I wasn't sure about posting this.. But I'm really willing to see other people's opinions in this situation than just my schoolmates.
Here's something to discuss:
- What kind of action should different big nations and unions (UN, USA, EU, etc.) actually take in the different situations that are happening over there?
- On who's side are you? Israel's or Palestine's? Why?
- What should be done on Iran? How could we be sure of the true intentions of Iran's nuclear plans?
- What do you think about Iraq's current situation? Was Saddams death penalty justified?
- How non-religious would you consider the different conflicts?
- Would you consider peace in the Middle-East as a realistic dream?
Please, discuss. Oh, and remember, no spamming, no stupidity what so ever. State your opinions calmly and try to be an adult.
Page 18 of 18
kesh Account deleted
16.09.2012 at 12:23
Gets me wondering if it's just Muslims now have decided to rejected everything Western, early Islamic civilisation lead the way in universal values, such as algebra, an astrology, translated Euclid an many other ancient works, alot if not most of the mathmatical symbols an numbers used in the West originate from India/todays Middle East region. Its easy to forgot that Medieval Europe before we picked up on Islamic scripts (translated an spread during the Renaissance) was an extremely religious place, alot more intolerant then the Middle East is today. An from those scripts was born tools, an people able to the explain the world better then a religion ever could.
Now the Middle East doesn't lead the way, even Turkey, which has a mild Islamic government is introducing the teaching of the Qur'an into state funded schools. Slowly taking Darwinism out the curriculum. You get the Arabian states, that shrewdly brought in outside help an knowledge to build up there petro-industries an now live a life that is far removed from anything that ever existed within the region before. Gone is the need to have a functioning, creating an destroying private market economy, with the need to give an take with relations to the outside world, or any other trade apart from oil an gas. An the outside world is hardly going to create partnerships in the Middle East outside the petro-industries (or defensive industries) because it isn't worth the security costs. Isn't worth getting blown up by a random to make a buck or two if at all. Security comes first, before jobs come along.
Needs a few Muslim Kierkegaard's, but likely Nietzsche's (who inspired a nation to world war) to come along an grab the main stream culture in my opinion to have a more secular demography similar to the West. Long road, an even then Europe isn't functioning, the EU isn't democratic like the USA, maybe the place needs the Chinese model, huge security, wild west style private sector that's gobbled up by the state when it gets too big, state controlled banks, secular eduction, with enough checks an controls an parnerships in place with the outside world. A patched up communist/market lead hybrid.
Top Egyptian cleric urges global ban on Islam attacks.
"criminalize attacks on Islamic symbols and on those of other religions". Are reasons for tolerating religion are not specific to religion but apply to all claims of conscience? Can someone point out to me why religion is excluded as special? Why not ban attacks on none-believers or polytheists in religious holy books?
Most fittingly, International Blasphemy Rights Day, held each year on September 30, is administered by the Center for Inquiry as part of its Campaign for Free Expression.
Quote: The Qur'an isn't unambiguously pacifistic and "self-defense" can be interpreted in many ways. There is no correct way to interpret the holy texts, since there is no theological truth to be found in my opinion. You can also be a pluralist. It's not the point. To make myself clear, that makes no difference to what I'm saying.
I'm not looking to condemn every ideology "based" on the Qur'an. Only the one that demands that people react like they did.
But you still seem to lump all of those "ideologies" into one and then condemn them. I'm not talking about the "self-defense" passages in the Qur'an but the ones that clearly calls for toleration and respect.
Quote: I can understand a few things by 3. You are trying to use a tu quoque. You are trying to trivialize. You are misrepresenting mt thoughts. To further clear myself:
I didn't say this is a "special" mode to Muslim (some British men just rioted outside a French embassy because of nude pictuers), but the riot because of a film, allegedly, concerning Islam is the subject.
Your apologetics (which is one problem with religious liberals, they do the apologetics for the extremists without condemning them without reservation) make is sound like the some in the Muslim community or your surrounding can use rational emotive behavior therapy.
Not everyone react like that after taking offense to their religion, we have gone over it. And no you are wrong, it is cultural and personality based and not "humans as a whole". In some cultures it separates adults from children. Something goes on between an action and a reaction, it's called self-control or the lack of it.
You're stereotyping me, putting words into my mouth based on that stereotype and then suggesting therapy !. I'm not trivializing and am certainly not apologizing for something I didn't do nor had anything to do with aside from the fact that those who made those actions were Muslims like myself.
I already said that I among a large group of Muslims condemn these actions, I don't know why you're circling back to this point over and over again.
I do believe that those actions are based on disturbed cultural background, the point where I disagree with everyone is that this background is not solely of a religious nature, what I mean is that several factors lead to these reactions : First, the misinterpretation of the holy text. second, and this is sadly something deep-seated in our community, the awful educational system (which is a product of the dictatorships ruling our countries). third and last, the absence of proper religious education (and this is related to the former point).
And again, and so you don't ask, I'm not trivializing nor am I putting the blame on something and someone other than the people who did what they did.
----
He who is not bold enough
to be stared at from across the abyss
is not bold enough
to stare into it himself.
You're stereotyping me, putting words into my mouth based on that stereotype and then suggesting therapy !. I'm not trivializing and am certainly not apologizing for something I didn't do nor had anything to do with aside from the fact that those who made those actions were Muslims like myself.
I already said that I among a large group of Muslims condemn these actions, I don't know why you're circling back to this point over and over again.
I do believe that those actions are based on disturbed cultural background, the point where I disagree with everyone is that this background is not solely of a religious nature, what I mean is that several factors lead to these reactions : First, the misinterpretation of the holy text. second, and this is sadly something deep-seated in our community, the awful educational system (which is a product of the dictatorships ruling our countries). third and last, the absence of proper religious education (and this is related to the former point).
And again, and so you don't ask, I'm not trivializing nor am I putting the blame on something and someone other than the people who did what they did.
Does any criticism or suggestion sound to you offending or "stereotyping"? Now THAT is very stereotypical. I was clearly referring to what you said, not where you come from or your "group".
That view pf people that you pronounced, from wherever you picked it up, you could happily suggest them REBT. I've read Albert Ellis for myself and his great. Helped tens of millions of people around the world, to deal better with the world. It fits with what you said, not where you come from.
Apologetics isn't apologizing, it's defending a position.
I think I was clear I was not referring to all Muslims or the "nature" of Islam. If someone wants to use rhetoric about the "true" interpretation of X, so it will fit better with modern and open societies, I don't mind. But it's not the point.There is no nature of Islam in my eyes and no point is discussing that. The "true" or "false" interpretation is irrelevant to the criteria I'm speaking of. There are ideologies/conceptions/interpretations that don't want to play according to the democratic game rules, which motivate people to react as some Muslims did.
When someone speaks out of ignorance or intolerance you can point it out and prove him wrong with confidence without violence.
No I did not take offense in your suggestions, you said and I quote : "Your apologetics (which is one problem with religious liberals, they do the apologetics for the extremists without condemning them without reservation) make is sound like the some in the Muslim community or your surrounding can use rational emotive behavior therapy."
That sounds like stereotyping to me, the "religious liberal" thing. I'll surely look up Albert Ellis as the description on the YT video you linked sounded like something I might be interested in.
The way you seem to view Islam and religions as a whole is a lot different from the way I do so I think it'll be really hard to find common grounds concerning this specific issue.
----
He who is not bold enough
to be stared at from across the abyss
is not bold enough
to stare into it himself.
No I did not take offense in your suggestions, you said and I quote : "Your apologetics (which is one problem with religious liberals, they do the apologetics for the extremists without condemning them without reservation) make is sound like the some in the Muslim community or your surrounding can use rational emotive behavior therapy."
That sounds like stereotyping to me, the "religious liberal" thing. I'll surely look up Albert Ellis as the description on the YT video you linked sounded like something I might be interested in.
The way you seem to view Islam and religions as a whole is a lot different from the way I do so I think it'll be really hard to find common grounds concerning this specific issue.
Heh...seems like the joke is on me. Sorry, I thought you were referring to something else.
This is a very nice example.
Let's put it this way, so far, what do we not agree on concerning this specific topic?
I believe that this situation is a result of the actions of Muslims, whereas you seem to think that Islam itself as an ideology provoked it.
Books don't provoke things, conceptions of them by people do. And that is what matters to me. So, so far I was saying a version of Islam, not Islam "itself". Giving it another thought, it is a mistake given what I currently know.
I can say I can agree with you partially. I don't know what is "true" (or to be less abstract the canonical interpretations) of Islam (I'm skeptical if there is such a thing) and I don't find that relevant. But it doesn't follow that if a Muslims did something, even if it is related to his religion, that it is his conception of religion is what that motivated him to do so.. You have to establish another proposition in order for it to follow.
InnerSelf: Ok, i think am getting you now...but now you need to get us as well - i believe none of us has any problem with peaceful Islam belief, at least i dont have...
but - there is a crystal clear connection between Islam belief and some Muslim people, who appear to be fanatics and who hate us, wishing us death...so how can you expect us not to blame your religion, when it is this religion that turns some Muslim people into mindless beasts...what do you suggest we should do but hate and defend what is important, valuable and sacred for us - like the freedom of expression (that also includes mocking other people's faith)?
question - can you, "normal Muslims", do something to silence the fanatics? and so prove us your faith is really peaceful and can coexist with our society? or will you just sit back yelling "That has nothing to do with us and Islam! Stop hating us!"?
---- The bones of beasts and the bones of kings
Become dust in the wake of the hymn
Mighty kingdoms rise, but they all will fall
No more than a breath on the wind
Since the end of WWII the Arabic/Islamic community went through massive changes i.e : the end of colonization and the chaos that followed. This paved the road for dictators to rise into power. And I've said this before, you can't simply ignore the effects of almost 60 years of chaos and oppression, and oppression is probably the best environment for extreme ideologies to thrive.
I don't see any solution for this in the near future aside form the transition into democracy, which will be inevitably slow .
----
He who is not bold enough
to be stared at from across the abyss
is not bold enough
to stare into it himself.
The main problem in West Asia\Egypt has 5 letters. I-S-L-A-M. Get rid of this cancer-like disease and there are more than half of the problems less there.
as a syrian, what do you think about Assad's recent speech and his offers for ending war? what do. other syrians think? I think he's making more trouble for his people... am I right?
There is a very simple question to answer this problem.
If Isreal stops send attacks , what would happen ?
Is The Palistinians stop sending attacks what would happen ?
If the Isreal stops , palistinians will continue to attack
If the Palistinaians stop attacking, Isreal will cease attacks.
Therfore, the responsibility lies with Palistinians to cease fire. Since they will not, they will not find peace.
----
I swear by my life and love for it that I will never live for the sake of another man, nor shall I ask another to live for me.
Since the end of WWII the Arabic/Islamic community went through massive changes i.e : the end of colonization and the chaos that followed. This paved the road for dictators to rise into power. And I've said this before, you can't simply ignore the effects of almost 60 years of chaos and oppression, and oppression is probably the best environment for extreme ideologies to thrive.
I don't see any solution for this in the near future aside form the transition into democracy, which will be inevitably slow .
Well said.
Integrating radical groups to the democratic process could be a good step towards those groups becoming institutionnalised (and thus, less prone to terrorist behavior). While excluding them from it can only mean that they will revert to other ways (i.e. violence) of expressing themselves.
The oppressive regimes of the past brought these groups to use violence as a way of expression. One hopes democracy changes that in a positive manner.
not really ! but the people are trying to say that they are not part of the political games the government want to fuel
I saw film about Glasgow a jewsih and palestinian families
jew said, here is our food, our fest we share this whit our palestinian friends, all together have some good wine and whisky
palestinians said, we all are friends we ARE NOT RELIGIUYS bewcause religion fuck up midle east ......
so true worls
----
Life is to short for LOVE, there is many great things to do online !!!
Stormtroopers of Death - ''Speak English or Die''
I better die, because I never will learn speek english, so I choose dieing
not really ! but the people are trying to say that they are not part of the political games the government want to fuel
I saw film about Glasgow a jewsih and palestinian families
jew said, here is our food, our fest we share this whit our palestinian friends, all together have some good wine and whisky
palestinians said, we all are friends we ARE NOT RELIGIUYS bewcause religion fuck up midle east ......
so true worls
Anti-colonial nationalism. Ethnic Nationalism. Romantic ultra-nationalism which "peace activists" (European ideologues) and "patriots" (Neo-fascists) tend to hold. Exaggeration and mystification were always human tendencies.
not really ! but the people are trying to say that they are not part of the political games the government want to fuel
I saw film about Glasgow a jewsih and palestinian families
jew said, here is our food, our fest we share this whit our palestinian friends, all together have some good wine and whisky
palestinians said, we all are friends we ARE NOT RELIGIUYS bewcause religion fuck up midle east ......
so true worls
Anti-colonial nationalism. Ethnic Nationalism. Romantic ultra-nationalism which "peace activists" (European ideologues) and "patriots" (Neo-fascists) tend to hold. Exaggeration and mystification were always human tendencies.
no! why do you really make it this complicated ! Why do I have to feel a special hatred for the people were born in a specific place ? huh? just because the media says ? Those so called peacemakers activist are trying to spread the same notion.Don't you think so?
Anti-colonial nationalism. Ethnic Nationalism. Romantic ultra-nationalism which "peace activists" (European ideologues) and "patriots" (Neo-fascists) tend to hold. Exaggeration and mystification were always human tendencies.
no! why do you really make it this complicated ! Why do I have to feel a special hatred for the people were born in a specific place ? huh? just because the media says ? Those so called peacemakers activist are trying to spread the same notion.Don't you think so?
No. That's why I use inverted commas. This isn't about a pragmatic sense of trying to find common grounds and getting along fairly as individual human beings (we should try and achieve that in my opinion). There is much more involved in this.
A more suited term would be"Justice activists", then the question "what justice exactly?" arises more naturally. They are not working in the spirit of the enlightenment and deny the notions of classic human rights and humanism.
Many of them, if not most, work in the framework of Frantz Fanon and anti-colonial 'studies'. Labeled as ideology by philosophers, like Gray Edwards.
With the search for "true identity", basing politics on ethnic identity (not rational principles), nativism (in the wide sense), mystical/romantic connection to a certain territory which fits it and the group essentialism makes it very hard distinguishing them for regular old time fascists.
Now you understand why history (not personal of course) has become such a central notion. They seem to agree on everything except the identity of "the natives".
This is a gross oversimplification, but it's a start of an understanding.
Today at noon, shelling from Assad's air forces on the Campus of the University of Aleppo. As a "coincidence" today was the first day of our mid-terms, the time when everyone from all of Syria's universities have their exams. Many students, civilians passing by the street and displaced people living in the dorms died and the sight and scent of blood was unholy.
EDIT : 20 of these students from the faculty of civil engineering were assassinated today by air strikes by the criminal and coward Assad regime!
----
He who is not bold enough
to be stared at from across the abyss
is not bold enough
to stare into it himself.
