An interesting view on the Muslims

[Sundae]

Interesting, certainly.
Opinionated - definitely.

You could say similar things to a Christian fundie - they wouldn't accept the logic either.

You could have told a member of the IRA just 10 years ago (Omagh - 29 High Street shoppers dead, over 200 injured) that God didn't condone killing in His name - they wouldn't have listened.

Not all Muslims are fundamentalists. Not all people from the Middle East are Muslims. The poorer the people, the fewer their options, the easier they are to provoke into hate.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

Interesting, certainly.
Opinionated - definitely.

You could say similar things to a Christian fundie - they wouldn't accept the logic either.

Sure, but like she said I don't see who groups of Christian Fundies blowing things and themselves up because they have disagreements.

[richlevy]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Sure, but like she said I don't see who groups of Christian Fundies blowing things and themselves up because they have disagreements.

No, but you do get the occasional one blowing other people up because of disagreements.

Christian Fundies are not feeling too disenfranchised right now because everyone is telling them that they are the 'base' of the Republican party and every politician has been paying them lip service (applied to ass cheek). They are just beginning to wake up to the fact that:

a) GWB has weakened their credibility by crediting them with his success in being the worst President in 100 years and

b) Using them twice to get to the White House and basically ignoring the key points of their agenda, even when his party controlled 2 branches of government.

They now have a reputation as wing nut suckers who seem willing to transfer blind faith in G-d to blind faith in anyone who claims to carpool with G-d. In the latest primary, this 'base' went for Huckabee and noone followed.

Let's see what a few years in the wilderness does to their demeanor.

Don't get me wrong. Faith is necessary for human existence. But faith tied to rigid dogma and intolerance has no place. At some point, religious faith has been used to:

Justify slavery, segregation, and ban interracial marriage.
Discredit environmentalism.

Most people of faith are good and decent. Unfortunately, the mixture of faith and politics leads to the decay of both. Just as religion and commercialism have led to Santa Clause replacing Jesus, religion and politics have led to to an intolerance in both areas. When no substantive results are possible, playing to the 'base' by disenfranchising gays is an easy win in politics.

This is not new to politics. Racial, ethnic, and other forms of 'outsider' baiting have been used throughout the world in any system where the ruling class needs to placate the lower classes. Religion just becomes another convenient hook for exploitable fear and a desire for easy solutions.

Whether Shiite/Sunni or Protestant/Catholic, power struggles have always led to destruction. The only difference between the Shiite/Sunni violence in the Middle East and the Protestant/Catholic violence in Middle Europe is about 400 years worth of technology.

If Guy Fawkes had access to 30 pounds of modern explosives instead of 1800 pounds of gunpowder, you might have had the world's first Christian suicide bomber 400 years before Iraq.


BTW, Fawkes did have some real cojones.

Fawkes, however, managed to avoid the worst of this execution by jumping from the scaffold where he was supposed to be hanged, breaking his neck before he could be drawn and quartered

[jinx]

Originally Posted by richlevy

Don't get me wrong. Faith is necessary for human existence.

I really don't think it is. In fact, I think faith is where all the big problems start... Anyway, I don't have faith and I exist.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

The poorer the people, the fewer their options, the easier they are to provoke into hate.

Poor -- disconnected from the flow of money; fewer options -- disconnected from the flow of ideas; not able to move to better territory where the economy actually works -- disconnected from mobility or migratory flow of people; in danger -- disconnected from what some call the flow of security.

The freedom of these "flows" to be exported from the places where there is a great sufficiency, or indeed a surplus, to places where there is a deficit, is a working indicator of how well a place or people is connected with the functional part of the world as a whole.

Establish this kind of connectedness in place of disconnectedness, and prosperity results. Prosperity balms the wounds resulting from being disconnected to the rest of the world.

The recent evacuations of children from the west Texas Fundamentalist Latter-Day Saints compound is a repair of a problem of acute disconnectedness. Those are some wounded people there. We'll have to show them where the balm is. Tw would no doubt remark that eighty-five percent of the FLDS's problems stemmed from its top management, which quite deliberately mandated complete disconnectedness from motivations that look baser by the day.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Tw would no doubt remark that eighty-five percent of the FLDS's problems stemmed from its top management, which quite deliberately mandated complete disconnectedness from motivations that look baser by the day.

According to UG, these people were fully informed and chose to fear the world. They had information sources besides what they were told by church leaders? Yes, according to UG. Nonsense, according to reality.

Reality: top management kept them isolated from reality so that the victims did not understand and therefore feared reality. Being sex slave was acceptable. Such is the world that UG loves - a world promoted by fear - the myth of 'good verses evil' where outsiders or muslims or immigrants or non-hetrosexuals are evil. UG will even rewrite the Pentagon Papers - and nobody would notice? Perverting reality is so normal that UG would even claim to be a ... libertarian.

UG is classic of those who love the scumbag George Jr and Cheney. No way around reality. Why would UG not endorse, promote, and praise the west Texas Fundamentalist Latter-Day Saints? After all, they only advocate many principles that UG also advocates. But in doing so, UG would contradict well comprehended reality. UG also conceded to a principles called propaganda. One cannot be popular and support what the west Texas Fundamentalist Latter-Day Saints have done. So UG must separate himself from what he also defines as a ... 'libertarians'.

Even UG propaganda cannot 'subvert' reality - the details - screwing children to propagate an agenda. Hundreds of victims directly traceable to a world where top management kept their victims isolated and ignorant. UG fears a world where the little people learn - ask embarrassing questions such as 'why'. After all, Hitler also needed people to only believe what they were told. No wonder UG also so admires Cheney.

What makes it so amusing to pick apart UG logic? He has no idea of a world beyond his political agenda. His poltics are, for others, a lesson in what intolerance looks like. UG posts are devoid of reality - and so fully justified by political mantra. UG will never accept that 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management. If he admitted to that reality, then a dictatorship that he advocates could not happen.

As Sundae Girl notes, the poorer those people, then the easier it is to provoke them into hate. UG fears to admit this because hate is part of his poltical mantra.

[Urbane Guerrilla]

I have no need to "subvert reality." I merely stay better connected with it than you do, tw. The quote you cite states the opposite of the conclusion you draw. Silly, aren't you? But it gets better: then you go on to contradict that conclusion and in essence if perhaps not some details, agree with me: these people were kept in an acutely disconnected condition. Which is again nothing more or else than what I already said.

UG will never accept that 85% of all problems are directly traceable to top management.

Try running a search on posts by me that allude to the 85%-attributable-etc. idea for the refutation of this idea. The truth is, I accept it as at least plausible, and have made some explicit use of the concept. Tw, you're very reliable at two things: getting it wrong, and misreading others' motives and statements. Thus you disgrace yourself and undermine all your arguments. That's what you do: you are drawn into making yourself look bad like iron filings around a magnet. It is, it seems, a law of nature that the people who frenetically attack me end up with blood and egg on their faces in roughly equal parts.

The rest of your post is such scrambled ranting as to be the product not of a brain, but of a brain tumor. You are very much in a hurry to attribute fear, hate, and so forth to others, aren't you? Ever heard of projection? A man hip deep in denial would do well to worry about the crocodiles there.

. . .hate is part of his poltical mantra.

Let's see: of us two, who is the one ranting, raving, spewing, hating, and generally acting like an angry chimpanzee again? I know the face of hatred, tw, and I know where I am concerned, hatred rules and controls you. Therefore I despise you, yes. And yes, I speak against certain things because I find them unsatisfactory.

[glatt]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Let's see: of us two, who is the one ranting, raving, spewing, hating, and generally acting like an angry chimpanzee again? I know the face of hatred, tw, and I know where I am concerned, hatred rules and controls you. Therefore I despise you, yes.

This is a little overboard, even for you.