Syria, America and Putin's Bluff

[mendeleyev]

My friend Lela Gilbert is a journalist living in Jerusalem and has seen the same signs I first saw in Egypt earlier this year which read in Arabic: Saturday People, Sunday People. This Arabic phrase is often painted on walls of churches that have been attacked by Islamic rebels. It expresses the ancient teaching that first we kill the Jews (Saturday people), then kill the Christians (Sunday people).  (http://www.jewishpolicycenter.org/4066/saturday-people-sunday-people)


Perhaps one of the finest pieces of journalism that I've read on the subject of growing Muslim violence is:
http://thefederalist.com/2013/09/25/can-we-finally-start-talking-about-the-global-persecution-of-christians/

[Shadow]

Where in the last 2-300 years have Christians been killing Muslims? Where are Christians killing Muslims now? How many must the Jihadist kill before their lust for blood is satisfied?

Do you count the bombs in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan?

[GQBlues]

Do you count the bombs in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan?

...add Egypt and Libya (which Europeans GLADLY initiated and participated in and without apprehension because they happen to be places their oil are coming from). Don't forget those dandies. They didn't get the press but it doesn't mean the *bombing and killing* didn't happen..


But I think the point FP was making Christians aren't killing Muslims due to religious reasons. *WE* (as in you, me and the rest of the righteous and moral societies of the west who just happens to have an affinity for comforts of life at the expense of others) just kill them for their resources.

 

[Faux Pas]

Do you count the bombs in Iraq, Afghanistan and Pakistan?

Can you name me one dropped bomb or incident in Iraq, Aftghanistan or Pakistan that was done in the name of Christianity? Try as you may you can not white wash the history of Islam and what they are doing in the name of religion today. No matter how bad you want to believe you can live in peace with it, that does not make it so. 

[lordtiberius]

I fail to see who these apostles of tolerance - the non god believers and their proselytization has any relevance to this thread.

[Shadow]

Can you name me one dropped bomb or incident in Iraq, Aftghanistan or Pakistan that was done in the name of Christianity? Try as you may you can not white wash the history of Islam and what they are doing in the name of religion today. No matter how bad you want to believe you can live in peace with it, that does not make it so.

Does it matter if someone called a name? For Muslims there are only Muslims and non-believers. It does not matter how they do not believe, as long as non-believers bomb their countries they will feel it is ok to fight back.

[Shadow]

I fail to see who these apostles of tolerance - the non god believers and their proselytization has any relevance to this thread.

Relevance was gone as soon as someone decided that bashing of the Islam was a positive contribution. Remember that the side of Assad is the moderate Islam, while the side of the rebels is supported by Al Qaeda and others who would enjoy seeing Christians slaughtered.

[lordtiberius]

Just one example,

The Bible does not only containt the New Testament, but also the Old Testament which is almost equal to a large part of the Quran.
It has the same passages about killing those who do not believe and about how slavery is ok.

  and really irrelevant to the discussion.  If there is an unwritten "no religion" clause in the TOS, then it follows anticlericalism and proselytization for atheism and agnosticism should also be prohibited

[Faux Pas]

Just one example,

  and really irrelevant to the discussion.  If there is an unwritten "no religion" clause in the TOS, then it follows anticlericalism and proselytization for atheism and agnosticism should also be prohibited

Actually, matters of politics and religion are frowned upon in this forum and in the TOS because much like this one, there generally is little middle ground or understanding on these topics. This usually leads to flames. As long as the topic continues in a civil manner it might be allowed to continue. Please tread lightly and avoid any personal attacks

[Daveman]

Just one example,

  and really irrelevant to the discussion.  If there is an unwritten "no religion" clause in the TOS, then it follows anticlericalism and proselytization for atheism and agnosticism should also be prohibited

sorry, atheism and agnosticism cannot be equated with religion. They are exactly what religion isn't.  No one proselytized for either..


this site may help you understand:
http://www.ihg.com/holidayinnexpress/hotels/us/en/reservation

[SANDRO43]

it follows anticlericalism and proselytization for atheism and agnosticism should also be prohibited

I can recall no one urging for consecration to the heart of the Mother of God Bertrand Russell .

[Daveman]

I can recall no one urging for consecration to the heart of the Mother of Bertrand Russell .

 

[Faux Pas]

Does it matter if someone called a name? For Muslims there are only Muslims and non-believers.

Of course it matters. Especially for this discussion. If you don't believe me, draw a cartoon of Muhammad, go to your nearest moderate Muslim neighborhood and call him a heretic. Then do the same with a cartoon of Jesus in a Christian neighborhood.

The bombs dropped and those countries you cite as some kind of comparison, is no comparison at all. For the Western world, politics isn't religion. Those bombs were political. You've confused it with Islam yet again where religion is politics.

It does not matter how they do not believe, as long as non-believers bomb their countries they will feel it is ok to fight back.

You're in denial shadow  You strike me as one of the most intellectual peeps I have ever run across in forums yet, you have out smarted yourself when it comes the the agenda of Muslims. You don't have to believe in any religion to see the intent of this one and the way it is shaping the world. What matters is, they believe it

[lordtiberius]

sorry, atheism and agnosticism cannot be equated with religion. They are exactly what religion isn't.  No one proselytized for either..


this site may help you understand:
http://www.ihg.com/holidayinnexpress/hotels/us/en/reservation

reference as to why you are wrong and I am right:
http://creation.com/atheism-a-religion
http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2013/08/26/is-atheism-a-religion-that-questions-at-the-heart-of-a-lawsuit-over-housing-credits-for-ministers-of-the-gospel/
http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2013/03/17/sorry-but-atheism-is-religion/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism_and_religion
http://reason.com/archives/2012/03/10/atheism-is-a-religion

Read the list and see how atheism fares :

1.Belief in supernatural beings (gods). CHECK POSTIVE NONBELIEF AND HOSTILITY AS OPPOSED TO INDIFFERENCE
2.A distinction between sacred and profane objects. CHECK ALL THINGS ARE PROFANE AND HOSTILITY TO THE SACRED
3.Ritual acts focused on sacred objects. CHECK RITUALISTIC HATRED FOR RELIGION (AND REASON)
4.A moral code believed to be sanctioned by the gods. CHECK THERE IS NO MORAL CODE MAKE IT UP AS YOU GO - SEE  soft SATANISM
5. Characteristically religious feelings (awe, sense of mystery, sense of guilt, adoration), which tend to be aroused in the presence of sacred objects and during the practice of ritual, and which are connected in idea with the gods. CHECK ALL THESE ARE DIRECTED TOWARD SCIENCE, THEMSELVES, MESSIAH LIKE POLITICAL FIGURES OBAMA, RON PAUL, ETC
6.Prayer and other forms of communication with gods.  CHECK THEY PRAY TO THEMSELVES, NEW AGE, OTHER NON WESTERN RELIGIONS INCLUDING A IDIOTIC TOLERANCE FOR ISLAM
7. A world view, or a general picture of the world as a whole and the place of the individual therein. This picture contains some specification of an over-all purpose or point of the world and an indication of how the individual fits into it. CHECK THAT IS SELF EVIDENT
8.A more or less total organization of one's life based on the world view. CHECK CHECK CHECK
9.A social group bound together by the above.  CHECK OH GOD YES
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/ath/blathm_rel_religion.htm

but until Obama says otherwise, its a free country and thus don't have to agree with me

Call what you want but if you want to be consistent (ie. FAIR) then the non god believers should get the same treatment as the god believers

My remarks

[mendeleyev]

Here is something to do with the thread:

Children in Syria playing a "beheading" game.

[Daveman]

but until Obama says otherwise, its a free country and thus don't have to agree with me

Any attempt to equate a belief in something for which there is lack of evidence to a lack of belief in the same something based the same lack of evidence is fallacy and nothing more than an attempt to shift the focus away from the lack of evidence.


If I did have a religion it would be Liberty. Or Freedom.  For which I would fight to protect your freedom to believe whatever you wish -- as long as the practice of that belief did not involve behavior or actions which invade the inalienable rights of others.


It's time for Godwin... call in the Nazis...

[lordtiberius]

The evidence is there.  You are free to look at it whenever you like or not.

You said that you would fight for me freedom.  Have you in the past?

[Shadow]

The evidence is there.  You are free to look at it whenever you like or not.

You said that you would fight for me freedom.  Have you in the past?

I expect you to call The Atheist Experience next Sunday and explain your point that they are following a religion.
For their website: http://atheist-community.org/

Udachi!

[Shadow]

Of course it matters. Especially for this discussion. If you don't believe me, draw a cartoon of Muhammad, go to your nearest moderate Muslim neighborhood and call him a heretic. Then do the same with a cartoon of Jesus in a Christian neighborhood.

Muslims would simply explain that they still have the fire to defend their religion, where Christians seem to be ok with mockery.

The bombs dropped and those countries you cite as some kind of comparison, is no comparison at all. For the Western world, politics isn't religion. Those bombs were political. You've confused it with Islam yet again where religion is politics.

I am not the one confused here. You tell yourself that for Islam religion and politics are one, so any political attacks on a country where Muslims live is seen as an attack on their religion.
then when they see Americans portraying themselves as Christian (regardless of how fanatic) they feel that they were attacked by Christians, as from their view politics and religion are one.

You're in denial shadow  You strike me as one of the most intellectual peeps I have ever run across in forums yet, you have out smarted yourself when it comes the the agenda of Muslims. You don't have to believe in any religion to see the intent of this one and the way it is shaping the world. What matters is, they believe it

Thanks for the compliment As for the agenda I am in the middle here. At some other place I may defend a position that is closer to yours, while defending the moderate and secular Muslims I know out here.

As I mentioned above, Muslims and Christians are not that far apart in many ways, except that Muslims still have the fire to defend and expand their religion. While some punishments given in the Middle East come across as barbaric to us, that is not directly the problem of the shariah.
Within the shariah, the judge is able to give punishment that fulfills the wishes of the community. That means that in places like London no stonings or whippings will take place, nor will any limbs be removed.

Islam has some pretty democratic basics, but like everywhere people once they get the power they desire start going out of control and influencing others. In any time of crisis people become more radical and also look for a scapegoat. In Europe the immigrants are a good scapegoat, and in return those groups feel outcast and become more radical. It is all a matter of time.
Either we manage to fight the crisis and the radical elements will lose ground, or a massive fight will break loose.

[lordtiberius]

yeah right, muslims = christians same thing

[SANDRO43]

Read the list and see how atheism fares :
1.Belief in supernatural beings (gods). CHECK POSTIVE NONBELIEF AND HOSTILITY AS OPPOSED TO INDIFFERENCE
2.A distinction between sacred and profane objects. CHECK ALL THINGS ARE PROFANE AND HOSTILITY TO THE SACRED
3.Ritual acts focused on sacred objects. CHECK RITUALISTIC HATRED FOR RELIGION (AND REASON)
4.A moral code believed to be sanctioned by the gods. CHECK THERE IS NO MORAL CODE MAKE IT UP AS YOU GO - SEE  soft SATANISM
5. Characteristically religious feelings (awe, sense of mystery, sense of guilt, adoration), which tend to be aroused in the presence of sacred objects and during the practice of ritual, and which are connected in idea with the gods. CHECK ALL THESE ARE DIRECTED TOWARD SCIENCE, THEMSELVES, MESSIAH LIKE POLITICAL FIGURES OBAMA, RON PAUL, ETC
6.Prayer and other forms of communication with gods.  CHECK THEY PRAY TO THEMSELVES, NEW AGE, OTHER NON WESTERN RELIGIONS INCLUDING A IDIOTIC TOLERANCE FOR ISLAM
7. A world view, or a general picture of the world as a whole and the place of the individual therein. This picture contains some specification of an over-all purpose or point of the world and an indication of how the individual fits into it. CHECK THAT IS SELF EVIDENT
8.A more or less total organization of one's life based on the world view. CHECK CHECK CHECK
9.A social group bound together by the above.  CHECK OH GOD YES
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/ath/blathm_rel_religion.htm

I've seen where the list comes from, but let's consider your alleged 'proof' comments to those 9 points:

1. CHECK POSTIVE NONBELIEF AND HOSTILITY AS OPPOSED TO INDIFFERENCE: apart from the typo, what is a POSITIVE NONBELIEF? Do NEGATIVE NONBELIEFS also exist ? An oxymoron.

Further, HOSTILITY (1st time but not the last in the list):

Hostility is seen as form of emotionally-charged angry behavior

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hostility): maybe I'm wrong, but I've not seen much anger displayed in the "agnostic/atheist" posts here. However, if you mean disagreement with your views, there certainly is.   

2. CHECK ALL THINGS ARE PROFANE AND HOSTILITY TO THE SACRED: see above.

3. CHECK RITUALISTIC HATRED FOR RELIGION (AND REASON): an oxymoron again. REASON: the meaning is obscure. RITUALISTIC HATRED FOR REASON? If LOGIC is meant by REASON, quite the contrary applies.   

4. CHECK THERE IS NO MORAL CODE MAKE IT UP AS YOU GO - SEE  soft SATANISM: your assumption. And "soft SATANISM" is childishly ridiculous: are non-believers by definition followers of the Devil, assuming it exists?

5. CHECK ALL THESE ARE DIRECTED TOWARD SCIENCE, THEMSELVES, MESSIAH LIKE POLITICAL FIGURES OBAMA, RON PAUL, ETC: science deserves some respect since it is constantly asking questions and trying to provide answers to phenomena that previously raised awe, sense of mystery, sense of guilt, adoration, such as not being certain that the Sun would rise the following morning and human sacrifices were required to ensure it, or hundreds of other examples like the Universe and Earth being created in 3761 BC. BTW, references to MESSIAH LIKE POLITICAL FIGURES OBAMA, RON PAUL are not much applicable outside the USA .

6. CHECK THEY PRAY TO THEMSELVES, NEW AGE, OTHER NON WESTERN RELIGIONS INCLUDING A IDIOTIC TOLERANCE FOR ISLAM: an "agnostic/atheist" would consider praying to him/herself a form of narcissistic onanism , and following a NON-WESTERN RELIGION is again an oxymoron, but objection to it disqualifies a few billion fellow humans - and has a heavy smell of racism . 

7. A world view, or a general picture of the world as a whole and the place of the individual therein. This picture contains some specification of an over-all purpose or point of the world and an indication of how the individual fits into it. CHECK THAT IS SELF EVIDENT: whose picture, yours? Again your meaning is rather obscure, and the assertion it is SELF-EVIDENT is a very old discussion excuse NOT to prove a point.

8. A more or less total organization of one's life based on the world view. CHECK CHECK CHECK: again obscure, but the more or less total organization is again contradictory, and funny to boot - an "approximately total organisation" ?   
9. A social group bound together by the above.: so non-believers are anti-social, too ?

[mendeleyev]

This was in Wednesday's edition the Daily News from Istanbul.

The writer, Burak Bekdil, is Turkish.

Source: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/there-is-no-islamic-terror.aspx?pageID=449&nID=55076&NewsCatID=398

‘There is no Islamic terror’   

While the world was expressing shock at the weekend’s death toll in Kenya and Pakistan – and I, at their shock – Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, in a public speech, was still mourning Asmaa al-Beltagi, the poor 17-year-old Egyptian girl who was shot dead by the security forces on “Black Wednesday.”

Earlier this year, Mr. Erdoğan’s Egyptian comrades, the Muslim Brotherhood – which, by the way, “renounced violence” – perpetrated the worst attacks against the Coptic Church since the 14th century. In one particular week, 40 churches were looted and torched while 23 others were attacked and heavily damaged.

In one town, Islamists paraded three nuns on the streets like prisoners of war after burning down their Franciscan school. Two security guards working on a tour boat owned by Christians were burned alive, while an orphanage was burned down.

On a village street, Islamists painted a black X on Christian stores in order to more easily identify them in future attacks. The Muslim Brotherhood decided to hold Friday prayers in an evangelical church that had been converted into a mosque. Meanwhile, the brotherhood’s Facebook page claimed that “the Church has declared war against Islam and Muslims.”

On Aug. 15, nine Egyptian human-rights groups released a statement saying, “In December (about seven months before the coup) … brotherhood leaders began fomenting anti-Christian sectarian [sentiment]. The anti-Coptic incitement and threats continued unabated up until the demonstrations of June 30 and, with the removal of President [Mohamed] Morsi … morphed into sectarian violence, which was sanctioned by … the continued anti-Coptic rhetoric heard from the group’s leaders on the stage … throughout the sit-in.”

That was an impartial, unchallenged brief account of the behavioral patterns exhibited by Mr. Erdoğan’s ideological next of kin in Egypt. It is important to note that the brotherhood justified the attacks by saying: “After all this [the Church’s presumed war on Islam and Muslims], people ask why they [brotherhood] burn the churches.”

In March, a Muslim mob swarmed through a Christian neighborhood in Lahore, Pakistan, burning two churches and more than 100 Christian homes. And on Sunday the world was shocked at the suicide attack on a historic Christian church that killed, as of Monday evening, 78 people in Peshawar. In the attack, which occurred as worshippers left All Saints Church, seven children were killed and 37 were wounded.

The weekend’s other “shocking” news came from Kenya where al-Qaeda-linked al-Shabaab militants attacked a shopping mall with grenades and assault rifles, killing, as of Monday, at least 68 and injuring 175. Victims aged between 2 and 78, and witnesses said the gunmen asked Muslims to leave before opening fire.

And Mr. Erdoğan was so sad during a public rally on Sunday. He was sad because the poor Egyptian, Asmaa, daughter of a prominent brotherhood politician, had been shot dead by Egyptian security forces on Aug. 14. The guns with which you kill today, the prime minister warned Egypt’s coup leaders, may one day be pointed at you.

One of Mr. Erdoğan’s favorite statements is his famous line, “There is no Islamic terror.” In 2010, online humor “daily” Zaytung fabricated a story whose lead paragraph read: “Erdoğan’s claims that ‘There is no Islamic terror’ have left several Islamic terror organizations heart-broken. A press release from al-Qaeda’s press office read: ‘The prime minister’s remarks are very discouraging. We are doing our best! So far our suicide and assassination teams have tried to blow up every possible target despite logistical constraints. It is so sad that the work we have done with a lot of sacrifice is being ignored by the Turkish prime minister.’”

No doubt, they are doing their best, but apparently not well enough to convince Mr. Erdoğan. I would bet all my money that Mr. Erdoğan, if asked today, would insist that “there is no Islamic terror.”

It must be the Jewish terrorists who killed over 150 people in two days in Pakistan and Kenya. The same Jews Mr. Erdoğan once said “know well how to kill.”

Source: http://www.hurriyetdailynews.com/there-is-no-islamic-terror.aspx?pageID=449&nID=55076&NewsCatID=398

 

[Daveman]

The evidence is there.  You are free to look at it whenever you like or not.

You said that you would fight for me freedom.  Have you in the past?

Evidence of/for what exactly? Fight for your freedom how in the past? 




from Merriam Webster:


re·li·gion noun[/color][/size][/font][/size] \ri-[/size]ˈli-jən\[/color][/size][/size]
: the belief in a god or in a group of gods
does not apply
: an organized system of beliefs, ceremonies, and rules used to worship a god or a group of gods
again, does not apply
: an interest, a belief, or an activity that is very important to a person or group     
sex, RWD, tennis, pool, taking a daily shower (or two), or even whacking off thus qualify as religions, a lack of interest or lack of belief in a god(s), however, still does not.


I've heard most all the Christian arguments that agnosticism and/or atheism are religions..  none of them hold water and most are completely asinine.

[lordtiberius]

Its great that you have still not found Jesus.  I too am not interested in hearing about the moral superiority of your religion either.

You said you woukd fight for my freedom.  How?  what would you be willing to do?  what have you done in the past that qualifies as fighting for freedom?  I am truly curious.

[tfcrew]

If I might chime in..
In spite of historical belief...
The Crusades never really ended.

 

...associated with campaigns in the Holy Land to establish control of religious sites but also cover other campaigns for different religious, economic, and political reasons

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crusades