wrote:
Tim Daneliuk wrote:
wrote:
Let us consider some Christian actions, during the same period of
time:
- Chaining a man behind a truck and dragging him to his death.
Condemned widely and loudly by both Christian laity AND clergy unlike
the deafening silence heard through the overwhelming part of the Islamic
world when their adherents behave badly.
Do you read any newpapers or watch any television stations or listen
to any radio from predominantly Muslim nations? I do not, therefor
I do not know if what you say is true or not.
Yes, several ... weekly when possible, see below.
- Planting an detonating bombs that indiscriminately killed civilian
men, women and children during sectarian warfare between
Christian sects in the British Islands.
Condemned widely and loudly by both Christian laity AND clergy unlike
the deafening silence heard through the overwhelming part of the Islamic
world when their adherents behave badly.
So what did the world do?
Maintained pressure on the participants until they reached an understanding.
If you're arguing that no one magically made the problem disappear,
then I agree. Then again, people of your political bent tend to believe
in magic whereas I do not. I never believed the current issues with Islam
have some simple solution, merely that it's reasonable to hold the Islamic
leaders - both secular and religious - accountable for what they do.
Do you read any newpapers or watch any television stations or listen
to any radio from predominantly Muslim nations? I do not, therefor
I do not know if what you say is true or not.
Yes, several ... weekly when possible, see below.
- Raping and murdering Christian Nuns in el Salvador.
Condemned widely and loudly by both Christian laity AND clergy unlike
the deafening silence heard through the overwhelming part of the Islamic
world when their adherents behave badly.
And yet, what did we DO? As I recall, our Secretary of State
told us that the nuns were caught in a crossfire and accidently
killed (and accidently raped too, I suppose).
I do not recall all the particulars.
Do you read any newpapers or watch any television stations or listen
to any radio from predominantly Muslim nations? I do not, therefor
I do not know if what you say is true or not.
Yes, several ... weekly when possible, see below.
- 'Disapearing' 30,000 people in Argentina, sometimes murdering
parents so that their children could be adopted by childless
Christian elitists.
Condemned widely and loudly by pretty much everyone unlike
the deafening silence heard through the overwhelming part of the Islamic
world when their adherents behave badly.
Do you read any newpapers or watch any television stations or listen
to any radio from predominantly Muslim nations? I do not, therefor
I do not know if what you say is true or not.
Yes, several ... weekly when possible, see below.
- Running a major white slavery ring in Eastern Europe primarily
preying on Ukraining women to supply brothels in other parts of
Eastern and Southern Europe.
Horrible, and hardly noticed by the West generally (to our everlasting
shame). BUT ... not motivated by any obvious religiosity nor in the name
of any religion unlike ... well, You Know Who.
Do you read any newpapers or watch any television stations or listen
to any radio from predominantly Muslim nations? I do not, therefor
I do not know if what you say is true or not.
Yes, several ... weekly when possible, see below.
- Murder and violence especially against Muslim Women in
Azherbeijan.
Horrible, and hardly noticed by the West generally (to our everlasting
shame). BUT ... not motivated by any obvious religiosity nor in the name
of any religion unlike ... well, You Know Who.
The sectarian violence in Azherbeijan was largely along religous lines.
Do you read any newpapers or watch any television stations or listen
to any radio from predominantly Muslim nations? I do not, therefor
I do not know if what you say is true or not.v
Yes, several ... weekly when possible, see below.
- Murder torture rape of both sexes and arbitrary imprisonment
of thousands of fellow Christians and Native Americans in Chile.
Horrible, and hardly noticed by the West generally (to our everlasting
shame). BUT ... not motivated by any obvious religiosity nor in the name
of any religion unlike ... well, You Know Who.
Perhaps you are not familiar with liberation theology.
I am painfully aware of it. It is essentially collectivism in religious drag.
Do you read any newpapers or watch any television stations or listen
to any radio from predominantly Muslim nations? I do not, therefor
I do not know if what you say is true or not.
Yes, several ... weekly when possible, see below.
- Murder torture and arbitrary imprisonment
of thousands and seizure and destruction of land in an effort
to eradicate entire Native American ethnic groups in Guatamala.
Horrible, and hardly noticed by the West generally (to our everlasting
shame). BUT ... not motivated by any obvious religiosity nor in the name
of any religion unlike ... well, You Know Who.
Perhaps you are not familiar with liberation theology. I'm not clear
on
what 'religiosity' means, but the Native Americans in queston were not
Christian, at least not of the same sort as their oppressors.
Do you read any newpapers or watch any television stations or listen
to any radio from predominantly Muslim nations? I do not, therefor
I do not know if what you say is true or not.
Yes, several ... weekly when possible, see below.
SNIP
I would not make the mistake of assuming that religion is
inherently evil. But evil men may turn it to their desires as
easily as good men do.
I do not assume any such thing. Humans have the capacity to inflict
unspeakable horror upon each other. And, yes, most all the religions
have acted badly at some point in history. But we are concerned here
with current events. In the current situation, the horrid acts of
the Muslim radical minority is met with deafening silence from the majority
and Islamic clergy.
Do you read any newpapers or watch any television stations or listen
to any radio from predominantly Muslim nations? I do not, therefor
I do not know if what you say is true or not. If you do not, then
neither do you.
But I do. I try to get to Middle Eastern news (via the web) at
least a couple times a week. The silence about the excesses of
the radicals is thunderous.
You too can join the fun:
http://weekly.ahram.org.eg/index.htm
http://english.aljazeera.net/HomePage
http://www.debka.com/
http://www.jpost.com
http://www.tehrantimes.com/
http://www.memri.org/
You _may_ be right. But it looks to me like you are assuming from
a lack of reportage in the English (and whatever other languages you
read) media, and have not actually investigated the issue.
As always, your need to defend your ideology allows you to presume
things that are completely false. I'm no expert on the region, but
I'm reasonably well read on the matter (or at least I try to be).
As I mentioned before, the condemnation of violent jihad by
the largest Iman in North American has been ignored in the
English -language media.and newspapers.
Actually it wasn't - it just wasn't all that important. Radical
Islam was not born in, nor is it largely being incubated within
North America. The Muslims of Detroit are unlikely to rise up
in Jihad anytime soon. The clerics that need to be speaking up -
and are essentially mute or busy pouring gasoline on the fire -
are the clerics in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia (especially Mecca
and Medina), etc.
There are a few brave and noble voices there speaking,
but they are so few that they are mostly unheard. Moreover the 20th
century butchers like Tojo, Stalin, & Hitler were roundly and loudly
condemned from the pulpit and the street, and the West put their
blood and treasure on the line to stop these monsters. Where is the
Islamic equivalent of a WWII, Nuremberg Trials, Cold War or they
many related activities levied against their own monsters?
Well the Iranians did want to try the Shah, and the Iraqis are
trying Sadddam Hussein. We won't let Afghanistan try the
Taliban (yet). The rest of the monsters, like Musharrif,
Niyazov, the Sauds, even Kaddafi are our allies, we support
them so maybe we shouldn't be pointitng fingers elsewhere.
Your analysis is puerile. The world is an imperfect place. It is not our
job to make everyone else perfect, nor can we afford to work with only
people who suit our sense of propriety. And, yes, sometimes that means
doing business with unsavory characters. The purpose of government -
something you and your ilk seem never to grasp - is to keep us *free*,
not to remediate the moral failings of other people. Therein the Left
and Right think the same way: You all want to use the force of
government to inflict your "morality" on everyone else ... at the point
of a gun.
Our interdiction in Iran historically, and more recently Afghanistan and
Iraq, is all about what is good for us (arguably). Part of the reason
this entire topic is so ridiculous is that both the Left and Right keep
arguing for some high-minded morality when doing what they do. The Right
wants to inflict some kind of democracy at the point of a gun, the Left
soils itself waiting for some version of "perfection" to arrive. But the
willingness to use military force should be limited to that necessary to
lower the threat to our liberty to an acceptable level. We can argue
about whether that was the case or not in Iraq, or whether it will be in
Iran/Syria/ Saudi Arabia et all, but the principle remains: Never go to
war to inflict your worldview upon others. Only go when there is an
issue of your own liberty at stake. Bush argued Sadaam was such a threat
- I agree. But he then went further to say it was the West's job to
create and environment where democracy could flourish - I disagree.
That's a job for the indigenous peoples of the region.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk
PGP Key: http://www.tundraware.com/PGP/