Topic awaiting preservation: This I find very disturbing.. (Page 1 of 1)

I find this to be very disturbing... http://www.memri.org/bin/latestnews.cgi?ID=SD38802 and would like to discuss the points? raised...

Are there any Koran experts here? Though I have read the Koran, I am not an expert...and only an expert could begin to 'dispute' some of these points, I believe...

i dont know much about islam but i thought it was forbidden to kill, i know its one of the biggest no no's morally, although i think that in the case of a jihad (holy war) it is allowed but only as a matter of self defence...

but thats some fucking scary shit there WS

Being an expert on the Koran is hardly necessary here, Shaman.

What you're seeing is interpretation, and justification of action. The Koran actually does forbid the taking of life unless life has been taken. It is the will of Allah that a person be judged singularly. However the verses (much like the Christian bible) are constantly bastardized and used to justify personal belief and retaliation.

"Even Satan can quote scripture to his own ends."

It's a lovely phrase, and quite telling. The Koran, much like the bible or the Torah, is merely a blueprint for muslim followers. It is almost constantly used as a scapegoat for aggression and action. Consider this a letter to the editor after a "good Christian" murders an abortionist. It reeks of the same vitriolic whitewashing.

Islamic law is strict...rough...and in some cases, just. However it does not give any man, or men the right to decide the fate of innocents, no matter what the precursor. Hatred runs high for the U.S. (and sometimes most rightfully so), so statements like this are menat to cover up cowardly acts as being righteous. Murder is exhonerated in the eyes of Allah as long as it is just for the crime committed against him or his children....but that isn't what this is.

This is an act...and a blueprint for further acts...of cowardice in an impotent display of revenge, mostly carried out on people that had and have nothing to do with the acts of aggression that are stated to be avenged. Make no mistake, this is merely justification in the eyes of insanity.

Even the insane plead their reality...but better to not blame the faith they happen to set themselves with...better to not blame the book they claim to follow.

It seems to me, based on this article, that Islamic people think Islam should be the only religion, and Christians think Christianity should be the only religion. This is no good. There is no one right way to enter what some people call heaven, and until everyone accepts this there will always be war. Every path that leads a person to seek out their spiritual nature is correct. There is no right way to become in touch with the god inside of each one of us. We are all our own greatest power. We do not need someone to tell us, or to guide us towards finding the internal peace and love inside of our hearts.

"What happened to America is something natural, an expected event for a country that uses terror, arrogant policy, and suppression against the nations and the peoples, and imposes a single method, thought, and way of life, as if the people of the entire world are clerks in its government offices and employed by its commercial companies and institutions." - from article

This is true. The thing that these people do not realize is that our government does not only do this to other countries, but they also do it to their own. If you do not believe in the gov't's view of freedom, then you will not be free. The American government is a tyranny, but so is the Al-Qa'ida, and also unfortunatly the real threat, the Chinese.

Hopefully, there will not be a WWIII, but it may be unavoidable.

-^^-
--::--
\___/

[This message has been edited by Gilbert Nolander (edited 06-13-2002).]

The Chinese are the "real threat"?

~L~

Oh man...someone has to stop handing out textbooks...or at least start writing them about the true "evil". Man is his own worst enemy...it doesn't come from abroad. It isn't born of what you do not understand. Calling the Chinese the "real threat" is precisely like saying "African Americans are dissentaries, and need to be watched."

Remember, coins have two faces...humans have millions. Painting with broad brushes will only ever make fridge-worthy artworks.

But then that was precisely why I was espousing the individual over the group. I think you missed that part and started talking about groups again. Interesting, because that's exactly the mindset that wrote that article too...

Mulling bits: maybe it's time to check mirrors before association cards.

You are right, we are our own worst enemy, but I just mean in the destruction of modern society sense. If we went to war with the Chinese, it would all be over.

-^^-
--::--
\___/

To be honest, I don't see China going to war with the U.S., based solely on their desire to set up a properly burgeoning capitalistic market.

Strangely the only thing to bring out weaponry again in a war has been wholesale slaughter and religious zealotry. Although China might have its fingers on the pulse of one, they are seriously not engaged in the other.

Nonetheless, I think "fear" has been a companion for too long. People need to understand that their actions have consequences, but that life is far too short to be cringing in horror, and searching for the Next Big Menace.

wasnt it kenedy that said something like: "Man must put an end to all wars, before war puts an end to man"

Seems to me that we as a race have come absolutely fucking nowhere since who knows how long... lets look back at some shit man has done in the name of religeon (whatever faith)

1.the crusades...shit seem familiar?
2.the religeous devide in ireland (discount the english angle to the problem) remember those scenes of kids being taken to school and stone even pipe bombs being thrown at them (christian v's christian ok different flavours)
3.the suppression by ultra extremists in afganistan

the list goes on but never changes.

if there is a god what the heck do ya think he's thinking when he see's the shit thats being done in his name... it seems to me we would be better off as a bunch of athiests at least war's etc would be down to just two factors then greed and politics...

my 0.2

Ah...but war already comes down to just those two factors...or rather one factor : Power

God is a scapegoat. Pain is inflicted in the search to establish one's (or a group's) personal beliefs as the belief en masse. I don't think people should kid themselves into believing that war has any reflection on "God" or religion for that matter. It takes a zealot to murder in the name of...it takes an insatiable (and all too human) lust for power to create a holy war.

If it wasn't done in the name of God, those selfsame people would choose another "reason". It's justification, plain and simple. It's just that the segregation of organized religion makes it easier, it doesn't create it.

I hope so, DarkGarden.

tomeaglescz - that is true. But I don't think athiesm is the answer, because there is more to life than matter. Life is composed of matter and energy. This energy is percieved as being related to religion. Perhaps people need to look more strongly at what all these religions come from. They are all based on an anciet belief stucutre, which is Shamanism. Shamanism is not even a religion, it is a basic belief that all things are composed of the same energy. I think if everyone would adopt Shamanism, and perhaps blend it in with their Muslim or Christian faith, they would realize that humans are not the only thing that matter. In a war, why are the number of murdered birds not taken into account? The number of murdered trees? These things are the true innocent victims of war. Using our greed and superiour ideas we do not take into account that though we may have a stronger intellect, we do not have a stronger spirit that all other creatures on this planet.


-^^-
--::--
\___/

GN nod i guess i was over simplifying my point, i hate war (having been at the front end of the firing line i know how scary that shit is) there's nothing glorious about crapping yaself in fear. nothing courageous in whacking whoever if they are weaker than you..the most corageous thing anyone can do is take a step back from the brink when everyone else is saying jump and say wait a minute this is fucking crazy, look at israel and palestine..same shit there both sides have people calling for peace and people calling for all out war...then take a look at the brinksmanship that just happened in india and pakistan...they both took a look at the crap that it would turn into if they went to war and both shouted lots moaned bitched and killed a bunch of each other and some poor civillians along the way..then they finally got brave enough to back down eachin their own way without losing face or appearing to be weak...

i guess what i was trying to say is if it wasnt for religeon there would be one less reason for the loony fringe/extremists whatever ya want to call them to have. unfortunately war isnt gonna go away unless ya get rid of as has been said here mans basest instincts GREED JEALOUSY...

edit WS laugh and there was e saing i wouldnt go for a religeous debate




[This message has been edited by tomeaglescz (edited 06-13-2002).]

I just had to post this Simpsons' quote:

Marge: "Lisa, don't make assumptions about people in other countries."
Bart: "Yeah Lise. That's what they do in Russia."

That is pretty scary WS...I always thought that the Quron (sp?) told people not to kill unless they were being directly attacked by another religion or society that was trying to impose their values and moral code onto the Islams.

PS: I saw that Simpsons episosde

@DG...yes (to all points)...and that is what I was eluding at. I know these 'points' raised in the Article are not justified...that's why I asked if there was anyone here that is an expert on the Koran (like Bugs on the Bible). I wish to refute these points soundly, using the same source...

You see, it's not the extremists that worry me so much...at least, not as much as the mainstream. Why? Extremists always attempt to find ways to get themselves empowered. But the only real way to do this, is to convince the mainstream to give them that power (ok, there are exceptions, however, since I am a believer in Ghandi's teachings, I believe that the mainstream has the real hold on power, they have to just be willing to use it...).

And that is where this article disturbs me...by using such a source (and such rhetoric), it is possible to sway the mainstream (in this case, the mainstream muslims) into making a descision based partly on fact, but mostly on belief and the emotional level. For someone who really believes in the muslim faith, and follows the Koran, arguments like these that are partly based on not only excepts from an accepted source, but also from religous leaders and then mixed with a bit of fact, become difficult to refute and are very seductive.

It's called lying with the truth mixed together with an emotional appeal, and is a very effective propaganda tool...I should know, I was well trained in this area and have used this technique quite a bit...and one of the best 'defenses', if you will, is to use exactly the same technique to counter it.

I think most Muslims have probably known about the Al Queda for a long time, and they must disagree with them or they would of alread joined them. At least I hope. An all out war based on whose religion is better would be the most childest thing I have ever heard of. Well, actually I guess this has been going on for thousands of years, which just proves the saying about how children and old people think alike. We are all children on the inside. If people can't learn to suck in their pride and let others believe whatever they want, well...nevermind. I think I already talked about this.



-^^-
--::--
\___/

I've explained this before, but I'll do it again, You want to know what the mainstream 'Arabic World' thinks about these sorts of things?
All you have to do is pick up a few newspapers (not your local paper, but Amera-Euro business press and Middle Eastern press)
It is all printed very clearly -- has been for years and years.

1)Most of the Arabic world does not agree that violence is an acceptable solution.
(There is a hidden assumption here...that is, there is a problem! Something most Americans would not believe or accept...which brings us to point 2)

2)Most of the Arabic world does think the U.S. is arrogant, power-hungry, often uses its military might to support and enforce dictatorial regimes on innocent civilians for its own economic well-being, often oppresses those people who are militarily weaker, generally acts in a way that is opposed to international cooperation, and somehow needs to be contained.

Al Queda and similar groups are saying, as WebShaman aptly pointed out, a lot of truths. This truth rings loudly and clearly in the ears of those people who feel (often rightfully so) oppressed.

So-called extremist groups are the only ones speaking that aspect of the truth. That aspect of the truth is not allowed in 'mainstream' political debate. The public's only source of this truth is the so-called extremist groups...so they thrive.

An analogy would be if all pro-life talk was outlawed. One could not speak on the news about it, raise questions at gov't meetings, carry signs, etc. The only people, then, who would speak on it would be the so-called extremists...the guys who go around shooting doctors, blowing up clinics and such.

If you happened to believe in the pro-life cause would you follow them or accept the party line?
Most pro-life people, I think, would do exactly as most of the Muslim world is doing today.
"I do not believe in murder to further the cause...but I still believe in the cause. They are the only ones leading the cause so I, begrudgingly, follow."

Until we in the US understand that, nothing is ever going to change.
If you don't allow discussion in the mainstream, the extreme will take over.

mobrul

Religion has been used throughout history as a means to gain political ends. Religious beliefs call up strong emotional reactions in humans, and the person with the loudest voice can easily sway the beliefs of a crowd based on these strong feelings. All of the religious texts have a variety of verses that are frequently removed from context. If a person is convinced enough that his position is the right one, it's easy to find enough religious evidence to back it up. That's one of the reasons I hold that a person's spirituality has to come from within themselves. Religion is only a framework for true spirituality. The few (ok, many) Arabic political leaders involved in the current crisis have twisted Islam's spiritual writings to suit their purposes. Evidently, it's working for many of their followers. Unfortunately, the political and spiritual unrest of the Arabic world may well hasten the day of all out distruction the fear of which caused the Cold War to end... Regardless of what China or anyone else may be feeling during all of this... Religious Zealots, no matter what denomination, are dangerous. Period.

Bodhisattva: an enlightened being full of generosity who sticks around in this world to show others the way to enlightenment.

Very few people know that Mobrul was actually cloned from my living cells back in August of 2000.

I let him out to say the things I neglected to say.

I call him mini-me.

heh

hehe...that's interesting DG...I didn't know that...aparently my knowledge of 'cloning' is somewhat out of date...

But more to the point...DG, you have a sound mind (when you wish to share it...)...I'm interested in your opinions, thoughts, ideas on this issue...more to the point, I get the feeling that maybe you would say more (I've seen some of your stuff in old threads...and would like to see more...you have a way with words...quite astounding, actually) if the issues that 'populate' the 'modern Asylum' were more...worth your time...

So, in the absense of a Koran 'expert'...how does one go about dealing with this sort of rhetoric, in your opinion? One has to realize, that the original post of mine is from actual news in the middle east...translated into english. Actually, one of the sites I frequently visit is full with translated Arabic text, stories, and news. I just like to try to understand what they are reading, talking about, and thinking...and newspapers are a great way of doing it...

I learned a long time ago through my travels and stays in other countries around the world that the inhabitants are real people, just like (and unlike) you and me, with worries, concerns, lives, thoughts...all just trying to get along with their lives...and coping (and not coping) with everyday issues...

So to understand them, one needs to be a part of that...to be 'inside' so to speak...and experience that firsthand...unfortunatly, it is very hard for me to currently do this in the middle east...and much to dangerous for me...esp. should my war 'background' become known...so I scrounge for clues, scraps and pieces...and newspapers have a lot of that in them...a solution, that is second-rate, at best...

DG, what do you think?

"Disparity"

I've been pulled over by the police. I've been pulled over by the police a great deal. I've been pulled over by the police a great deal and treated like a criminal while being reviled in their thoughts.

I don't know what it's like to be Rodney King, or Malice Green.

I have the ability to understand impetus....catalyst....reasoning...but I will never have another mind. Being "inside" isn't just a question of knowledge, but of knowledge and experience.

Using no comparisons:
What's an orange? An orange-ish yellow, round fruit, roughly palm sized in diameter. It has a thick slightly bumpy rind with a sizeable, juicy interior of fluid filled cells. It grows on large trees in warm climes.

What's an orange taste like?
uh...sweet...and...uh...like an orange?

Need to know what an orange tastes like? Taste one. Can't? Well then there's some things you just won't ever know.

To an extent people are the same all over. Fears, anger, joy, contentment, peace, hate...but aside from that, each group is as different as each individual, and just as similar. I'm no closer to understanding the personal vision of an Al Quaida member than I am to understanding why my girl eats ice cream then complains about getting fat. I might see the root of her thoughts, or the process she worked out...but I can't honestly understand it because I'm not behind her eyes, her life.


I have opinions...which broaden through knowledge...which are honed through study...which are as personal and as tangential as anyone else's. What remains the same to me is the lengthy bit that I babbled on about before: Justification is the lot of man. It's what helps him survive.

I'm no better than anyone else who is honest with themselves. I justify my bluntly honest prickishness by saying that I'm being honest with people. Some of my cohorts justify their pacifying, coddling lies by saying that they're being polite and kind. What I was trying to say just above was that in the absence of religious "backup", people would merely find some other vassal for their actions. Justification through facilitation seems bred into the mix.

It seems more and more to be the will of the mass to contemplate the will of Allah. The Q'uran is merely a book (for arguments sake let's call it one book ) with ambiguous maps on how a person should live. It outlines an ideal of how to reach spiritual awakening. It's no more magical than an L Ron Hubbard missive, or Balthasar Gracian's "Art of Worldy Wisdom". Faith is the key. Blind or not, it comes down to the amount of belief, and suspension of disbelief that the reader is willing (wanting?) to go with.

If you're asking how I feel about justifying mass murder by using scripture...you need only read my point on "honesty" to see that I cannot, will not, and flat out refuse to exhonerate murder in the name of a God, a book, or a fucking teletubbie telling you to do it. You see I interpret scripture in my own way as well. That being fair, it's my point of view that the "vengeance of Allah" is precisely that...Allah's vengeance to mete out...by Him/Itself.

Period.

The only strength of argument aside from that that you will feel from me is this: Religion is a convenient and powerful scapegoat for emotional reactionaryism. It is an insidious button pounded into people's lives that they react to almost as readily as filthy "mom jokes" or commentary on one's sexual preference. For that I usually have my own personal scapegoat. Organized Religion.

My beliefs are just that...mine. I keep them as personally as any detail of my bowel movements. ie. If someone asks, I'll share, but I'm not likely to regale the unasking with stories, nor am I wont to expect them to follow my method. Mass marketing an idea, belief, or "way" seems about as water-holding as cheesecloth over a sieve to me.

Now if I've gone off-topic and rambling enough for all those still foolish enough to be reading, I'll try and sum up in that succinct fashion that I do so love. Disparity exists, always strive to learn as much as possible in all facets so as to better understand and function, but never expect to truly know the world through someone else's eyes. Knowledge is power, experience is life, and content is king (err...some shit like that). And this single tidbit for folks to gnash teeth over.

Organized Religion sounds a lot to me like Mayonaise flavoured Chocolate Bars: Fascinating concept, and probably a hell of a read into...but I'm not anxious to swallow either one. There's enough in the world to leave bad tastes in my mouth already.


Now pardon me while I piece together that haphazard thought process and finish my eighth cup of coffee.

Thanks for the thread WS..I'm sure I'll babble more if necessary..or my wont to do

Cloning?
I don't remember that...
I think it's more like...poem and prose...no, that's not right either.
Poem and PhD dissertation.
One is beautiful, the other is boring as a Cubs vs Athletics game in pre-season March.
I'll let you all figure out who is who...

Anyway, WS, you ask a good question:
"...how does one go about dealing with this sort of rhetoric...?"

The answer is simple -- provide an alternative.
Currently these people feel oppressed. They also, for the most part, feel there is no hope. Nobody is listening, the US population (for the most part) couldn't care less, most of their own leaders are US puppets, they are dirt poor, and the US blocks any international effort to relieve the situation.

First, we contribute to a real, lasting, 2 state, equitable solution to the Palestine/Israel issue.
Second, we allow democracy in Arab countries.
Third, we actually act like we belong to the UN, and start acting like international law applies to us.
Fourth, we stop looking at the rest of the world as our 'empire' to conquer and start looking at the rest of the world as our neighbors.

It's really that easy. If the US did that, there would still be people who hate us, no doubt. Everybody is hated by somebody, somewhere. The difference is, those who hate will be less likely to gather any kind of support from the general population.

Individual people can act stupid/crazy. General populations rarely act stupid/crazy. That's one of the double-edged swords of democracy. General populations will not be absolutely brilliant, nor will they be totally stupid. They will walk a middle path of slow mediocre prudence.

Provide a reasonable, real alternative and people will follow it.

mobrul

"I might see the root of her thoughts, or the process she worked out...but I can't honestly understand it because I'm not behind her eyes, her life." DarkGarden

I will have to remember this. I usually get to the part where I work out the process of others thoughts, and I know I can't understand it, and then I just get frustrated. I have to remeber that I am not behind other people's eyes, and I will never know what past circumstances led them to a particular conclusion. Even if that conclusion seems completly unlogical. Thanks.


-^^-
--::--
\___/