100's of Muslims protest Muhammad cartoons in London…But how many protest terror?

Originally posted by masterp
Very tue, one more LESS reason for a people with knowledge to be so Uncivilized.

I will ask again, since no one cared to answer my question:

1) why were the cartoons published?

Because they CAN be published, just like cartoons defaming the western and the Jewsih world are published in muslem countries. There is a world outside Islam you know ?

And also, because it DID show a good image of what these poepl are about, to blow up others in the name of Mohamed, so therefore Moahmed is the bomb carrier, and thats is simply what the cartoon portrayed.

2) what exactly is humourus about them?

Its not the humour, but the truth in the cartoon... I don't think it was made to be humorous, but its was made to be realistic.

What is humorous about cartoons pcituring Bush has a voltrue as showing muslems sodomizing Jews with bombs??? nothing... its really not funny at all... but they were published, even tho their only purpose was not to show truth but to justify violence.

3) why turmoil is now? the cartoons were published in September.

My honest opinion, is because Iran came out and annouced they are goingfor nuclear weapons, and this made the muslems think they have their backs cover to do as they please

said by masterp
Well, I've never heard that the numerals we are using today are Hindu...care to share some links?

There are numerous reputable links out there.

scit.wlv.ac.uk

Hindu system is a pure place value system, that is why you need a zero. Only the Hindus within the context of Indo-European civilisations have consistently used a zero.

Our decimal system is descendent from this system.

The earliest number symbols in India
In 3000BC the Hindus culture flourished and large numbers were used (inscriptions).

From the middle of 2000BC Indo-European tribes were making their way from the N.W. towards India. They introduced Sanskrit - earliest knowledge of maths from this time.

In Sanskrit there are number words for 1-9, 10, 100 and further powers of 10 - up to 10 - definitely a decimal system.

Originally posted by Thomas Crowne
Let me get this straight, beachcoma, while Muslims are protesting by the tens of thousands because of cartoons, some real, but the most inflamatory faked, and shown around the world by an iman who was the one using the Pavlovian response and now you are trying to give a simple psyhcology lesson to the rest of us?

It doesn't really seem to be that difficult to find valid reasons for the Islamic world to be in the paper, nowadays. I mean, it isn't as if some Islamic cartoonist drew some silly pictures of Jews in a very bad light and the Judeo-Christian world is burning embassies, or something. Nope. In that case I would have to agree with you. Otherwise, I have to say that it might be that the suggestion is that we look the other way while our homes burn, lest we be accused of picking onthe Muslims.

Yes exactly, TC. You're almost there.

Just to clear things up it's 'imam' not 'iman'. The latter means 'faith'.

Propaganda sermons and biased reports

You know what, I've actually heard quite a number of sermons that single out "jews" or "zionists" or both as corruptors of the worlds or puppetmasters of the world, they wish to oppress muslims.. etc. etc. I've also been privy to articles that make that sort of connection without real solid data.

I've even heard guest speakers from the middle-east give these sermons. That one almost convinced me, it was quite thought provoking until I did some fact-checking and couldn't find any real answers. This was all back in '97. But from time to time I hear new ones, the rhetoric is the same but it's easier to believe in light of the last two wars America took part in.

The point is the time is ripe now if the propaganda was assumed to have been continueous, who knows, maybe even more fiery now, more anger provoking. I'm a natural skeptic, but I love a good conspiracy. I'd almost once been convinced that the "Jewish Zionist Puppet-Masters of the USA and Israel is out to oppress the muslims" so imagine what less skeptical and lesser informed people might come to conclude.

And then you have the Great Free Western Media, reporting truths (with a spin) that keep on saying "muslim terrorist here, muslim terrorist there" instead of "Saudi terrorist here, Pakistani terrorist there" so that instead of acknowledging there is a problem in these parts we simplify it to "muslim terrorists."

On top of this the middle-eastern media isn't a fan of the USA or Israel. If you know how your western media spins, then you can imagine how the spin in the middle east might be.

Muslim=Terrorists?

Why are these psycho muslims from there parts do these crazy things like blowing themselves up in public when it's clear that killing civilians/non-combatants is a big no-no and killing yourself is a bigger no-no? Did they get some fatwa I didn't hear about?

Now, there are protests among muslims because of this cartoons, I'm sure the numbers are way higher than what you suggested. Millions. Tens of millions. Maybe even hundreds of millions.

But there are many forms of protest -- public and private. The public ones are where there are matters to be concerned about, because it's public, it will affect a public. This is further divided into normal protests, loud protests, violent protests and outright rioting.

The last two, as far as freedom of expressions go is out of bounds, no? I agree with that myself. I've made that clear many times, I don't know why people keep coming back to that when responding to me. I suppose it's muslim=terrorist. Or at the very least muslim=violent. Or even more subtle, muslims condone violence and terrorist acts. Granted lately a lot of these come from people who claim to do it for Allah. But like I said, I don't know where they get this idea.

As I have posted in this thread: The muslim riots and other acts of violence..., there are only 12-14 muslim majority nations (maybe) where this problem is rampant or at least can't be controlled or even condoned. Why it is like that? Well if you have a good theory I'd like to know. That's out of 52 countries with muslim majorities. Why isn't it the same all over the "Islamic world"?

Lighting the match and stoking the fire

The US-led "War on Terrorism" has invaded two muslim majority countries, the reasons don't matter because it's perceived by people who are fed one propaganda as for "Global Security" and as constituting "Zionist Aggression" by the other.

This imam set off a fuse there in that region, where tensions and anti-west sentiments are already high thanks to a daily dose of "blame the Zionist Jewish pigs who control the Great Satan America who supports the Zionist Israel". What I'd like to know is more about this imam. Was he working for Iran? The Al-Qaeda? The Al-CIA-duh?

Meanwhile the western media continues with all kinds of terrorism news updates, never forgetting to subtly include the catch-phrases "Muslim Terrorists" or "Sunni Insurgents" or "the Islamic terror organization Al-Qaeda" or "Jihadist movement" all to scare you and make the association. They show you footage of all these dastardly acts while they say these buzzwords.

Quite frankly it's almost like those sermons I've heard, but on the flip-side of the coin. But I'm starting to see the similiarity here. Don't underestimate Pavlovian conditioning. They don't call it classical conditioning for nothing.

A lesson I never forgot

Up to this day, I still remember how my lecturer demonstrated it five years ago once in class, this was during the first classes of Psychology 101.

He asked us to participate in an experiment, he will tell us the result and the purpose later. He instructed us each to draw four large circles in a clover-leaf pattern on a piece of paper. After that, we were to start making as many dots within the first circle when he said "start" and stop doing it when he said "stop."

So it began, when he said "start." After a brief moment, he slammed the table not to loudly and said "stop." Now bear in mind we had no idea what he was up to, he never told us what the experiment was about. HE NEVER TOLD US WE WERE BEING CONDITIONED. After it's done he asked us to count how many dots there were in the circle and to write the number next to the first circle.

We did this excercise twice more, some of us noticed we were getting better at making the dot, but none of us realised he slammed the table only when he instructed us to stop. If we did we were not conscious of it in the sense that it's conditioning. We thought it was for effect or emphasis.

On the last circle after we had started with the dots, he slammed the table after some moments have passed. But he didn't say stop. A lot of us had already stopped making dots when he said stop moments later.

Then he told us we had just participated in a classical conditioning experiment, a subject which we will cover in the following class. If we wanted to know more before then, it was on page so and so of our textbook. Class dismissed.

I never forgot that lesson. It was brilliant in it's subtlety. And the fact that he ran interference by asking us to count the dots. Oh, what a simple distraction!

* * * * *

Classical conditioning works. And if nothing, the experiment proves that you can be conditioned without you knowing if the source is a person or entity you trust, like your teacher or lecturer. Your religious leader or some other charismatic leader. Even the media.

And no, TC, we shouldn't look the other way when these things happen, these violence and terror. We should ask ourselves why are these people so angry to the point of pure idiocy. We should seek out the truth. Instead we are given bits and pieces of media spin about the issue. We make generalizations from the bits and pieces we are fed. Differentiate propaganda from fact.

PS, BaastetNoir -- I don't care about medieval history, when it comes to this issue. All the "civilized" world was more or less barbaric then. This is a current issue that's happening in at least a quarter of the muslim majority nations, if it has any links to history it won't be any longer than the past 100 years.

Nakash -- It can work on people too, not just rats or animals. No joke, I'll let you know how I conditioned a person once without her realising it, if you're interested. I'll send it in a u2u as it has nothing to do with this thread and I've already made an example above about the lecture I attended.

[Edit - response to Nakash]

[edit on 11-2-2006 by Beachcoma]

Originally posted by masterp
I know the analogy is false, but I can not give you an example of Jesus with a bomb in his hand, because you will simply ignore it. I have to give you something that offends you in order to make you understand the problem better.

You don't get it. You cannot make me angry with offensive statements. You are impotent in this regard.

Originally by Freedom_for_sum
In any case; go ahead and show jesus having sex with his mother. I can simply change the channel!!! No need to burn down buildings and kill people over it.

Originally posted by masterp
Ok, you do not care about that. How about the american flag with a nazi symbol in it?

As a freedom loving combatant in the "war on terror" (I'm in the military) I can tell you that the state (condition) of freedom is much more important than the symbol of freedom; for with out freedom, and all its tenets (including freedom of expression), the symbol means nothing. Therefore; go ahead and befoul the flag; I would die fighting for your right to do so. Even though I may disagree with it.

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
Go ahead!! I don't care!! Depicting Jesus in those roles is no threat to me. It doesn't shake my beliefs. Again; I can simply change the url, the channel, or turn off the tv/computer!! It's MY CHOICE and I'm in control of those things that are important in my life. NOBODY else dictates to me what's important or how I'm going to feel. Muslims need to learn this!!

Originally posted by masterp
You simply do not care enough about religion, that's why.

It's not about whether I care about this, that, or the other. It's about whether you can make me angry with offensive statements. (You can't).

Originally posted by masterp
Many people before me and after me have made the same point: it is not religion that causes the bombings, it is people.

So you're saying that if the 911 hijackers were Christian that they still would have attacked? Are you saying that if those angry riotous Muslims were Budhists they still be angry and riot and burn buildings and call for death to those publishing offensive cartoons?

Originally posted by masterp
The mistake you do, and many others do, is to think about a religion as the problem instead of thinking bout the people as the problem.

So if I understand you correctly: (and only as an example) It's not the ideology of skinheads and white separatists that blacks should not mix with whites and all Jews should be killed; but rather, it's the skinheads and white separatists themselves? It's not the ideology of Islam but rather, the Muslims themselves? I have extreme difficulty separating the people commiting the acts of "terror" from their ideology.

We don't come out of the womb with ideology. Racism, hatred, and intolerance are learned behaviors and usually taught through ideology. You get rid of the ideology, you get rid of those things that are taught by the ideology.

Originally posted by masterp
And before you say "I do not do such a thing", let me remind you something George Bush said: "if you are not with us, you are with them". By using this line of thought, if you do not care about Muslims being offended by the "cartoons", then you are ok with it.

I am having difficulty folowing your logic here. Are you asking whether I care that Muslims are offended? If so; the answer is no. I could even care less. What I do care about is the violence they are commiting.

Originally posted by masterp
But it is illogical to say "arab muslim children are abused, therefore when they grow up they become terrorists". Do you have a study to support your claims? do you have an example?

Watch the two clips of the boys and tell me this isn't abuse: (scroll down to the bottom)

times.discovery.com...#

Please explain where the one young boy learned his intolerant ideas about women and going to hell?

Originally posted by masterp
And children in America and Europe are forced to learn about "Adam & Eve", the seven days of creation, etc. Maybe they are not forced so strongly, but the trend is to be a reborn Christian these days, isn't it?

I wasn't forced. And I am agnostic; not Christian. I don't force my children to go to church and learn Christianity. And there is no requirement in Christianity to memorize the bible.

Originally posted by masterp
You attribute economic facts on biology/race and not on history/sociology.

Not on race; on an ideology (Islam); at least the way it's applied in Islamic nations.

Originally posted by masterp
Let me give you an example to show you how wrong you are:

In the year 500 BC, most of Europe was in primitive state, with little or no written records. At the same time, Greece and Italy had developed a culture 'millenia ahead' of those people in England, Germany and the northen states.

Did that mean that Anglosaxons/Germans/Nordics etc were inferior? 2500 years later and the situation is reversed: European south is poor and does not produce any of the consumer goods you mention, whereas European North is rich and has a production of cars, airplanes, and anything you can imagine.

So, by this analogy, are you saying islam is in the dark ages? We might be in agreement there.

Originally posted by masterp
Turkey is actually 4 countries:

1) Istanbul: a huge city with 20 million people, most of them poor.
2) the western shore up to Ankara: situation similar to rest of western Europe.
3) the east part: primitive state; villages do not have electricity, computers are something they have never seen, and young daughets that had affairs are publically slaughtered by their fathers with the concesus of the local authorities.
4) the Kurdish part: same as (3), but with different culture.

...and you're calling me ignorant?

Originally posted by masterp
a) what is humorous in the picture of Mohammed with a bomb in his turban.

It's satire--not necesariily humorous. I find Muslims reaction to the cartoons somewhat humorous; as well as pathetic.

Originally posted by masterp
b) why those "cartoons" where printed in a newspaper.

Because newpapers print satire

Originally posted by masterp
c) why all these months there was no problem (the "cartoons" were published in September), and the problem is now.

That's a question for the Muslims.

Editted for premature posting before finishing

[edit on 12-2-2006 by Freedom_for_sum]

11 people killed over this. When will the violence stop? 11 Human beings who had little if anything in the slightest to do with this just died. Am I the only one outraged?

Here is a good resource >> www.zombietime.com...

The Jollen-Posten Cartoons >>
www.zombietime.com...

Here are new cartoons >> www.zombietime.com...

I agree with the views posted here >> face-of-muhammed.blogspot.com...

____

And check out what 'they' have done as well :

Anti-Semitic cartoons from contemporary Arab media.

Major Anti-Semitic Motifs in Arab Cartoons

First off, Beachcoma, you'll see that I usually type "Imam" but you'll also notice that the keyboard is not my friend. I don't catch all of my typos, only some of them. Thanks for the hand, but I have it under control.

Thank you, Beachcoma, for the very long but interesting read. Honestly, it had little meat, and I almost wonder if you weren't trying to see if I am skimming again!

Thanks for the lesson on conditioning, but I am well aware of such actions and concepts. I see it going on all the time, both within my own country and without it. I, too, had psychology classes; you don't excape the clutches of higher education without them. Still thank you.

Speaking of conditioning, that is a normal line of conditioning the U.S. is fed nowadays; you might have been subjected to it, too, by the question you ask. "Why don't we try and firgure out what has caused them to behave as they do?" I don't feel the need todo such contemplation as such activities have been going on for decades, now. Even before their attacks on us (I mean back in the days of TWA being known as "Travelling With Arabs") Israel was attacked viciously on hours after her birth. As a matter of fact, the main reason the West has had as little interference from the Islamic world as it has is because of the Caliphate being dismantled by the Turks, and the division of the Arabic world into several states. While the other religions are abused by others, they do not behave in such manner. While nations like mine and Israel allow others to worship as they see fit, Islamic nations are much less tolerant. See what would happen to you, for example, if you were to pull out teh Bible and start reading it in public in Saudi Arabia.
You ask why it is not pointed out that the terrorists are "Packistani terrorists", or "Saudi Arabian terrorists"; these people do not do these things in the name of Packistan or Saudi Arabia, but allah. When someone wanders in to a coffee shop in Tel Aviv and evilly slaughters innocent people, he does not first mutter, "Syria Akbar!" The president of Packistan is under constant threat of assassination, and this is not because he love freedom of speech and is tolerant of other beliefs. The Saudi government is also under constant threat of upheavel, and it isn't from those who demand more freedom of speech for loony cartoonists who push the envelope of decency and good taste. Nope, these people have something else in common, and a psychology class and a rambling about how you attended a couple sermons you thought were fringe, will change this.

Still, I thank you for the reply. I really did enjoy it.

Originally posted by masterp
I know the analogy is false, but I can not give you an example of Jesus with a bomb in his hand, because you will simply ignore it. I have to give you something that offends you in order to make you understand the problem better.

That would be a totally bogus and fake cartoon... s fake as if it had Buddah in it... neither Jesus or Buddah ever called for the death of anyone... but Mohamed and Allah DO... they call for the death of Jews, Christians and all other "dorty Infidels"... its not anyones fault but their own...its their belief and religion, not anyone elses... you have to deal with what you believ in... can;'t whinne about it ervytime things don't go your way...

TC,

Yeah it was a bit long winded, but I figured giving those stories about my personal experiences were important in the point I was making. I see a lot of bigoted coments and prejudiced remarks on these boards of late about muslims. Being a muslim myself I feel a reaction against it in me. So I wanted to show how this sort reactions have been manipulated by The Powers That Be, whoever they are.

I do admit there are these crazies going around blowing themselves to splits in the name of Allah, I just don't like seeing that associated with the whole of the muslim world.

There is a submission by someone else pending on ATSNN that talks about a rally being organized by muslims to protest and condemn these extremists. It's been there quite a while. It's still pending. It's like media blackout. When we do speak out against it the story gets dismissed.

Then there's another thread somewhere talking about Hindus and Muslims protesting Feb 14 which I think is silly and a non-issue by the way, but it's conveniently left out the Hindus and it's now up to page 5, ignorance not denied.... sigh. Sensationalism wins.

I thought that by showing my own personal experiences being duped by rhetoric I can show that we all make this mistake, no matter how smart we think we are I'm just saying we identify negative things so easily in others, we often fail to see our own mistakes.

I hope you're not pulling my leg or being sarcastic about enjoying it. I took a while to write that It's by no means "the solution" - just an analysis that maybe could do a little condensing

Thanks for the input though, I'll include the dismantling of the caliphate angle in my next analysis in skunkworks.

[Edit - extra orphaned word]

[edit on 12-2-2006 by Beachcoma]

The evolution of man is limited, where he/she revolts against
something idiotic or hurts their values -but the education
of the high intellect surely would know the real meaning
of expressing and delivering one's own harsh steps can
be delivered much much differently-not by a cartoon.

The masses need many other things that the world should
know by now- medicines, foods, fresh fruits,trade.etc.
A Stable environment,safety.

If I say I enjoyed your writing, I enjoyed your writing.
You write in paragraph form and not a bullet-line quote with bullet-line response. Very good!

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
You don't get it. You cannot make me angry with offensive statements. You are impotent in this regard.

I just wanted to pop in here and say that for the first time I can remember, I agree with a LOT of what you're saying!

Just imagine if we all actually took responsibility for our own feelings and TOOK BACK THE POWER we have freely given to others to offend us. Imagine if we said, "Nothing you say can offend me because I am secure in who I am and your opinion is NOT more important than mine"!

Imagine what would happen in the world right now in an instant.

Freedom_for_sum refuses to give that power away, as do I. It's not really that hard to do once the decision is made to do so.

But no... people need to maintain that illusion of control they have by giving this power away. See, if you can be offended, then you can say:

"Hey! Stop that! That offends me and I want you to stop. I want to control what you're doing. Because what you do controls how I feel. You control my feelings. So behave the way I want you to so I won't feel that way. And if you don't, I will make a big stink."

We can BE IN control of how we feel.
OR
We can have the illusion of FEELING IN control of how others behave.

It's our choice.

OK people, here's a New Twist.

Cartoon editor Fleming Rose and the tentacles of PNAC

It turns out the editor who originally publshed the "offensive" Muslim cartoons is a disciple of Daniel Pipes and the "clash of civilizations" theory put out by Project for a New American Century. PNAC is the outfit that called for a "Pearl Harbor event' in order to initiate a global war against the Muslim world.

"Agents of certain persuasion" are behind the egregious affront to Islam in order to provoke Muslims, Professor Mikael Rothstein of the University of Copenhagen told the BBC. The key "agent" is Flemming Rose, the cultural editor of JP, who commissioned cartoonists to produce the blasphemous images and then published them in Denmark's leading morning paper last September.

The International Herald Tribune, which reported on the offensive cartoons on January 1, noted that even the liberalism of Rose had its limits when it came to criticism of Zionist leaders and their crimes. Rose also has clear ties to the Zionist Neo-Cons behind the "war on terror."

Rose traveled to Philadelphia in October 2004 to visit Daniel Pipes, the Neo-Con ideologue who says the only path to Middle East peace will come through a total Israeli military victory. Rose then penned a positive article about Pipes, who compares "militant Islam" with fascism and communism.

In April 2003, President George W. Bush nominated the rabid anti-Muslim Pipes to the board of the United States Institute of Peace, a congressionally sponsored think tank dedicated to "the peaceful resolution of international conflicts."

Well, thats so Nice.

First we have Links with the Editor of this Danish Newspaper with the Bilderbergs - now also with the Project for the New American Century?

Mister Daniel Pipes rings a Bell to anyone?

Well, he's your Averege neo-conservative, orientalist, extreme right-wing Zionist who often expresses Islamophobic statements (and he's not Alone!) who wrote Books like, Militant Islam Reaches America, In the Path of God, Slave Soldiers and Islam. So I guess he is the Right Guy to start this "Clash of the Civilizations" right?

You know what he Said in one post-September 11, 2001 interview:

"What we need to do is inspire fear, not affection."

Nice guy ey?

[edit on 13/2/06 by Souljah]

Oh puhleeeze. "A disciple of Pipes"? Come on now, somebody wants us to believe that a Danish newspaper official is a "disciple" of a certain neocon.

He may have views on Pipes that again, may be positive. It simply doesn't matter. The cartoon sure did contain certain degree of contempt towards islam, the thing is, so what. I'm not a fan of neocons and I'm not a fan of islam. When somebody publishes wild cartoons of George W Bush or Mohammed, so be it.

is it so unusal to you,

that a danish newspaper interviews and/ or prints articles of columnists which are counter-terrorism analysts, and scholars of Middle Eastern history, - like Daniel Pipes, who is author or co-author of 18 books, which have been translated into 19 language?

Where is the "conspiracy" ?


I am a lot more worried about the "friendly people" behind the organisatiion of the demonstration in Great Britain last Saturday, which is said to be organized by The Muslim Association of Britain (MAB) which promotes itself as the 'moderate' voice of Islam.

But The Daily News in UK reports, that the Muslim campaigners behind the mass rally in Trafalgar Square have close links to Islamic terror groups:

Terror link of 'moderate' Muslims at London rally

However, Labour MP Louise Ellman said the MAB was an ‘extremist’ group whose members repeatedly advocated suicide bombings in Israel.

. “Leading members of MAB have indicated their links with Hamas and their support for suicide bombings abroad. It is not tenable for a group to support suicide bombings in another country while expecting to be seen as moderate in this country.”

Mike Whine, of the Community Security Trust, which monitors anti-Semitic behaviour, said: “The leading members have close links with the Muslim Brotherhood and have been active in anti-Jewish propaganda.

We are worried about their increasing influence within the Muslim community.”

Azzam al-Tamimi - a Palestinian described yesterday by the MAB as one of its leading political thinkers - caused outrage 18 months ago when he told the BBC he would willingly carry out a suicide bombing in Israel. “Sacrificing myself for Palestine is a noble cause,” he said. “It is the straight way to pleasing God and I would do it if I had the opportunity.”

Last year, five MAB members were made trustees of the re-opened Finsbury Park Mosque, North London, which was closed in 2003 because of the activities of its [color]imam Abu Hamza. *)

One trustee, Mohammed Kassem Sawalha, was named in a U.S. court case as a former senior Hamas commander responsible for terrorist activities in the West Bank in the 1990s. He is a former MAB president who admits he still supports Hamas.

MAB leader Anas al-Tikriti is the son of Osama al-Tikriti, leader of the Muslim Brotherhood in Iraq.

The organisation has strong historic links with Al Qaeda and other terror groups, including Islamic Jihad, which was behind the 1981 killing of Egyptian president Anwar Sadat.

*) imam Abu Hamza: ATS: Abu Hamza Found Guilty of Incitement to Murder



[edit on 13-2-2006 by Riwka]

Maybe what Souljah is trying to say is that the editor mentioned might have his(her?) believes influenced by Mr. Pipes' own somewhat anti-Islam views. It does look like a connection.

This thread is falling prey to political labeling. It stops now.
If needed, please review this link and discuss the subject.

For your reading pleasure:

This trend is the unmitigated and obnoxiously repetitive insertion of "the Neo-Cons are all crooks/murderers" and "the bleeding heart Liberals are all traitors" and many variations thereof in threads that have NOTHING to do with either of those comments.

This is a "slick" way to hi-jack a thread and turn a good conversation into yet another tiresome political bickering match. I say "slick" because it doesn't violate the TAC directly.

Additionally, the never ending debate/sniping between the Liberals and Conservatives is NOT ATS subject matter PERIOD. The Administrators and owners of this site have bent over backwards to give the membership a place to have those arguments, P@ATS, a unique and COMPLETE message board with all the bells and whistles.

I know a certain amount of political infusion is unavoidable in many conversations, that's fine. The rational input of a political perspective or ideal is a normal course of discussion. The insertion of anti-liberal/conservative diatribe in a discussion about another subject is NOT fine. The insertion of pro-liberal/conservative diatribe in a discussion about another subject is NOT fine.

www.abovetopsecret.com...

Heh. Funny thing is Muslims are blaming Europe, Israel, and America for the cartoons and about to start a riot in those regions when every single non-Islamic nation in the world seem's to have published the cartoons:

face-of-muhammed.blogspot.com...

Another bit of proof this is about holy war. All of Latinamerica is Christian, there are hundreds of millions of Christians in Asia, there are Jews everywhere outside of the middle East (excluding Israel of course. Jews are unsurprisingly banned in several of the gulf states. Not too many. Same for Christians), Christians in Oceania, Africa,you name it. Why the obsession over whether Europe, America, or Israel publish the cartoons? Well I know why- because Islamic Eschatology has as a prime goal the forceful conversion of Europe and a reactionary anti-Mohammed cartoon is a stumbling block in the welfare Imam's goals. Israel and America are "the enemy" which needs to pay for their "crimes". My hypothesis over why the Islamic world is obsessed with those regions. Or it could be because we are the Bloc which prevents the Dhimmitude fantasy from ever occuring

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
I just wanted to pop in here and say that for the first time I can remember, I agree with a LOT of what you're saying!

Thanks BH; but if you go back and read some of the posts, I think you'd see that we agree on other things as well.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
"Nothing you say can offend me because I am secure in who I am and your opinion is NOT more important than mine"!

Just a minor correction here: There are alot of things that can offend me; it's how I react to being offended that defines the difference here. I choose to react in ways where I am in control of my emotions; not someone else.

Probably just semantics anyway. Thanks for the support BH

BTW: Quite an impressive accumulation of points!!

My question is: What is it about the roiting angry Muslims that renders them incapable of this very basic, yet important, psycological state of mind?


[edit on 13-2-2006 by Freedom_for_sum]

Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
My question is: What is it about the roiting angry Muslims that renders them incapable of this very basic, yet important, psycological state of mind?

Let me venture a guess -- is it a combination of daily indoctrination of 'Israel and America are "the enemy" which needs to pay for their "crimes"' as Nakash has mentioned coupled with America's foreign policy that in their indoctrinated eyes confirms said indoctrination?

And knowing full well how powerful and practically impossible it would be to beat America is, this seems to them somewhat unfair -- perhaps like bullying even? Or outright oppression at worst?