1. I have already said I am aware there are interpretations of Islamic theology/jurisprudence that are powerful factors in creating extremists. In certain areas, Islam can be very useful to theocrats and radical tacticians in maintaining power and motivating people to kill themselves for a higher cause. I've also said there is a large divide in Islam based on interpretation; I think that is the real litmus test of the future. You are not understanding my larger point so I'll expand. Harping about Islam, while ignoring eveything else, is ignorant for several reasons: - A: If Islam was sufficient, in itself, to cause terrorism there would be a regular distribution of extremists across the world, regardless of the historical, cultural, political, and socio-economic make-up of the countries in which they live. As I said before, Xinjiang is not Nigeria. Ghettoes in France are not suburban Iranian communities in Southern California. I never said underdevelopment alone is SUFFICIENT to cause terrorism, but only a bonehead would think it plays no role whatsoever. - B: No religion is monolithic. Christianity today is absolutely nothing like it was a millenium ago. It took bloody wars, the collapse of colonial empires, and the rise of enlightenment thinkers to transform Western societies into what they are today. The religion had no choice but to adapt if it wanted to remain relevant. This is how progress happens. - C: Blaming Islam only is pointless -- it just stokes the coals of smug, self-righteous fury in Western boneheads. Some people get off on reducing complex social phenomena into "good vs. bad" conflicts, so that they can feel like the good guy. These types get a rush out of frothing at the mouth about how Islam is the enemy when another suicide bombing takes place in Iraq or Israel. I think this kind of mentality is embarrassing. It's also politically counterproductive for the reasons I've stated to kiwi_trader. 2. Your repeated mention of the wealth of bin Laden and others is not a counterargument to what I've been saying, any more than me bringing up one 17 year old, fatherless, poor Palestinian suicide bomber is proof of my argument. Not even highschool kids would think like that. I'm looking at things systematically, and I'm not making a controversial argument. If you can't understand this, then I'm not going to try to explain myself further. You'll just end up ignoring what I say and repeating yourself later. Usually it takes a few posts to get a sense of the kind of person on the other end. When you said something about getting through to my "cerebellum," I realized that there's probably not much more fruitful conversation here. Furthermore, while you demanded every Middle Eastern country apologize for the slaying of a nun, you called for impartiality and a trial of the soldiers in Haditha. The nature of both incidents seem straightforward to me (the latter has pretty much been verified by the Pentagon and the press). I think this is enough for me to intuit what kind of person you are, and I can probably predict a whole range of political positions you have based on that alone. I'll let you have the last word.
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz: More gobbledygook speak... You got him to do it again! (Watch the hypocrite hurl ugly racial epithets today, and then 'speak out against racism' tomorrow.)
I am not "ignoring everything else." To say that I am is, well, ignorant. I have given your underdevelopment rationale credit for playing a role. Saying I have not is, well, boneheaded. Furthermore, if you bothered to read my posts, I have been talking primarily about the Middle Eastern extremists. Note the word "extremists," which indicates an acknowledgement on my part that they are not the mainstream, although, as RM has pointed out, the mainstream appears to tacitly support and/or sympathize with these extremists. And given what happened in London, one must also consider the role of Islam in what caused those British born and raised Muslim youths to do what they did. And BTW, one of them was born in Jamaica and converted to Islam prior to blowing himself and many others up on that day. So what? Islam has had quite a long time to progress. Unfortunately, in the here and now it has "progressed" to the point where we are faced with extremists who may soon acquire nuclear weapons. You may be comfortable with giving them more time to "progress," and make a huge leap of faith that they will progress in the manner you envision. But there is no guarantee of that happening. How do you know that the apex of Muslim "progress" was not marked by where it stood 30 years ago, or 100? You keep on with this mantra that I am "blaming only Islam," when in fact I am not. To keep on doing so is, well, boneheaded. The reason I keep on mentioning it is that you keep on ignoring it. And I believe you do so because you are disingenuous. Because by acknowledging that the worst act of terrorism against this country was masterminded by a multimillionaire and executed by mostly middle-class Muslims, it crumbles the facade of the argument you have constructed. Clearly the reference I was making to balance, which the cerebellum has an important controlling relation to, went over your head. No surprise. First of all, I said that: "THE MUSLIM HEADS OF ALL COUNTRIES WHERE ISLAM IS THE MOST DOMINANT RELIGION SHOULD CONDEMN THE ACTIONS OF THE MUSLIM CLERIC IN SOMALIA WHO CALLED FOR THE POPE'S MURDER which resulted in the subsequent murder of the nun." Can you understand the difference between what I wrote and what you claim I wrote? Obviously not...Interesting too that you do not believe in due process for our soldiers and are happy to convict them without trial. And, I suppose to satisfy your clear moral relativist bent, we should have to put the Muslim cleric on trial for what he said, wouldn't we? It's clear you have reading comprehension problems and are incapable of objectivity. In your zeal to whitewash the role Islam plays in what is, by the way, ISLAMIC fundamentalism, you can only repeat the litany of assumptions you've made since this exchange began and continue to ignore the cogent facts. In any case, I'm glad you've left me with the last word, as you clearly would continue with your obfuscation. You see, I have a pretty good idea of the type of person you are, too. Have a great day. ____________________________ Member of the ET Anti-Troll Brigade Iustus ignarus troll
re: the above, well said, hap ---------------------------------------------------------- Z's racism has been pretty well documented. The fact that he calls me a gook shouldn't come as a surprise. So... you claimed that there is nothing in the Qu'uran that specifically promotes violence. I responded with three examples. You responded... by cutting and pasting a post 9 times in a row. Hmmm... not very mature, was it? Kind of like throwing a little tantrum, right? I remember a few weeks back when you were cornered, getting hammered for your evasions and lies here. You started posting a bunch of references to anal penetration. I guess you aren't quite there yet... ____________________________ Member of the ET Anti-Troll Brigade iustus ignarus troll
Quote where I called you a "gook." Your posts are full of gobbledygook speak...true, but so are a lot of post by the klannish folks around here.... For a self proclaimed "proof reader" who is so clearly IQ challenged, you really are useless...
PLUHHHHZEEEEE....... Tradernik is correct. Everytime you find yourself against a wall of common sense or just simple "reason", you will find your way out of it in less than illustrious ways. Well documented fact.
So you can't pull up a quote where I called him a "gook." Thought so, more bs from the klannish ET members.... You guys stick together like a bloody bowel movement....