Letters to the Editor
-
denigrating?
that's worse than bombing them, shelling them, shooting them, raping them, and turning their towns and cities into churned up moon-scapes?
you bet it's gonna be hard to get a sympathetic ear east of jerusalem.
-
are you claiming, fightthetheocracy, that apart from Al Quaida there aren't any major problems with religious freedom
in the Moslem world. There are NO religiously free Moslem socieities by the standards which people in historically Christian socieities use to define religious freedom, nothing in the Islamic world comparable to Scandanavia for example, and even the "good ones" such as Turkey are equivalent in their levels of social/political relgious coercion to at least the most backward parts of the US.
-
@ anonymous
There are NO religiously free Moslem socieities by the standards which people in historically Christian socieities use to define religious freedom, nothing in the Islamic world comparable to Scandanavia for example, and even the "good ones" such as Turkey are equivalent in their levels of social/political relgious coercion to at least the most backward parts of the US.
I would draw you attention to Bosnia and Albania. Also, in the past, the Mughal Empire in India. A good time was had by all until the Christians showed up.
-
Bitter legacies, racial hatreds, religious righteousness...
I'm not a doctor, but would be terribly interested if anyone out there who IS a doctor or researcher has begun to study the potent release of brain chemicals involved in 'righteous anger,' be it cultural, religious, or oddly, something as unconnected as 'road rage.'
Bear with me here. . . : When one feels angrily that he/she is right and justified in his/her action, there seems to be a definite chemical RUSH - - - flooding of the brain with chemicals like adrenaline and other opiates- - - that makes the political/religious position so much more addictive. Is this a cleansing feeling that is enhanced by the denial of the mortifying physical self, the repression of the sexual self, or the denigration of the forbidden (like the unveiled woman's face)? When one reads bits of the book most Islamic radicals quote with assurance, Sayyid Qtub’s, 'Social Justice in Islam' (1948), he says that "The greater jihad is the struggle against ONE'S OWN IMPURITY AND BASE DESIRES, while the lesser jihad is for the expansion of Islam."
Pardon me for sounding like Freud, but I see this self-righteousness everywhere, with the hatred building up to incendiary levels. From the big 4WD pickup driver who hates my Democratic bumper-sticker and drives dangerously and aggressively close to my rear bumper, to the suicide bomber who prepares for his/her final mission with the righteousness of a newly minted angel. Thank God I see few of the latter (the suicide bombers) except on TV and in interviews, but I see plenty of the former, and common psychological threads in each of them.
There must be a way to lead people out of this wilderness of hatred. I think psychologists and sensitive doctors can help. I realize that we'll have to wait until a rational person gets into the White House to get weight behind this idea, but might there be another way to thread this needle?
Comments?
-
Actually, the roof IS on fire
"It would be perfectly all right to talk about Muslim terrorists, but calling them Islamic terrorists or Islamic fascists implies that the religion of Islam is somehow essentially connected to those extremist movements."
The Muslim prophet Mohammed would almost certainly disagree with Mr. Cole. Mohammed organized or led over 65 campaigns against his neighbors during his lifetime, many of them at night, and most of them resulting in the robbery, arson, and extortion of peaceful communities. One ended with the mass murder of 900 men and boys, personally supervised by Mohammed, and the sex-enslavement of the women and children. Much of the Koran deals with rules for the distribution of loot from these violent robberies, a solid portion of which was always given to Mohammed for his personal use (on Allah's command, of course).
Mohammed was quite definite about the usefulness of violence and terror in his religious pronouncements. For example:
“When the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever you find them — seize them, besiege them, and make ready to ambush them” [Koran 9:5]
“When you encounter infidels, strike off their heads” [Koran 47:4].
“I [Muhammad] have been made victorious through terror” [Bukhari B52N220].
These are only a few of the violent passages in the Koran, and are actually some of the *least* viscerally repugnant. Further, jihad is mentioned over 200 times in the most reliable collection of Islamic hadith, Bukhari. Each and every time, it is with reference to the robbery, murder, and subjugation of infidels -- never once the "inner struggle" you're always hearing about. (In fact, the idea of "inner struggle" as the primary meaning of Jihad has been repeatedly debunked by multiple Islamic clerics and on Islamic websites).
As a writer publishing on Victor Davis Hanson's website points out, "No “radical” Muslim — including head-chopping Zarqawi — made up these verses and others like them. They are understood to be the everlasting words of God and His prophet."
The smoke blowing here is from Mr. Cole as well. While demonizing all Muslims isn't the way to go about defeating Islamic terrorism, ignoring the fact that it is, in fact, solidly grounded in the texts of the ideology and the personal behavior of its founder isn't either. Certainly, the victims of the over 10,000 Islamic terror attacks since 9/11 wouldn't agree with Mr. Cole -- nor would the millions killed to the screams of "Allahu Akbar" in the 1400 years since Mohammed emerged from his cave.
-
bullshit LeCastor, the Christians may have been worse but REAL FREEDOM as you define it for yourself is a modern western invention
which the Islamic world has not imported on a large scale.
-
@Kasimira
Mohammed organized or led over 65 campaigns against his neighbors during his lifetime, many of them at night, and most of them resulting in the robbery, arson, and extortion of peaceful communities. One ended with the mass murder of 900 men and boys, personally supervised by Mohammed, and the sex-enslavement of the women and children.
Good point. I would add that's chump change compared to the pillage and rapine narrated in the Bible. 900? Try thousands. Those holy, God-inspired Hebrews cut a bloody swathe for a hell of a long time, burning down villages, stealing and destroying goods, slaughtering everyone except the young virgins, whom GOD told them to take as sex slaves.
So maybe Mohammed didn't come up with the idea on his own? Maybe he got it from that book he was so keen on improving, whaddaya think?