > > > > > > > loyalties. There were plenty of Irish-Americans that lent support in
> > > > > > > > some fashion to either NI or the IRA. But do we castigate all Irish-
> > > > > > > > Americans because of it? Ahh, but they were all Christians. In
> > > > > > > > truth, there were IRA supporters that would tell you that the
> > > > > > > > that the Catholics in the south weren't Christian.
>
> ...
>
>
> Erfahren Sie mehr »
Slip Disc
Dec 15, 2009, 6:23:33 PM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
Buzzer goes off, I'm not an Atheist, never claimed to be one, being
non religious is not Atheism. What I believe God is may be different
from others beliefs. Yes for sure I think the world would be much
better without politics and many other things including wealth, an
unnecessary state of being. Your interpretations are too micro. I'm
not picking on religion per se but it is within the context of this
thread, in case you haven't noticed, ie; Muslims um Religion um Islam
um Religion um Jihad um Religion.
> ...
>
> read more »
non religious is not Atheism. What I believe God is may be different
from others beliefs. Yes for sure I think the world would be much
better without politics and many other things including wealth, an
unnecessary state of being. Your interpretations are too micro. I'm
not picking on religion per se but it is within the context of this
thread, in case you haven't noticed, ie; Muslims um Religion um Islam
um Religion um Jihad um Religion.
>
> read more »
Slip Disc
Dec 15, 2009, 6:27:35 PM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
There is a huge difference between Learning and being made aware of
something.
People don't go to school to find out about their families problems,
they go to "Learn".
Lets at least get on the same level of understanding, I'm not going to
entertain a semantic quiz.
> ...
>
> read more »
something.
People don't go to school to find out about their families problems,
they go to "Learn".
Lets at least get on the same level of understanding, I'm not going to
entertain a semantic quiz.
>
> read more »
Slip Disc
Dec 15, 2009, 6:30:32 PM12/15/09
to "Minds Eye"
That's nice Pat, but you are talking about "Children".
> ...
>
> read more »
>
> read more »
archytas
Dec 16, 2009, 4:37:19 AM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
Honesty in these regions is very difficult, not least because there is
so much hostility waiting to pounce. I always wonder why anyone would
want to believe in any of the religions around the world. This really
implies that I think my own take is better, though doing away with
'the trappings of salvation' and a range of comforts and even false
fellowship is a lot to ask. I would say, but then I would, that I
have worked hard on trying to establish what truth is (even if I have
to admit we don't quite meet it) and religionists take a line of much
less resistance. I am, frankly, scared when they would do nasty
things to each other and others based on relations with goats' heads
or religious text. I also know many people do not treat religion like
this in their own beliefs and that generally it is irrelevant in my
dealings with others. I find it sad that most people still seem able
to find more in ancient scriptures or voodoo than in Hume, Darwin and
Einstein - but I have drunk with the stilted devil men and found much
of their day-to-day little different than mine.
Slip should not have found any need to defend himself for raising an
important question. He has hardly had to in here, but wider society
is more hostile. There is a bigger question that underlies this, one
about how one can argue amongst inertial violence, that also leads to
questions of the chance of argument amongst ignorance and zealousy,
itself leading to reflective questions on how we might come to have a
better position that recognises such without merely forming new dogma.
I looked through our Shaun's science homework book last night and
found the answer 'because it smoked' as an answer to how he could tell
putting magnesium into an acid was a chemical reaction. The next
question was how he could tell rusting was a chemical reaction. His
answer was 'because of the magnesium'. When I asked him what
magnesium was he didn't know and claimed never to have seen any (I
used to be fascinated setting strips of it on fire). When I asked
which metal rusts he didn't know, but had some idea that cars do. I
could have thought what kind of bloody awful teachers have made him so
ignorant, though chose to wonder how they manage to teach anything to
the average attention-spanned kids in their charge. I just about got
him to scrawl some half-reliable answers in his notebook for half-an-
hour before his urge to get out to play with his Muslim mates became
too much. He won't be as good at chemistry as me, but he already
knows some good stuff, like skin colour and religion being an
irrelevance in choosing friends.
> ...
>
> read more »
so much hostility waiting to pounce. I always wonder why anyone would
want to believe in any of the religions around the world. This really
implies that I think my own take is better, though doing away with
'the trappings of salvation' and a range of comforts and even false
fellowship is a lot to ask. I would say, but then I would, that I
have worked hard on trying to establish what truth is (even if I have
to admit we don't quite meet it) and religionists take a line of much
less resistance. I am, frankly, scared when they would do nasty
things to each other and others based on relations with goats' heads
or religious text. I also know many people do not treat religion like
this in their own beliefs and that generally it is irrelevant in my
dealings with others. I find it sad that most people still seem able
to find more in ancient scriptures or voodoo than in Hume, Darwin and
Einstein - but I have drunk with the stilted devil men and found much
of their day-to-day little different than mine.
Slip should not have found any need to defend himself for raising an
important question. He has hardly had to in here, but wider society
is more hostile. There is a bigger question that underlies this, one
about how one can argue amongst inertial violence, that also leads to
questions of the chance of argument amongst ignorance and zealousy,
itself leading to reflective questions on how we might come to have a
better position that recognises such without merely forming new dogma.
I looked through our Shaun's science homework book last night and
found the answer 'because it smoked' as an answer to how he could tell
putting magnesium into an acid was a chemical reaction. The next
question was how he could tell rusting was a chemical reaction. His
answer was 'because of the magnesium'. When I asked him what
magnesium was he didn't know and claimed never to have seen any (I
used to be fascinated setting strips of it on fire). When I asked
which metal rusts he didn't know, but had some idea that cars do. I
could have thought what kind of bloody awful teachers have made him so
ignorant, though chose to wonder how they manage to teach anything to
the average attention-spanned kids in their charge. I just about got
him to scrawl some half-reliable answers in his notebook for half-an-
hour before his urge to get out to play with his Muslim mates became
too much. He won't be as good at chemistry as me, but he already
knows some good stuff, like skin colour and religion being an
irrelevance in choosing friends.
>
> read more »
Pat
Dec 16, 2009, 7:47:41 AM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
On 15 Dec, 23:23, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Buzzer goes off, I'm not an Atheist, never claimed to be one, being
> non religious is not Atheism. What I believe God is may be different
> from others beliefs. Yes for sure I think the world would be much
> better without politics and many other things including wealth, an
> unnecessary state of being. Your interpretations are too micro. I'm
> not picking on religion per se but it is within the context of this
> thread, in case you haven't noticed, ie; Muslims um Religion um Islam
> um Religion um Jihad um Religion.
>
Muslims are practicing, per se, and not all forms of Islam (for those
who ARE practicing) are the same. Sunni vs. Shi'a is a big divide,
for one, and ther eare four major 'schools of though' when it comes to
deriving laws (Shari'a) from the Qur'an (scripture), ahadith (sayings
of the Prophet) and Sunna (traditions of/about the Prophet). The you
mention jihad. Which one? The lesser (more violent and outward
fight) or the greater (the less violent and more inner struggle)? All
these terms are not equal to one another. Much less are they even
congruent.
Have you looked at Islamic economics? If implemented well (and, of
course, that's a huge caveat), there are no 'wealthy', as they would
be charitable and share their excesses with those who have needs. Of
course, this is one of the big areas where Islam and Western
capitalism collide. Western capitalism allows for the stinking rich--
and encourages it--whereas that is not the case with Islamic
economics, as the rich (those who have more than they need) have a
responsibility to ensure that there are no poor, because they are the
ones who are best placed to alleviate that condition. Yet, at the
same time, Islamic economics isn't so far as communism, because it
respects private property. It actually sits as a happy compromise
between communism and capitalism based on social values in which the
standard of living for everyone is (or COULD BE, if properly
implemented) guaranteed. But the West doesn't like it because it
means 'no fat cats' and the Communists don't like it because they have
to give up some control. I.e., it's a compromise in which both sides
give up something and everyone gains.
Molly
Dec 16, 2009, 8:47:00 AM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
I think that Justin's read on Slips question was accurate, in that it
points to the racial hysteria that is now all around us, inflamed by
mainstream media and ignorance. In the US, as generations go on, so
does the racism, but the targeted race changes. During my
grandparents time, the Irish were targets. Now, because Islam is not
really a race, but a religion, anyone with medium dark skin is a
target, which could be Eastern European, Indian, Middle Eastern parts
of the globe and include, in truth, several different races and
religions that include a particular physical "look." It is our
tendency to identify with groups, and feel ourselves against others
and other groups that get in our way in significant but irrational
ways. My step daughter dates a guy who immigrated from Armenia at the
age of 7. He had someone call him an Arab with distain the other
day. Last I checked, Saudi Arabia and the US were allies.
Even a relatively innocuous statement from Gabby against me and for
someone else will interrupt cohesion in the group. In terms of self,
moving against is always looking away from self. It is human nature
none the less. Wrap that up with a big coat of fear - fear of the
future, fear of war, fear of attack, fear of economic disaster, fear
that I won't be able to keep my stuff or have more stuff or hang on to
my irrational fear and anger that allows me to feel in the absence of
love, well, you are perfect fodder for herd mentality and those who
prey on it. Even that is simply a reflection of changing humanity.
It may be that what we are witnessing is really the death throes of
racism in a global society.
> ...
>
> read more »
points to the racial hysteria that is now all around us, inflamed by
mainstream media and ignorance. In the US, as generations go on, so
does the racism, but the targeted race changes. During my
grandparents time, the Irish were targets. Now, because Islam is not
really a race, but a religion, anyone with medium dark skin is a
target, which could be Eastern European, Indian, Middle Eastern parts
of the globe and include, in truth, several different races and
religions that include a particular physical "look." It is our
tendency to identify with groups, and feel ourselves against others
and other groups that get in our way in significant but irrational
ways. My step daughter dates a guy who immigrated from Armenia at the
age of 7. He had someone call him an Arab with distain the other
day. Last I checked, Saudi Arabia and the US were allies.
Even a relatively innocuous statement from Gabby against me and for
someone else will interrupt cohesion in the group. In terms of self,
moving against is always looking away from self. It is human nature
none the less. Wrap that up with a big coat of fear - fear of the
future, fear of war, fear of attack, fear of economic disaster, fear
that I won't be able to keep my stuff or have more stuff or hang on to
my irrational fear and anger that allows me to feel in the absence of
love, well, you are perfect fodder for herd mentality and those who
prey on it. Even that is simply a reflection of changing humanity.
It may be that what we are witnessing is really the death throes of
racism in a global society.
>
> read more »
ornamentalmind
Dec 16, 2009, 9:11:28 AM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
One major caveat example for Pat:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Saudi_Arabia
And the beat (list) goes on….
http://www.religionfacts.com/islam/places/top_50.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Freedom_of_religion_in_Saudi_Arabia
And the beat (list) goes on….
http://www.religionfacts.com/islam/places/top_50.htm
ornamentalmind
Dec 16, 2009, 9:24:25 AM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
“…to teach anything to the average attention-spanned kids in their
charge…” – archy
One wonders if associated dogma includes sugar induced ADD.
charge…” – archy
One wonders if associated dogma includes sugar induced ADD.
ornamentalmind
Dec 16, 2009, 9:53:24 AM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
As far as I know, xenophobia is nothing new and appears to have
existed at least as long as recorded history.
Continuing in a slightly skeptical vein, there isn’t even agreement
upon when the Age of Aquarius began or will begin! …start dates
ranging from 1447 AD to 3597 AD!!! At least the general agreement is
that it will last for 2,150 years. Now that New Age acknowledgement
has been made and the associated idealism has been given lip service
if not actually found in vitro, projections upon future date
catastrophic times as well as full enlightenment and wisdom times
exist concurrently. Perhaps the recognition that all we have is *now*
could be thrown into the mix?
Surely being repetitive, Walt Kelly was right about who the enemy is.
Right now ‘it/he/she’ can be found and destroyed if one wishes to do
so. Here is the core issue. Yet, on a more mundane level, and with the
advantage of the ability to study history objectively, omnipresent
cycles of oppression have existed and remain in action and can be
quite informative when actual cause/effect issues are addressed.
The ‘truth’ is that much of the populous found within Western culture
has some fear of being attacked by a few albeit perhaps growing in
numbers of people who have said enough is enough and retaliation is
the only way. Most honest people will admit to the familiarity of such
feelings no matter how lacking in correctness they may be. Since the
causes for such attitudes started long ago yet continue through today,
until/if they are nakedly addressed and removed, the retribution dance
will continue with its associated and appropriate nervousness…
appropriate that is if one has any concern about personal death.
Having said all of this, and having discussed ad nausea here how to
‘fix’ such a situation, the best that I can see is to first stop
supporting any sort of hegemony and associated crimes against humanity
and then just sit and wait for the hatreds to die out. Doesn’t sound
too promising does it? Ah, well…
In any case, whether we are at the dawning of a new age or not, surely
we will all die. This is the only ultimate fear possible in such cases
and is addressable. All shouldofs and couldofs evaporate into the mist
of imagination from whence they came. What is, is.
existed at least as long as recorded history.
Continuing in a slightly skeptical vein, there isn’t even agreement
upon when the Age of Aquarius began or will begin! …start dates
ranging from 1447 AD to 3597 AD!!! At least the general agreement is
that it will last for 2,150 years. Now that New Age acknowledgement
has been made and the associated idealism has been given lip service
if not actually found in vitro, projections upon future date
catastrophic times as well as full enlightenment and wisdom times
exist concurrently. Perhaps the recognition that all we have is *now*
could be thrown into the mix?
Surely being repetitive, Walt Kelly was right about who the enemy is.
Right now ‘it/he/she’ can be found and destroyed if one wishes to do
so. Here is the core issue. Yet, on a more mundane level, and with the
advantage of the ability to study history objectively, omnipresent
cycles of oppression have existed and remain in action and can be
quite informative when actual cause/effect issues are addressed.
The ‘truth’ is that much of the populous found within Western culture
has some fear of being attacked by a few albeit perhaps growing in
numbers of people who have said enough is enough and retaliation is
the only way. Most honest people will admit to the familiarity of such
feelings no matter how lacking in correctness they may be. Since the
causes for such attitudes started long ago yet continue through today,
until/if they are nakedly addressed and removed, the retribution dance
will continue with its associated and appropriate nervousness…
appropriate that is if one has any concern about personal death.
Having said all of this, and having discussed ad nausea here how to
‘fix’ such a situation, the best that I can see is to first stop
supporting any sort of hegemony and associated crimes against humanity
and then just sit and wait for the hatreds to die out. Doesn’t sound
too promising does it? Ah, well…
In any case, whether we are at the dawning of a new age or not, surely
we will all die. This is the only ultimate fear possible in such cases
and is addressable. All shouldofs and couldofs evaporate into the mist
of imagination from whence they came. What is, is.
Molly
Dec 16, 2009, 10:51:14 AM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
I'm certain that Howard Zinn would not agree that the only thing for
us to do is sit back. But he would agree that not participating in
hate is one good step. We are all called in different ways to
participate or not in the stampeeding herd.
us to do is sit back. But he would agree that not participating in
hate is one good step. We are all called in different ways to
participate or not in the stampeeding herd.
ornamentalmind
Dec 16, 2009, 1:07:48 PM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
Unlike the charges to the contrary, I am not a true ideologue when it
comes to such things. Like many others here, I can be as apparently
ambivalent as the next person…pointing towards both material action as
well as internal contemplation…not pimping either as being the only
answer for humanity.
As much as our intuitions may lean towards true integralism, in
practice…at least while typing at some keyboard somewhere, we are a
multitude pecking symbols to an illuminated screen. Any protestations
to the contrary imply divinity.
Of course, since the topic is nervousness and a specific theology, to
those points, I have accepted that today, no more than a decade ago,
someone somewhere just might decide to kill a bunch of fellow human
beings, me included whether I actively participated in perceived
injuries or not. So, today, nervousness in the current context is not
a personal issue.
When it comes to the associated theology, while I do not pray 5 times
a day nor bow to Mecca, I do, on occasion Zhikr, repeat the names of
god, do not proffer images of the divine, participate in cleansing
rituals quite similar to the aforementioned religion and discuss such
things in an open and inquisitive way with both atheists and believers
alike. In this way, along with the ‘acceptance’ of the previous post,
do tend to result in some sense of being able to not run out into the
streets and get my head beat in like those at the climate conference
are doing today. I’ve already paid my dues in this respect and now
tend to more direct activism such as congressional contacts and
directives, discussing such things and voting records with everyone
who will listen, rant online (as has been well documented), present
quite sane albeit apparently radical thoughts of sound patriots and
political thinkers as much as may be appropriate wherever possible and
sometimes even when not ‘appropriate’. I am well aware of the history
of this wonderful experiment called the United States of America and
the sacrifices and real dangers accepted as necessary for a more
perfect union to be formed…this even though in the few short years
from the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution, the tenor
changed greatly and much more towards one of that of an Oligarchy.
I do continue to applaud and support Amy Goodman who for decades has
put her life and limb on the line for such causes. I apologize for
Noam in conferences hostile to such brilliance…pointing out in
perpetual motion the reality of what he presents. Sadly, I am not a
published author nor a physically fit anarchist so I could do more
today. I think that Zinn would understand and sympathize, especially
since I don’t suggest that no action is possible nor is preferable.
Sadly, attempts at unifying the introspective arts and political
realities are lost on many.
comes to such things. Like many others here, I can be as apparently
ambivalent as the next person…pointing towards both material action as
well as internal contemplation…not pimping either as being the only
answer for humanity.
As much as our intuitions may lean towards true integralism, in
practice…at least while typing at some keyboard somewhere, we are a
multitude pecking symbols to an illuminated screen. Any protestations
to the contrary imply divinity.
Of course, since the topic is nervousness and a specific theology, to
those points, I have accepted that today, no more than a decade ago,
someone somewhere just might decide to kill a bunch of fellow human
beings, me included whether I actively participated in perceived
injuries or not. So, today, nervousness in the current context is not
a personal issue.
When it comes to the associated theology, while I do not pray 5 times
a day nor bow to Mecca, I do, on occasion Zhikr, repeat the names of
god, do not proffer images of the divine, participate in cleansing
rituals quite similar to the aforementioned religion and discuss such
things in an open and inquisitive way with both atheists and believers
alike. In this way, along with the ‘acceptance’ of the previous post,
do tend to result in some sense of being able to not run out into the
streets and get my head beat in like those at the climate conference
are doing today. I’ve already paid my dues in this respect and now
tend to more direct activism such as congressional contacts and
directives, discussing such things and voting records with everyone
who will listen, rant online (as has been well documented), present
quite sane albeit apparently radical thoughts of sound patriots and
political thinkers as much as may be appropriate wherever possible and
sometimes even when not ‘appropriate’. I am well aware of the history
of this wonderful experiment called the United States of America and
the sacrifices and real dangers accepted as necessary for a more
perfect union to be formed…this even though in the few short years
from the Declaration of Independence to the Constitution, the tenor
changed greatly and much more towards one of that of an Oligarchy.
I do continue to applaud and support Amy Goodman who for decades has
put her life and limb on the line for such causes. I apologize for
Noam in conferences hostile to such brilliance…pointing out in
perpetual motion the reality of what he presents. Sadly, I am not a
published author nor a physically fit anarchist so I could do more
today. I think that Zinn would understand and sympathize, especially
since I don’t suggest that no action is possible nor is preferable.
Sadly, attempts at unifying the introspective arts and political
realities are lost on many.
Slip Disc
Dec 16, 2009, 2:17:15 PM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
I think that Justin's read on Slips question was accurate, in that it
points to the racial hysteria that is now all around us, inflamed by
mainstream media and ignorance. << Molly
points to the racial hysteria that is now all around us, inflamed by
If racial hysteria is all around us it is because people are under a
more consistent awareness of the fact that a serious threat exists.
We can't ignore the reality of threat and attack because many or a
majority are peaceful. I don't think I've participated in hate
because I asked that question and I know that Justin's take on it was
reactionary and emotionally charged, which I made clear in my
replies. Of course you both stand on the same religious platform so I
can understand your position.
>
> read more »
Slip Disc
Dec 16, 2009, 3:24:59 PM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
We should also note, Molly, that racism in the past, as you pointed
out against the Irish in your mothers time is not really relevant.
This is not a racist issue, it's about attacks that kill people by a
specific religious group. I'm sure the Irish were not setting off
bombs, shooting people, joining the army and killing their fellow
soldiers, nor did any other immigration group. Racism is entirely off
base.
> ...
>
> read more »
out against the Irish in your mothers time is not really relevant.
This is not a racist issue, it's about attacks that kill people by a
specific religious group. I'm sure the Irish were not setting off
bombs, shooting people, joining the army and killing their fellow
soldiers, nor did any other immigration group. Racism is entirely off
base.
>
> read more »
dj Briscoe
Dec 16, 2009, 3:37:29 PM12/16/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
The Irish was fighting for their freedom to be out under the Queens rule. It started along time ago when they were called Bastards and there Queen was called a Bastard and was not excepted. And to have their own Kingdom. What starts wars is not enough kindness and understanding and finding solutions. And if there is no solutions of peaceful understandings than you have wars. And if people have to submit to what is not there dreams of their people than again you will have wars or divisions..To consider what is good for people is the best solutions. To force people to do what they do not want to do (will always cause hard feelings)
> ...
>
> read more »
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups ""Minds Eye"" group.
To post to this group, send email to mind...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to minds-eye+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/minds-eye?hl=en.
Molly
Dec 16, 2009, 4:02:23 PM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
I don't think it is off base at all. We are talking about race in the
current definition: "a class or kind of individuals with common
characteristics, interests, appearance, or habits as if derived from a
common ancestor." Racism in the US is defined by targeted group, and
currently that group is Muslim. Clint Eastwood's movie Gran Torino
did a good job of showing the problem in Dearborn, MI, although the
movie portrayed the group as a group from Southeast Asia that
immigrated from several different countries. In truth, the group in
Dearborn that is currently the target of racial hostility is Muslim,
and all Middle Eastern immigrants or those who look like them are
carried along. But you probably know that.
> ...
>
> read more »
current definition: "a class or kind of individuals with common
characteristics, interests, appearance, or habits as if derived from a
common ancestor." Racism in the US is defined by targeted group, and
currently that group is Muslim. Clint Eastwood's movie Gran Torino
did a good job of showing the problem in Dearborn, MI, although the
movie portrayed the group as a group from Southeast Asia that
immigrated from several different countries. In truth, the group in
Dearborn that is currently the target of racial hostility is Muslim,
and all Middle Eastern immigrants or those who look like them are
carried along. But you probably know that.
>
> read more »
ornamentalmind
Dec 16, 2009, 4:10:06 PM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
When it comes to attitudes over the centuries about ‘them’…from
differing points of view, years ago I found this very informative site
and strongly suggest reading some of the actual words that were
written at the time. Hopefully you will find it as interesting as I
have.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook1k.html#General
differing points of view, years ago I found this very informative site
and strongly suggest reading some of the actual words that were
written at the time. Hopefully you will find it as interesting as I
have.
http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/sbook1k.html#General
Slip Disc
Dec 16, 2009, 9:13:18 PM12/16/09
to "Minds Eye"
Well your turning the hostility around, reversing the direction of the
hostility. If anything the hostility is originating from Islam and we
seem to be the targets. My intended focus was towards the incidences
that have been reported by reputable sources not some tabloid rag. I
think that a majority of people globally feel threatened by the
increase in Muslim populations, especially considering all the
problems arising from their presence. I didn't think much of it when
they had rioting in Paris several years back but now I see a
continuing trend towards more serious violent acts aimed at killing
innocent people, as per the examples I have cited. How many more
Hasans are hiding behind the shroud of peace and how many more
teenagers are out their waiting for the opportunity to strike? We are
a multi cultural country but the only culture that seems to be causing
concern is that of the Muslims. Pat has expended much energy on
pointing out the various faiths within faiths which actually validates
my point that religion segments societies and has been throughout
history the root of many wars and atrocities still to this day. I'm
not worried about Irish people nor German, Italian, Polish, French and
dozens of others. I'm worried about some Hasan copy cat opening fire
on a group of people or a group of Muslim teenagers committing some
heinous act that will take the lives of innocent people. As I pointed
out to Justin, this is not something that just popped up out of
nowhere, but has been happening for quite sometime and is still
happening but is getting more frequent and insidious in nature. I
don't think God intended for us to come up with a slew of religious
figures to believe in nor multi-Gods to worship. I don't even know if
we are supposed to worship anything. Why can't we just live and
enjoy?
I do own the movie Gran Torino and I don't think that it applies to
what I talking about. I think it is natural for people to develop
fear of a specific race/culture when that race/culture is out and
about killing people, its no different than the fear arising from a
serial killer on the loose, everyone becomes suspect. Your stance
reminds me of the political correctness position taken on racial
profiling and as a result my 87 year old mother had to undergo
scrutiny at the airport, removing her jacket for inspection. Its not
age old grannies that are hijacking planes and carrying out suicide
missions but it is the ____________ people. Simply fill in the blank
for a reality check.
hostility. If anything the hostility is originating from Islam and we
seem to be the targets. My intended focus was towards the incidences
that have been reported by reputable sources not some tabloid rag. I
think that a majority of people globally feel threatened by the
increase in Muslim populations, especially considering all the
problems arising from their presence. I didn't think much of it when
they had rioting in Paris several years back but now I see a
continuing trend towards more serious violent acts aimed at killing
innocent people, as per the examples I have cited. How many more
Hasans are hiding behind the shroud of peace and how many more
teenagers are out their waiting for the opportunity to strike? We are
a multi cultural country but the only culture that seems to be causing
concern is that of the Muslims. Pat has expended much energy on
pointing out the various faiths within faiths which actually validates
my point that religion segments societies and has been throughout
history the root of many wars and atrocities still to this day. I'm
not worried about Irish people nor German, Italian, Polish, French and
dozens of others. I'm worried about some Hasan copy cat opening fire
on a group of people or a group of Muslim teenagers committing some
heinous act that will take the lives of innocent people. As I pointed
out to Justin, this is not something that just popped up out of
nowhere, but has been happening for quite sometime and is still
happening but is getting more frequent and insidious in nature. I
don't think God intended for us to come up with a slew of religious
figures to believe in nor multi-Gods to worship. I don't even know if
we are supposed to worship anything. Why can't we just live and
enjoy?
I do own the movie Gran Torino and I don't think that it applies to
what I talking about. I think it is natural for people to develop
fear of a specific race/culture when that race/culture is out and
about killing people, its no different than the fear arising from a
serial killer on the loose, everyone becomes suspect. Your stance
reminds me of the political correctness position taken on racial
profiling and as a result my 87 year old mother had to undergo
scrutiny at the airport, removing her jacket for inspection. Its not
age old grannies that are hijacking planes and carrying out suicide
missions but it is the ____________ people. Simply fill in the blank
for a reality check.
Picture this, your are on an elevator, the other passengers consist of
two old ladies, a mom holding a baby and three children aged 3, 5 and
7, an old man with a cane and two men in the corner each with an
attache case and speaking any Islamic language. Ok, who are you
worried about? Me? I wouldn't even get on the elevator if I heard
them talking. Sorry but that is that way it is and it is getting
worse. This is a real situation, but I didn't cause it, they did.
> ...
>
> read more »
dj Briscoe
Dec 16, 2009, 10:04:46 PM12/16/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Slip Is right on the mark with his conclusions. And With his concept or what should be, which is not, takes others to see what he is talking about and to agree yes this is the way life should be. I do not think his conversation is in general. But remenber there are hate groups that arrive from being onesided for there relgions and should we say there kind of people. Is this racism? Even if there religions did not enter into it than what? They would still be the same kind of people that was born into the same pace of life and their ways..There are People that take on Muslim religion that were born in other countries, but are not true muslim's. I do believe it is a form of racism..I think this that people are happy when they are with there on culture and relate better. I do think it is good culture and education to learn about other cultures and religions. I cannot say what it would be like to go to another country or convert over to another religion. I do not have hate in my heart, but I do believe we have a problem on are hands in certain groups as hate groups. A murder , is a murder or murders. If your ways and beliefs are not like others and they think you as a dog and woman as dogs and other as this also because your ways are not their ways ..than I would call this racism in a sense..Because of different Beliefs and ways of all over the world there are many divisions. Can you mix these and convert without problems? No. To have fears now because you realize awareness of these peoples beliefs and they are some your neighbors and some you are working for. To me to think about the mixture of beliefs all over +the world and cultures and we have had very few incidents, such as how easy it could be to put things in our foods and our water..but this has not happened as far as I know. I buy bottled water. dj
Lee
Dec 17, 2009, 5:36:06 AM12/17/09
to "Minds Eye"
Ahhh then please forgive my ignorance Slip, I did not know that about
you. See what happens when we assume without taking the time to
clarify our assumptions.
you. See what happens when we assume without taking the time to
clarify our assumptions.
It is interesting though how you accuse me of micro interpretation
whilst I accuse you of massive generalistion.
I think though that my methoed must trump yours, surely a more
regourous look at any situation must be better then any amount of
cursary glances?
To get things a little straighter between us, I did not for a second
think that you where picking on my religion, I can read your words and
it is clear to me that you are picking on the religion of Islam, My
post to you was merely to highlight your generalisations. Of course
it would be far far better, to not generalise if you are talking about
Islam say Islam, and then you'll find we actualy may save some time
and not wastes as many posts.
On 15 Dec, 23:23, Slip Disc <bug...@gmail.com> wrote:
Pat
Dec 17, 2009, 7:47:39 AM12/17/09
to "Minds Eye"
Your worry about people speaking an "Islamic language" speaks
volumes. English is an Islamic language. That is, there are Muslims
who speak it. Let me put it in Christian speak for you (English is
also a Christian language!!): "And why beholdest thou the mote that is
in thy brother's eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine
own eye?" That quote, of Jesus, was not originally spoken in English,
obviously. The point is that when you said "Islamic language", I
really don't think you have any ground to stand on. Is that
Indonesian, Persian, Arabic, Urdu, Pashtun, Albanian, what? There is
no single language that is Islamic. The Qur'an was written in Arabic,
but would you know, by listening, the difference between two native
Arabic speakers and two native Aramaic speakers? Either could be
Christian. The statement was blatanly racist, borne out of fear, cast
over you by a right-wing, neo-con, fundamentalist Christian media
ploy, and you've fallen straight into the mindset they want you to
have. "Be fearful of the OTHER fundamentalists, not us 'good
Christian fundamentalists'".
Do you think 9-11 was done as a pre-emptive strike? It was
retaliation for American foreign policy!! Bad form, it's true, but it
was a REACTION to Western action. It WAS precipitated. You SHOULD be
worried about what the U.S. is doing that is fostering that kind of
response. If that doesn't cross your mind, then you've not understood
the past 3 decades of history.
Lee
Dec 17, 2009, 8:28:18 AM12/17/09
to "Minds Eye"
I think the last bit of this post rasies a very good point DJ.
If every Muslim was anit west, how easy would it be for those that
live in the west to find employment in our food maufacturing
industries, and our water sanitation industries and put shit in both
our food and water?
I would say to easy, so one conclusion that can be reached is that not
all Muslims feel way that Slip says they do.
Of course another conclusion that could be reached is that they just
have not thought of it. Hahahah now who's ever gonna trust canned
food again ummmmm?
Slip Disc
Dec 17, 2009, 10:46:38 AM12/17/09
to "Minds Eye"
Pat, this is all getting very messy. Lee is tossing around phrases
like "...all Muslims feel way that Slip says they do.", which I never
stated and you are saying that I'm worried about people who speak an
Islamic language when the example was to be interpreted within the
context it was written. It is not the worrying about a language that
is the issue but what the language represents. If all the terrorist
acts over that past 20 years were committed by some radical Polish
group and we replace the two Islamic men in the elevator with two men
speaking Polish, it would clearly become a case of worrying about the
two men speaking Polish because we don't know if they have a bomb in
their attache case. Simple really. This is not to say that I'm
worried about "all" people who speak Polish or that I think "all"
Polish people have the same intent as Lee would imply but simply that
in view of years of attacks by "ANY" group identifiable by language
would instill a certain level of fear in any given society. I know it
is an unfortunate fact but nonetheless it is and further holds true in
other areas of social deviation such as pedophilia. It is not that
"all" Catholic priests are bad but I still would not let a 9 year old
boy go traipsing off into the woods with Father O'Feeley, and I'm sure
you can see why. So in summation it is in that perspective that I
feel concerned about the intent of people who fit the description of
the terrorists, Hasan types in social employ or teenagers from Muslim
families. I don't hate Muslim people but you would have to admit that
when an incident like Fort Hood takes place and a group of home grown
teenagers take off to kill me and mine on top of all the other attacks
in the past, one does become very wary.
As far as the Governments manipulation of world affairs, instigation
of political coups and overall butting into other people's business
for the sake of self gain, I do understand your point about
retaliatory attacks, but that doesn't make me fee any safer. If it
were up to me I would pull out of every country in the world, disband
all military, turn all the weapons into plowshares and set an example
of how to propagate Peace on Earth and Good Will to ALL People! We
can change the world by setting an example but unfortunately the
example we set is one of military power and aggression.
like "...all Muslims feel way that Slip says they do.", which I never
stated and you are saying that I'm worried about people who speak an
Islamic language when the example was to be interpreted within the
context it was written. It is not the worrying about a language that
is the issue but what the language represents. If all the terrorist
acts over that past 20 years were committed by some radical Polish
group and we replace the two Islamic men in the elevator with two men
speaking Polish, it would clearly become a case of worrying about the
two men speaking Polish because we don't know if they have a bomb in
their attache case. Simple really. This is not to say that I'm
worried about "all" people who speak Polish or that I think "all"
Polish people have the same intent as Lee would imply but simply that
in view of years of attacks by "ANY" group identifiable by language
would instill a certain level of fear in any given society. I know it
is an unfortunate fact but nonetheless it is and further holds true in
other areas of social deviation such as pedophilia. It is not that
"all" Catholic priests are bad but I still would not let a 9 year old
boy go traipsing off into the woods with Father O'Feeley, and I'm sure
you can see why. So in summation it is in that perspective that I
feel concerned about the intent of people who fit the description of
the terrorists, Hasan types in social employ or teenagers from Muslim
families. I don't hate Muslim people but you would have to admit that
when an incident like Fort Hood takes place and a group of home grown
teenagers take off to kill me and mine on top of all the other attacks
in the past, one does become very wary.
As far as the Governments manipulation of world affairs, instigation
of political coups and overall butting into other people's business
for the sake of self gain, I do understand your point about
retaliatory attacks, but that doesn't make me fee any safer. If it
were up to me I would pull out of every country in the world, disband
all military, turn all the weapons into plowshares and set an example
of how to propagate Peace on Earth and Good Will to ALL People! We
can change the world by setting an example but unfortunately the
example we set is one of military power and aggression.
> ...
>
> read more »
Molly
Dec 17, 2009, 11:02:35 AM12/17/09
to "Minds Eye"
"I didn't cause it, they did."
This one sentence speaks volumes. I hear you Slip, when you say that
you are full of fear. I challenge you to look within yourself for the
cause. "We have nothing to fear but fear itself," was Roosevelt's way
of quelling fear during difficult times for the country, and applies
today as well. Pointing the finger with blame at a person or group
only shows a reluctance to take responsibility for your own emotions.
I prefer not to live my life in fear, but it took a great deal of fear
to allow me to understand my own part in creating it. Once I was able
to let my emotional fear go, I stopped having experiences that
required the feeling of fear. We build our own emotions with past
experiences, future speculation, information, all stored in memory
that comes rushing back each time we need to feel the rush.
" I'm worried about some Hasan copy cat opening fire
on a group of people or a group of Muslim teenagers committing some
heinous act that will take the lives of innocent people."
This is happening in the world, it is true. All over the world,
people of all color, race, religion are being injurious and cruel,
inflicting pain and death, on each other. Do you worry about all of
it, or just the stuff that is in the news that is placed there to
create a herd mentality that will justify war? If there was a 300 lb
black man in that elevator, would your feel fear? How about an
Italian in a $2000 suit flipping a coin and smoothing his greasy
hair? How about a young Hispanic with tear drops tattoed by his eye
and his cap on sideways? All pretty good stereotypes of fear. But
the truth is, anyone can kill, all of us are capable of great harm.
There is plenty to be afraid of and each of us is responsible for our
own fear. We are also responsible for what we do that incites fear in
others, whether it is through intimidation or screaming fire where
there is none, but you are afraid there might be one.
> ...
>
> read more »
ornamentalmind
Dec 17, 2009, 12:04:21 PM12/17/09
to "Minds Eye"
Starting at 11:55 here is an admission of propaganda seldom made and
perhaps a little bit material to Slip’s presentations and perceptions.
perhaps a little bit material to Slip’s presentations and perceptions.
dj Briscoe
Dec 17, 2009, 2:21:07 PM12/17/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
There has always been that threat and possible concept and has been done in small degrees..Slip is justiflied in his thinking. But remenber Howard Huges what happen to him, in his fears and what surrounded him.. I spoke about this subject at the first of several Threads. Don't take nothing for granted. Good people are good people. And Bad are Bad. How you discern this is simple their mouth and their actions. It does not matter what religion,are color or race. If you have hate in your heart and if you are born into this and taught this, then that is the way it is. Even The poor has a point of racism against the rich. What is hidden in the heart will speak out of the lips one way or the other. No matter what country or race you are and you speak kind words and this is not really how you feel in your heart than you are a fake. Slip is only repeating what was spoken awhile back. And I still feel like it is a great threat within the countries if they think they are the top dog of ManKind. We always fought to save Mankind. You cannot stand inbetween. To stand Hot or Cold is better than inbetween. Alot of people from other countries that are in other countries have hate in their hearts and make Judgements within that country and curse it. This is what I have seen. I look at the person and do my own discerments. dj
--
dj Briscoe
Dec 17, 2009, 3:27:57 PM12/17/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Let me add this:] I have and learned what hate is, and it is this: I hate ways of a person that goes against my very being..There ways are not my ways.. And I would consider this not to be racism, and it is not to be considered a form of racism or to be confused as racism . When you have a matter of preferences of what you choose in ones own life.
Vamadevananda
Dec 17, 2009, 3:33:58 PM12/17/09
to "Minds Eye"
" ... when an incident like Fort Hood takes place and a group of home
grown teenagers take off to kill me and mine on top of all the other
attacks in the past, one does become very wary."
grown teenagers take off to kill me and mine on top of all the other
attacks in the past, one does become very wary."
We all would be wary, Slip ! It is when we form generalisations,
instead of working out things in our mind and taking actual
precaution, that our words and behaviour becomes irrational.
What is there to discuss ? How to handle our fear, in our mind ?
What precautions do we take ?
Or, do we discuss our irrational thoughts, words and behaviour ? !
Personally, Muslims do not make me nervous. Terrorists and extremists
everywhere, including Americans, do.
ornamentalmind
Dec 17, 2009, 3:40:44 PM12/17/09
to "Minds Eye"
An expansion of possible causes of that perceived as being a threat to
‘us’:
‘us’:
Noam Chomsky delivers the 5th Annual Edward Said Memorial Lecture: The
Unipolar Moment and the Culture of Imperialism at Columbia University
School for International Affairs.
dj Briscoe
Dec 17, 2009, 6:04:57 PM12/17/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
I would say this that there is a reality that is not irrational thoughts. When you have on Sept 11-happens or any other bombings in other countries- and the precautions that we take is awareness as good citizens and the concerns are real but what do we do about? Be aware of it. Generalisations is not what Slip meant. And What you are saying is work it out in yourself? I am not speaking for Slip but understanding it I do. If you saw the reality of how easy it would be to do these things in society.....Well lets say this it would be to much to think about and then what good would it do? To shut ones eyes to reality as if you are sticking your head in the sand! If we all did this what would we have? fight the good fight and if you have the oppuntunity to make a difference in the things that surrounds you. If it is in your heart or of your concerns. Shove dirt underneath the rug long enough and it piles up and is harder to get rid of it and is more work or it will be at your back door. Say if we all were aware and had the couarge when we see things to do something about it..whatever that may be..Americans on most part as other countries have good people in them. I would like to ask you this question: Why would you not trust Americans?
--
dj Briscoe
Dec 17, 2009, 6:14:09 PM12/17/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
dj Briscoe
Dec 17, 2009, 6:26:09 PM12/17/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
Vamadevananda
Dec 18, 2009, 3:24:22 AM12/18/09
to "Minds Eye"
DJ, what is your post about ? The best way to respond is to try to
say it in a word, a line, a paragraph, or a structured brief.
say it in a word, a line, a paragraph, or a structured brief.
" Why would you not trust Americans?" The answer is : Fundamentally,
for the same reason I do not trust myself. Also, because there is
historical evidence of its behaviour upon the rest of the world that
deems it untrustworthy in my view. And, the fact is that it is managed
by oligarchs, not by individuals trained in the art of management by
truth !
The US emits 22 tonnes of carbon emissions per capita. India, and
other countries, have about 1, more or less. This ratio might have
been still worse 30 years ago. The US, UK and some European countries
have been at it for a century now. And look at what how they are
behaving at Copenhagen. That is, if you can see the more truthful ways
to behave, to say, to propose ...
If you display behaviour in disregard of truth, you can hardly be
trustworthy !
On Dec 18, 4:04 am, dj Briscoe <sandsands.brisc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would say this that there is a reality that is not irrational thoughts.
> When you have on Sept 11-happens or any other bombings in other countries-
> and the precautions that we take is awareness as good citizens and the
> concerns are real but what do we do about? Be aware of it. Generalisations
> is not what Slip meant. And What you are saying is work it out in
> yourself? I am not speaking for Slip but understanding it I do. If you saw
> the reality of how easy it would be to do these things in society.....Well
> lets say this it would be to much to think about and then what good would it
> do? To shut ones eyes to reality as if you are sticking your head in the
> sand! If we all did this what would we have? fight the good fight and if
> you have the oppuntunity to make a difference in the things that surrounds
> you. If it is in your heart or of your concerns. Shove dirt underneath the
> rug long enough and it piles up and is harder to get rid of it and is more
> work or it will be at your back door. Say if we all were aware and had the
> couarge when we see things to do something about it..whatever that may
> be..Americans on most part as other countries have good people in them. I
> would like to ask you this question: Why would you not trust Americans?
>
Lee
Dec 18, 2009, 4:35:41 AM12/18/09
to "Minds Eye"
And that is exactly how I think we should all approach things DJ.
Except of course not alll of the poor hold their wealth against the
rich, and for those that do, well it's not racism is it, envy perhaps.
Except of course not alll of the poor hold their wealth against the
rich, and for those that do, well it's not racism is it, envy perhaps.
Lee
Dec 18, 2009, 4:43:24 AM12/18/09
to "Minds Eye"
Let me add this also.
Hatred, I mean hatred as opposed to dislike, well I truely do not
think that there is as much of that about as people suppose.
It's a figure of speach to say that 'I hate bigotry', sure I think it
is nowt but a destructive thing, but can it really be said that I hate
it?
You know what I don't think I do. We all have our little codes, our
morals, our sayings, our principles, ideas and ideals by which we
strive to live. One of mine is all about being the bigger person. If
I think rationaly about it, if I am confrunted by behavour that I
dislike, then to act in the same way means comeing donw to the same
level. In a real way doing exactly that which I despise. No sir be
the bigger human, and refuse to go down to that level.
On 17 Dec, 20:27, dj Briscoe <sandsands.brisc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Let me add this:] I have and learned what hate is, and it is this: I hate
> ways of a person that goes against my very being..There ways are not my
> ways.. And I would consider this not to be racism, and it is not to be
> considered a form of racism or to be confused as racism . When you have a
> matter of preferences of what you choose in ones own life.
>
> On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 11:21 AM, dj Briscoe
> <sandsands.brisc...@gmail.com>wrote:
Lee
Dec 18, 2009, 4:59:57 AM12/18/09
to "Minds Eye"
I think DJ that this is the actual sticking point between the two
ponits of view we have here.
ponits of view we have here.
You say:
'To shut ones eyes to reality as if you are sticking your head in the
sand'
Which reality? The one which suggest that all Muslims are to be
feared, or the one that says that that a tiny minority of Muslims are
extreamists?
To take your last question, and apply the same rhetoric to it.
Jim Jones, David Koresh, Charles Manson. All American, thus fear
Americans?
On 17 Dec, 23:04, dj Briscoe <sandsands.brisc...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I would say this that there is a reality that is not irrational thoughts.
> When you have on Sept 11-happens or any other bombings in other countries-
> and the precautions that we take is awareness as good citizens and the
> concerns are real but what do we do about? Be aware of it. Generalisations
> is not what Slip meant. And What you are saying is work it out in
> yourself? I am not speaking for Slip but understanding it I do. If you saw
> the reality of how easy it would be to do these things in society.....Well
> lets say this it would be to much to think about and then what good would it
> do? To shut ones eyes to reality as if you are sticking your head in the
> sand! If we all did this what would we have? fight the good fight and if
> you have the oppuntunity to make a difference in the things that surrounds
> you. If it is in your heart or of your concerns. Shove dirt underneath the
> rug long enough and it piles up and is harder to get rid of it and is more
> work or it will be at your back door. Say if we all were aware and had the
> couarge when we see things to do something about it..whatever that may
> be..Americans on most part as other countries have good people in them. I
> would like to ask you this question: Why would you not trust Americans?
>
Pat
Dec 18, 2009, 7:37:43 AM12/18/09
to "Minds Eye"
On 18 Dec, 08:24, Vamadevananda <atewari2...@gmail.com> wrote:
> DJ, what is your post about ? The best way to respond is to try to
> say it in a word, a line, a paragraph, or a structured brief.
>
> " Why would you not trust Americans?" The answer is : Fundamentally,
> for the same reason I do not trust myself. Also, because there is
> historical evidence of its behaviour upon the rest of the world that
> deems it untrustworthy in my view. And, the fact is that it is managed
> by oligarchs, not by individuals trained in the art of management by
> truth !
>
> The US emits 22 tonnes of carbon emissions per capita. India, and
> other countries, have about 1, more or less. This ratio might have
> been still worse 30 years ago. The US, UK and some European countries
> have been at it for a century now. And look at what how they are
> behaving at Copenhagen. That is, if you can see the more truthful ways
> to behave, to say, to propose ...
>
> If you display behaviour in disregard of truth, you can hardly be
> trustworthy !
>
Indeed. Not to mention the 'put-on' high morality given the drugs
trade, prostitution, homelessness, unemployment, general lack of car
for the general public and, oh yeah, remember the times(!) when we
(the U.S.) gave out blankets--purposefully infested with smallpox--to
Native Americans specifically to wage an underhanded biological war
against them? How many of the treaties we made with Native Americans
did we keep to? 1, I think it is, but we may well have broken that by
now.
Vam is right, Slip/dj, there are plenty of reasons not to trust
America (in general), but that doesn't mean that the individuals
themselves are all that bad. The very same is true, in the reverse,
with certain elements within Islam; i.e., there are certain elements
that are dangerous (no more dangerous, though, than the neo-con
fundamentalist Christians!!) but that doesn't transfer to all Muslims,
by any means. In fact, Islam itself is far more cooperative in nature
than most people think (Saladin SPARED the population of Jerusalem
when he conquered it, unlike the Christians 88 years prior!!). But,
in order to find out about it, you have to be willing to engage them.
Which implies dropping the 'automatic fear' of the unknown. Learn
about them and they won't be unknown. This was an implied part of
Jesus' concept of 'Love your enemies' speech:
Matthew 5:43-48 43 Ye have heard that it hath been said, Thou shall
love thy neighbor, and hate your enemy. 44 But I say unto you, Love
your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate
you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you;
45 That ye may be the children of your Father which is in heaven: for
he makes his sun to rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain
on the just and on the unjust. 46 For if ye love them which love you,
what reward have ye? do not even the publicans the same? 47 And if ye
salute your brethren only, what do ye more than others? do not even
the publicans so? 48 Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father
which is in heaven is perfect.
THAT'S the Christian message and it has nothing to do with abject fear
but, rather, by treating everyone as well as you can.
dj Briscoe
Dec 18, 2009, 12:33:11 PM12/18/09
to mind...@googlegroups.com
You get my point!
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages