I wouldn't want you to leave the folks on this board with the impression that your pm explained anything more than your post, except for three additional points you found significant: (1) you contend that all religions are responsible for bloody outrages, and (2) you take exception to your conclusion that my posts indicate a belief that Islam has generated more than its share of terrorists; (3) you're an atheist.

You're welcome to your opinions and your convictions. I don't think Buddhists have much of a history of terrorism. I also take exception to the idea that responding to terrorism is itself terrorism. To me that is a twisted doctrine that gives terrorism a moral "pass." Just my opinion.

 

No Mav, talking about these things brings out the myth and the truth. If you can't talk about it you don't learn. Remember, there are some pretty intellegent people out there. You don't learn by osmosis. To dispel rumors you have to know about them.

Cheers

Jeff

 

Anthrax RULES!!

Oh wait...never mind.

 

[QUOTE]Originally posted by 2x6spds
[B]I wouldn't want you to leave the folks on this board with the impression that your pm explained anything more than your post, except for three additional points you found significant: (1) you contend that all religions are responsible for bloody outrages, and (2) you take exception to your conclusion that my posts indicate a belief that Islam has generated more than its share of terrorists; (3) you're an atheist.

 

I can't believe I am getting involved in a political post here!

I would wager that almost every mainstream religions have been used over time as the catalyst for bloodshed. That is not a criticism of the religions themselves, simply the people who have used them accordingly.

The posts over the past month have at times been quite unkind to the Islamic faith. We don't have to go that far back in history to see the Christian faith involved in less than peaceful ventures. Even today, the secular unrest in Ireland is a serious problem.

Even buddhism, which is about the most peaceful religion, is not immune fom that. Both Sri Lanka and India have had serious problems with Buddhist extremists. The violence they commit is antithesis to the teachings of the religion itself but that has not stopped them.

Let us not confuse extremists using religion as being representative of the mainstream.

On the other hand, why have these people found it necessary to resort to extremism? I would wager it is not something most people do because it is fun.

Those of us who live in western societies have no idea how fortunate we are. I've been to Beirut. I've been to Ambon. Go youself and see if you retain your Western concepts of right and wrong which so many of you profess so freely at the moment.

 

I think this thread is starting to head in the wrong direction. Please stay on topic and please remember the Forum Rules. Politics and Religion topics and posts are not allowed.

Everyone knows what will happen if this continues.

Thank you.

 

Hi Bernie

You said, "On the other hand, why have these people found it necessary to resort to extremism? I would wager it is not something most people do because it is fun."

Is it something we did?

When you say "resort to extremism" are you referring to terrorism, like flying airliners into office buildings? Disseminating anthrax? Blowing up US embassies?

Isn't anyone watching the news?

 

The terrorists have striken this thread!! And they're polluting it with brown stinky stuff. I've got to get my Haz Mat suit on to wade through this stuff. Are all of you guys on the same side or what?

Take a drive and air it out.

 

G'day 2 X 6 spd

I can't believe we are debating this. If I respond directly to your first question, I am going to be painted as anti-semite and you know me so you know that simply is not the case. If anything, the little island country I come from has much to thank Israel for in terms of defense assistance and expertise, particularly in its formative years. So, on that basis, I will decline.

Rather, let me approach it in a different way. Here is a good example of a very current issue. The United States government has recently withdrawn its freeze on arms sales to Indonesia because the new president in Indonesia was forward in condemning the attacks. It is also likely that the IMF will be more generous in a number of respects.

Meanwhile, the Indonesians continue to burn Australian and American flags, they continue to slaughter christians in Ambon while pretending that they are doing nothing to support the Islamic factions, they continue to undermine the efforts on the UN in East Timor after slaughtering thousands before Australia went in.

But the USA is still going to sell them more arms. If there is any danger to Australia, it comes from that direction. Australia has been one of the strongest advocates for the USA over the past decade on nearly all issues. If Indonesia ever becomes aggressive towards Australia, it will be with arms from the USA. At that time, will it be something you did?

I am not even going to dignify the second question.

My apologies to the moderators. This post does indeed contain topics contrary to the forum rules. Perhaps the community here would be better off if this post was frozen.

 

Hello Bernie

I am not suggesting that US policy is without error, or that it is not, on occasion, downright stupid. It is frequently both and worse. US accommodation to the criminal regime in Jakarta is just one example. Indonesia has certainly engaged in organized, governmentally sanctioned terrorism and murder. The poor folks of East Timor just one example.

I am curious as to whether al Jareez will characterize the Palestinian Authority and Pakistani government as "terrorist" as a result of the recent mob violence which was violently suppressed resulting in deaths of demonstrators?

Anyway, don't hesitate to call me if you're stuck in LAX anytime. I look forward to lunching with you again.