Uncle Vinny

[UncleVinny]

True, Vagrant.
And that point is a matter of opinion, I would guess.
I am sad that bush moved the line so much closer to the war side in the Iraq arena.

[moonotmo]

Patriot said:

Are you aware that Muslims do that very thing, against those very religious groups?

Do they? I don't see many muslims around here start lashing out at people when they discover their religion. Surely they'd all be imprisoned, instead of allowed to walk the streets freely. Maybe it only happens in America...?

Though if muslims did do that, would lashing out at them in return really be the best solution?

Patriot said:

All in-bred Americans are vested with inalienable rights sanctioned by the government, among these life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, according to our Declaration. That holds true for all peaceful immigrants as well. If they choose to contribute to the growth of our society and respect our ideals, they may partake in what this country has to offer. But, if they come with the intent to alter our culture or destroy our pillars of civilization (as Islam in general does: see my "Islam, Christianity, and Judaism" thread in the next few weeks), then they will by no means be provided with the tools necessary to do so.

That's fair enough. I completely disagree about Islam intending to destroy your "pillars of civilization", though I will be watching that thread; don't disappoint me now.

Patriot said:

In our quest to provide freedom and protection to Buddhist, Hindu, and Jewish immigrants (as well as guard our own Christian heritage), we have no choice but to level the axe when necessary, as Islam poses both an ideological and militant threat against all of the above. Peaceful Muslims are just as intolerant as Militant Muslims, the difference being that the latter takes judgment into their own hands, whereas the former provides financial support for, and makes no secret of desiring, the destruction of all who are not Islamic.

Aha! Thank you! I can now understand how you came to the conclusion that peaceful muslims also want us dead.

However, is that accurate? I doubted it, so I asked a few Islamic friends if they thought that donating money and/or resources to extremists could ever be justified. Two answered "no," whilst the third answered "only if necessary," pointing out that not even the Iraq situation constitutes as "necessary" for him. Admittingly, a survey of three muslims - in no way, shape or form - provides an indication on the whole muslim population, but I am confident that their opinions are not alone - at least around here. I very much doubt that many muslims donate to militant groups, and would like to see some evidence of this before I accept that this practice is wide-spread.

I'd just like to throw in a question here that I'm interested in. One of my Islamic friends wants to become a pilot later in life, so I just wondered: if you were boarding a plane, and you knew the pilot was a muslim, would you still fly on it? Just curious.

Patriot said:

That's nice. But here we appreciate facts, not faulty memories. Bottom line is that you didn't remember correctly. Therefore, until you have your facts straight, don't pretend that your faulty remembrance of a lie constitutes factual information.

I was never pretending that my statement was factual information. If I were, I wouldn't have prefixed the statement with "if I remember correctly," as it would not be required.

What I said was factual, in that if I did remember correctly, then yes, the statement I was referring to would have been accurate.

MO said:

Moon person posts lies.

Oh now that's just a brilliant argument there, going into great depths and detail, and very well and clearly made, may I add.

Oh yeah, and MO wets the bed.

[Patriot]

Moon Woman,


You wrote,


^{I don't see many muslims around here start lashing out at people when they discover their religion. Surely they'd all be imprisoned, instead of allowed to walk the streets freely. Maybe it only happens in America...?}


Of course you don't see it. Your eyes are shut. And the law in Britain has become weak, acquiesing to hypocritical norms of "tolerance" for inane brutality. Check out this link for what Islamic men are doing in Europe at this very time:


www.secularislam.org/women/dont.htm


As for other parts of the world, there is no one to "arrest" the guilty, because the "guilty" run the governments! That's one of the reasons we quashed the Taliban in Afghanistan.


Azam Kamguian, an Iranian, writes on his website (previously cited) that:


Essentially, Islam is a set of beliefs and rules that militate against human prosperity, happiness, welfare, freedom, equality and knowledge. Islam and a full human life are contradictory concepts, opposed to each other. Islam under any kind of interpretation is and always has been a strong force against secularism, modernism, egalitarianism and women's rights.


That stands in stark contrast to what the USA stands for. Our government is founded upon "life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness". As you can see, there is a fundamental clash of ideology between the American ethos and the Muslim faith. Period. And rest assured, Islam will not emerge victorious in its quest to quell the rights of freedom-loving people.


You wrote,


^{Though if muslims did do that, would lashing out at them in return really be the best solution?}


No, it wouldn't be. The best solution would be to pull our pants down and be castrated for our unbelieving, abominable status as infidels. Think, moron.


^{I completely disagree about Islam intending to destroy your "pillars of civilization", though I will be watching that thread; don't disappoint me now.}


The World Trade Towers were two very literal "pillars" that have already been destroyed. This isn't a matter of obtaining your agreement, approval, or lack thereof. You can piss off, for all we care.


^{However, is that accurate? I doubted it, so I asked a few Islamic friends if they thought that donating money and/or resources to extremists could ever be justified. Two answered "no," whilst the third answered "only if necessary," pointing out that not even the Iraq situation constitutes as "necessary" for him.}


Oh, that's great, Moony. Ask your Muslim friends and take their word as concrete truth. Here in the US we have caught numerous "sleeper agents" for Al Qaeda posing as innocent, peaceful Muslims. We can't afford to take chances. We don't rely on the word of liars: Bin Laden himself initially declared, internationally, that he was in no way responsible for 9/11, only to reverse his claims publicly.


You asked,


^{I'd just like to throw in a question here that I'm interested in. One of my Islamic friends wants to become a pilot later in life, so I just wondered: if you were boarding a plane, and you knew the pilot was a muslim, would you still fly on it? Just curious.}


That would depend on what type of plane, the origin of departure and the point of arrival. If I were on an Egyptian airline bound for Calcutta, yes, I might fly on it. If I were on an American airline bound for Washington DC, no, I would not fly if I knew the pilot was Islamic.

[MO]

Check this out, Moon woman!
debate.domini.org/newton/womeng.html

Tell me all cultures are equal.

By the way, I'm flattered that you used my quote in your tag line.

[UncleVinny]

Good point MO, so how does a superior culture upgrade an inferior one? Usually the inferior one deteriorates in the face of the more advanced one, such as with the American Indians. So what do we do? Certainly not force our ways on them. I've said before, here in the West we had a philosopher (Russeau?) who instituted the "Social Contract" which states that if you want to live in a civilized society, you have to give up certain 'rights' - - such as the right to kill your neighbor if you don't agree with him, or the 'right' to claim a wife as property. Else you end up living in a cave, and many of the Islamic fundamentalists in fact DO live in caves.

Well one approach is to occupy their country and destroy their infrastructure. That's what I see as the Bush approach. Another is to instruct them in the ways of civilization - much more slow and dedious, but few people die from it. Guess bush is not much of a thinker or teacher. The fundamentalists are still back in the dark ages of an eye for an eye, and there are many blind men.

Would you not agree that these people need to be educated? So how then does that occur from the wrong end of a rifle muzzle?

[Ian]

Well one approach is to occupy their country and destroy their infrastructure. That's what I see as the Bush approach. Another is to instruct them in the ways of civilization - much more slow and dedious, but few people die from it. Guess bush is not much of a thinker or teacher. The fundamentalists are still back in the dark ages of an eye for an eye, and there are many blind men.

Fundamentalists can't be educated. Extremists will never adopt democracy. Bush is trying to educate them, the wrong approach if you ask me. If Bush wanted to bomb them into compliance, he very well could drop nuclear weapons, he hasn't. Bush could have instituted a military dictatorship that was Western-neutral, he decided to chase a dream of democracy and freedom for the Iraqi people and the Muslim world, a dream which I think is unattainable by the way. Its outrageous to suggest that Bush has a blood lust for Muslims and any investigation into the matter suggests, glaringly, otherwise.

And while I disagree with the US's position on Israel, remember who fired the first shot.

Where's my tagline moon woman!?!?

[UncleVinny]

Fundamentalists can't be educated. Extremists will never adopt democracy. ""

I disagree with you there. Even the Palestinians are realizing how they have gained NOTHING under Arafat. I would have more faith in mankind, I guess. Slowly, even the most extreme of them see that democracy works, tribal warfare, clerical rule rarely works. We'll see. I think we can both agree bush is not going about it in the right way.

[Ian]

UncleVinny said:

Fundamentalists can't be educated. Extremists will never adopt democracy. ""

I disagree with you there. Even the Palestinians are realizing how they have gained NOTHING under Arafat. I would have more faith in mankind, I guess. Slowly, even the most extreme of them see that democracy works, tribal warfare, clerical rule rarely works. We'll see. I think we can both agree bush is not going about it in the right way.

The Palestinian people were being oppressed by extremists such as Arafat. Arafat never conceded to the democratic push, in part due to his ideals, but also because of the power and gold that came with his oppression. If you think that Hamas and other terrorist groups in Palestine are being educated, best of luck to you.