Egyptian Violence

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by LJT

I'd really like to know what this weeping and wailing about Islam will achieve? All I get is a be on your guard? Against what exactly? This sweeping horde of Arabs descending upon us with their Sharia law? Should we ban Islam? Should we invade and sort them out? Should we have laws that are only applicable to muslims like none of that Allah stuff in public? All i'm hearing is 'BEWARE' in a comedic scary voice like the stone faces in the oublient in The Labyrinth.

apparently Sharia law is waiting to pounce in the north of England and the southern US states the second we turn our backs, so best to strike first, strike hard, no mercy.

[LJT]

Originally Posted by AEON

That is true at the highest levels, at least in most cases, but these leaders will certainly use religious ideology to stir up the masses.

That they will, like the Republicans do, like the Unionists often do back home in Belfast (they're like a mini bible belt). Like the Catholic leaders in France, or the Orthodox in Russia who were used quite well against Pussy Riot and in the current anti-gay legislation.

I'm of the opinion if we tried to create a fairer world which we really aren't interested in at the highest levels, you wouldn't get this violent appeal to religion quite so much.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by AEON

That WAS the point

Wouldn't you have respected an article where the point was information rather than a vendetta against other media?

Originally Posted by AEON

True, but how many Christian/Buddhist/Jewish theocracies exist in the world today? There are several such Islamic states and another handful that are not exactly there, but are close to it.

And here's one reason why all those "professors and journalists" aren't reporting it through YOUR filter, the theocracy is the problem, not so much the religion itself.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by LJT

I'm of the opinion if we tried to create a fairer world which we really aren't interested in at the highest levels, you wouldn't get this violent appeal to religion quite so much.

I agree with you here. At least - I would like to think you're right.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by BVS

the theocracy is the problem, not so much the religion itself.

In Islam - they are one and the same.

[BVS]

Originally Posted by AEON

In Islam - they are one and the same.

That's incredibly weak. I know you're brighter than this.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by BVS

That's incredibly weak. I know you're brighter than this.

Thanks for the encouragement, can you please enlighten me and how they are not the same? T

Islam cannot be “reformed” unless its caretakers repudiate its instruction manuals. But their repudiation would necessarily entail the repudiation of Islam. When the manuals go up in flames, so will Islam.

From the Ayn Rand inspired capitalismmagazine.com

[BVS]

Originally Posted by AEON

Thanks for the encouragement, can you please enlighten me and how they are not the same? T



From the Ayn Rand inspired capitalismmagazine.com

Take a look at the history of man. How many theocracies have come and gone?

Take a look at Christianity, there are many that would still interpret it and want a theocracy that followed the Bible word for word. Luckily we don't have that, but we both know that given the right circumstances any religion can be manipulated into one and people would say the exact same thing you are saying about the Muslim religion.

[Irvine511]

Originally Posted by AEON

In Islam - they are one and the same.

Do you know any American Musilms?

[AEON]

Originally Posted by BVS

Take a look at the history of man. How many theocracies have come and gone?

True - and "gone" is what we hope for.

Originally Posted by BVS

Luckily we don't have that, but we both know that given the right circumstances any religion can be manipulated into one and people would say the exact same thing you are saying about the Muslim religion.

I agree. But in our modern world, Islam is the only one successfully carrying this out.

I am with you and Irvine - I agree that a secular government is the answer. Unfortunately, in Muslim dominated countries, that's not what you get? Why is that?

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Irvine511

Do you know any American Musilms?

Admiral Ackbar - "It's A Trap!" - YouTube

[AEON]

from that same article

Any theocracy must be totalitarian. It can become totalitarian by default or happenstance or by negligence, or it can become totalitarian according to an instruction manual written by clerics and intellectuals friendly to what they know in their minds are dystopias for the masses and paradises for the rulers. Islam has its instruction manuals.

Apologists for Islamism like to portray those groups as liberation movements, but there is nothing liberating about terrorist groups run by millionaires and billionaires, doctors and other degree holders, and funded by the ruling clans of Kuwait, the UAE and Saudi Arabia. These ruling families have the most to lose from modernization, and though they build skyscrapers in their cities, they also helped orchestrate the Arab Spring to topple more modern governments and replace them with parties affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

[LJT]

Originally Posted by AEON

True - and "gone" is what we hope for.



I agree. But in our modern world, Islam is the only one successfully carrying this out.

I am with you and Irvine - I agree that a secular government is the answer. Unfortunately, in Muslim dominated countries, that's not what you get? Why is that?

Because the majority have a small ruling elite? Again a leftover of colonialism. It's not a result of Islam, the same as Kings and Queens were not the result of Christianity. Most of these Muslim countries did not exist 100 years ago, tell me how these many disparate groups of people, tribes and ethnicities who suffered under colonial rule were meant to band together into stable states with most power structures removed and borders created out of the desert?

That article you've just posted perfectly illustrates it is the rich and powerful orchestrating things to maintain their own power. It has little to do with the religion. Islam is just a tool, it is not the threat. The threat is the wild economic imbalance in these states that entrenches large sections of their populations in poverty.

I am not apologising for Islam, I don't give a crap about it. But your approach of demonising all of islam is only going to create more problems for you than actually dealing with the issues that exist in the middle east.

[LJT]

Quoting from an Ayn Rand inspired magazine is not helpful either, its an ideology heavily bankrupt of any human caring characteristics.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by LJT

Quoting from an Ayn Rand inspired magazine is not helpful either, its an ideology heavily bankrupt of any human caring characteristics.

True - but I thought it was important to not use a source with a Christian based agenda. She was about as atheist as they come.

[LuckyNumber7]

How the American government has handled this from start to finish has been incredibly painful.

I don't for one second think they're stupid enough to fail to realize they've been aiding the wrong side from the get-go both in Egypt and across the rest of the Middle East like in Syria. I just desperately want to know the truth.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by LuckyNumber7

How the American government has handled this from start to finish has been incredibly painful.

I don't for one second think they're stupid enough to fail to realize they've been aiding the wrong side from the get-go both in Egypt and across the rest of the Middle East like in Syria. I just desperately want to know the truth.

Unfortunately - I think the truth is the only thing the US government (and all other governments for that matter) really care about is that the Suez Canal remains open for business.

[LuckyNumber7]

That would explain supporting the Muslim Brotherhood at first, but it fails to explain what's going on now, and it also fails to explain arming rebels in Syria.

This government had consistently played for the wrong side against "oppressive dictators" on the Middle East. Realistically speaking, the only "dictator" who needed to be removed from power was Gadaffi. Not Sadam Hussein, not Mubarak, not Al Assad, not the Egyptian military.

If what you were saying is true, they would never have gone to the extent that they have to destabilize the entire Middle East. It wreaks of appeasement.

[Diemen]

Originally Posted by AEON

Come on, you're better than that dodge. It's a trap inasmuch as it shows that Islam an theocracy are not one and the same, as there are millions of devout Muslims perfectly content to practice their faith peacefully in a secular society.

[AEON]

Originally Posted by Diemen

Come on, you're better than that dodge. It's a trap inasmuch as it shows that Islam an theocracy are not one and the same, as there are millions of devout Muslims perfectly content to practice their faith peacefully in a secular society.

The problem with the question, (and he asked the same question about whether I knew gay people), is that when it is answered - it is automatically cliche ("some of my best friend are [fill in blank]"). Either that, or you're attacked for not befriending a person of that group. It's a trap.