There is much sarcasm there. However, it stands up better to scrutiny than "Hey .. what's your problem ? the guy was an American Jew ( from Israeli decent as well ..) he deserved to die ... ..
However, you have to read it all before you come back and tell me it is full of it (and there is a LOT there). I just heard this guy speak and the cse is made quite clearly that Islam is not based on peace, and Allah is not the same as the christian God. If you don't care, then don't read it
<hr></blockquote>
I have read the source you have heard. Here are my comments:
At first I was laughing so sarcastically. Then as I read further I realized there is some truth in the claims your source makes. Unfortunately he does manage to twist things around and you personally would believe him due to your lack of knowledge and due to the fact that evil includes and good excludes. That is the terrorist Bin Laden represents 1,000,000,000 muslims and unfortunately I can not give you an example of a good muslim who you would agree with, again for the lack of your knowledge.
I have compiled many paragraphs in which the author's claim are easily refuted for those who are without knowledge, and another set that can not be refuted without compiled cross reference since from my experience with your posts on AI states that ONLY Judeo-Christian references are credible.
Such a discussion should be dedicated to another thread titled "Is Islam Evil?" with what you provided as a reference put for everyone's scrutiny. That is, if you really believe that "Allah" is "Satan".
<a href="http://www.yahoodi.com/peace/arabs.html"; target="_blank">I also direct you to another link which holds similar views only about 100,000,000 Arabs rather than 1,000,000,000 Muslims, courtesy of PC^KILLA.</a>
There is more than what you have provided in the above link all summed up in one page.
[quote]
As for the terrorists, I just hope that their own so claimed just rules be applied on them and get them beheaded, only this time in public and for the rest of the world to watch.
Throw that stone, hey throw that stone. Oops, I guess because you are not religious this does not apply to you?
<hr></blockquote>
It Applies to me if I wanted to prosecute them according to my rules. But I asked for their rules to be applied on them which calls for beheading those who kill the innocent.
In your sarcastic statement however you have labeled 1,000,000,000 (and growing, which will contribute to your fear even more) individuals regardless of race, ethnicity, nationality, or even secular believes. Do you want to face your solely biblical GOD with a hand that typed what might contribute to more hatred afterward and lead to the killing of one innocent man out of the 1,000,000,000? Or let us bring them down to 100,000,000? It says in the Bible that that who kills an innocent soul is like killing all humanity, you could correct me here with your vast knowledge in this field.
[quote]
A valid fear. However I doubt that you could get any farther than:
As for the terrorists, I just hope that their own so claimed just rules be applied on them and get them beheaded, only this time in public and for the rest of the world to watch.
<hr></blockquote>
Yes it is a valid fear. Reasoning tells me that if they claim to be muslims, then they should suffer the consequences and not I or you. No body has forced Islam unto them. Certainly I did not, nor have you.
Same reasoning applies when I ask you to turn the other cheek for the terrorist. But then, that is another topic that might fit in your religious thread regarding the teachings of the Bible.
As a Christian, I hope you take more moderate peaceful approach in life because deep inside you there should be a realization that vengeance is better practiced by GOD [by the way of practicing His laws].
Killing of the innocent in the middle east by muslims has nothing to do with Islam, just like the killing of the innocent by christians in Africa has nothing to do with Christianity, and the killing of the innocent [I should add bystander] by Israeli army in the OT has nothing to do with Judiasm.
---
Consider seeing a smile after each paragraph above, I was asked by the server to remove them because they exceeded a certain predefined number.
[quote] fr. Jakkorz:evil includes and good excludes <hr></blockquote>this is wrong, evil excludes that is why it is evil, it negates the otherness of others through exclusion and negation. . . . I can't stress this enough!!
OBL was evil because the ideas he promulgated negated the reality of others: negated their Being, a reality that necessarily transcends the human definitions of what they, as others, are.
pard' the arrogance of 'knowing' here but:
These are the two things that make up evil:
1> exclusion and negation of all that is other (usually done through catagorization (definition) of the other's transcendence)
and
2> Anger is evil, and Evil is anger (as the Dalai Lama says)
(note; there is no mysterious power here, and yet it doesn't deny evilness, it just grounds it in the multifarious world of human behavior)
<strong>this is wrong, evil excludes that is why it is evil, it negates the otherness of others through exclusion and negation. . . . I can't stress this enough!!
OBL was evil because the ideas he promulgated negated the reality of others: negated their Being, a reality that necessarily transcends the human definitions of what they, as others, are.
pard' the arrogance of 'knowing' here but:
These are the two things that make up evil:
1> exclusion and negation of all that is other (usually done through catagorization (definition) of the other's transcendence)
and
2> Anger is evil, and Evil is anger (as the Dalai Lama says)
(note; there is no mysterious power here, and yet it doesn't deny evilness, it just grounds it in the multifarious world of human behavior)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the logic in explanation.
I totally agree with you in this logic and that this is how it should be. But I was talking about what it is in general, not what it should be.
With all misconceptions, misleadings, prejudices, etc. that we naturally possess as character traits, it is hard, therefore, to see what it should be rather that what it is. How can we resist a behavior or fight back a bad trait in which we, in general, fool ourselves of not possessing or deny that traits existence.
Again, I do understand what you have laid out above and I do agree with you in what have you logically explained.
[quote]Danny Pearl's execution is a recruitment video for savages. According to CBS News, the film is being distributed out of Saudi Arabia, our strategic partner for peace and the war on terrorism. The footage is titled "The Slaughter of the Spy-Journalist, the Jew Daniel Pearl." It must trip off the tongue better in Arabic.
Apparently the footage is very popular with Saudi college kids, high-school students, and other folks whose idea of downloading porn from the Internet involves getting the latest pictures of Americans and Jews being carved up like animals. So much for the idea that education is the solution to all social problems.
Dan Rather introduced the footage by saying, "Enemies of this country are spreading on the Internet a gruesome piece of propaganda: It is videotape of the execution of the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl."
Now, I realize I'm at least a week late in writing about this, but Dan Rather and the rest of the media are years behind schedule.
I think Rather and CBS were right for airing the video and I think the rest of the media is wrong for not following suit...<hr></blockquote>
<strong>Apparently the footage is very popular with Saudi college kids, high-school students, and other folks whose idea of downloading porn from the Internet involves getting the latest pictures of Americans and Jews being carved up like animals. So much for the idea that education is the solution to all social problems.</strong><hr></blockquote>I think it was scotthphd that posted this before, too.
Maybe I'm naive about the depths that their culture has sunk to, but I just find it hard to believe that college kids are really watching that and thinking it's cool.
I haven't watched it, but they actually show him being beheaded?
Sorry, but normal people, Saudi Arabian or not, just aren't going to see that and think it's a good thing. They usually engage in denial about what their terrorists do - like blaming Jews or Americans for 9/11.
I just don't believe that article's implication that it's popular among average Arabs. I think it would have the opposite effect. If it really is true, it's deeply ironic that the Muslim world thinks our culture is corrupt because of McDonalds and Baywatch.
<strong>I think it was scotthphd that posted this before, too. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I missed that. I saw the Best of the Web link which I read almost everyday too but I hadn't read that day. Then I quickly scanned his post and focused on The Atlantic Monthly piece.
Anyway, there's no doubt that this is a recruitment video. (Yes, I watched it. ) And there's also no doubt that the terrorists are having considerable success recruiting from the Saudi middle class. Look at the 9/11 terrorists. These were middle class, and in many cases, college-educated Saudis and Egyptians.
About being in denial about what terrorists do, well, that's why I watched it. Violence is so often used as a form of entertainment and yet so many are opposed to the airing of this. It's not that I don't understand the arguments against showing the video. It's just that there's a "disconnect" here. I think the murder of Danny Pearl needs to be seen. But it's truly awful.
<strong>I haven't watched it, but they actually show him being beheaded?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not like it is a straight and uncut shot of them decapitating Daniel Pearl. It apparently took them a minute or so to complete the job, so there are a couple of edits during that part of the video.
On one hand, the video is propaganda designed to scare the American people, which it will no doubt do. But then again, it *is* directed towards the American people, so we do have a right to see it.
Sure, it's a disturbing video, but I didn't find it as bad as it's been made out to be in this thread. He looked like he was dead when they began cutting his had off, so I don't think we're seeing the actual execution. Were he alive, it would have been a lot messier when cutting through the carotid arteries, but in the video, that isn't the case. Added to it the fact that the total running time where they're acually decapitating him totals about 3 seconds, it didn't affect me as much as it could have. I guess it takes a lot to really bother me...
On one hand, the video is propaganda designed to scare the American people, which it will no doubt do. But then again, it *is* directed towards the American people... </strong><hr></blockquote>
Not really. There's a lot of Arabic text for it to be directed at the American people.
[quote]<strong>It's not like it is a straight and uncut shot of them decapitating Daniel Pearl. It apparently took them a minute or so to complete the job, so there are a couple of edits during that part of the video.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Umm, the three seconds shows then finishing sawing off is head with a knife or something (I am not going to go back and look again) and then holding it up to the camera. He was likely already dead, but that does not make it less grotesque or sick.
[quote]<strong>On one hand, the video is propaganda designed to scare the American people, which it will no doubt do. But then again, it *is* directed towards the American people, so we do have a right to see it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, it is propaganda designed to show possible future terrorists that Amerians are running scared and are not safe in the world. Of course this will have the added "benefit" of scaring any American who sees it.
This is a heinous and barbaric video, and the way it is put together with music and flashes of supposed Israeli, American and UN "atrocities" it is definately made to bring sympathy to their cause and attract people to their cause. The last scene however shows you the mindset you are up against...
<strong>At first I was laughing so sarcastically. Then as I read further I realized there is some truth in the claims your source makes. Unfortunately he does manage to twist things around and you personally would believe him due to your lack of knowledge and due to the fact that evil includes and good excludes. That is the terrorist Bin Laden represents 1,000,000,000 muslims and unfortunately I can not give you an example of a good muslim who you would agree with, again for the lack of your knowledge.
I have compiled many paragraphs in which the author's claim are easily refuted for those who are without knowledge, and another set that can not be refuted without compiled cross reference since from my experience with your posts on AI states that ONLY Judeo-Christian references are credible.
Such a discussion should be dedicated to another thread titled "Is Islam Evil?" with what you provided as a reference put for everyone's scrutiny. That is, if you really believe that "Allah" is "Satan".</strong><hr></blockquote>
I would start the thread, but I do not think that many would be interested in me starting another religious thread right now. I anyone disagress with this then I would be more than happy to oblige, or you could do this as well.
Lets just say that he makes a very strong case for his points, and that in light of recent events I am n=more inclined to believe that radical islam is not the peaceful religion that it is made out to be in the media. That is not to say that Muslims are evil people, just like Germans were not evil, but the radical Muslems that practice Islam as it is written in the Koran and the Kadish(?) or in the case of Germans that were Nazis there is an obvious disconnect there.
[quote]<strong>Yes it is a valid fear. Reasoning tells me that if they claim to be muslims, then they should suffer the consequences and not I or you. No body has forced Islam unto them. Certainly I did not, nor have you.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is no necesarily true. The muslim holy texts have very strong statements about those who do not follow their religion in this world, not in the afterlife. Some point to Christianity and say, well that is a very intolerant religion that calls for the death of those that don't follow it, but it is quite different with fundamentalist Islam.
I will quote another article I have read recently that sums up what I mean.
While the Arab-Israeli conflict pits Moslems against Jews, it concerns Christians as well, because ultimately, it is a conflict over revelation ? the revelation of the Bible and that of the Koran. By opposing the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel, the Moslems effectively reject the Divine promises of the Jewish ? and Christian ? Bible, and replace them with another, diametrically opposed doctrine ? the Koran.
The Moslem Palestinians have tried to make allies of the powerful Christian Churches, to win international support for their aspirations to statehood. But history shows that the Moslems, when in power, have not been sympathetic at all to Christians. For instance, one of the most popular figures in Arab folklore is Saladin, the Moslem-Arab warrior who defeated the Crusaders in the Holy Land.
The Koran itself warns Moslems, ?Do not take Jews or Christians as your friends.? During the Arab conquests, Jews and Christians alike were massacred, and synagogues and churches destroyed. A Moslem phrase often quoted in this region is: ?On Saturday we kill the Jews and on Sunday we kill the Christians!?
In Islam, the world is divided between the believers and the infidels, between Dar al Islam (?the world of Islam?) and Dar al Harb (?the world of war?). All non-Moslems are included in the world of war, and thus, can be forced to accept Islam through Jihad, Holy War.
This theology enables us to understand the roots of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and should warn the Christian West about what power lies behind the attempts to divide the Land of Israel. This does not mean that Moslems are evil; but Christians should be aware that they are under a deceiving, evil influence and power ? that of Islam. Therefore, Islam as a power must be resisted.
[quote]<strong>Same reasoning applies when I ask you to turn the other cheek for the terrorist. But then, that is another topic that might fit in your religious thread regarding the teachings of the Bible.
As a Christian, I hope you take more moderate peaceful approach in life because deep inside you there should be a realization that vengeance is better practiced by GOD [by the way of practicing His laws].</strong><hr></blockquote>
Turning the other cheek does not mean allowing innocents to be slaughtered by zealots. I am not asking for someone to gie me a gun so I can go and kill "dirty Arabs" or something. However, Muslims live in this world and are under the law of this world and should be held accountable just as you and I are accountable. If you have read my other threads you will know that I do not call for me to be the instrument of God's vengence. Not once. But there is nothing wrong with wanting those guilty to pay for what they have done wrong. Nothing at all.
[quote]<strong>Killing of the innocent in the middle east by muslims has nothing to do with Islam, just like the killing of the innocent by christians in Africa has nothing to do with Christianity, and the killing of the innocent [I should add bystander] by Israeli army in the OT has nothing to do with Judiasm. </strong><hr></blockquote>
These statements are made with no links to actions. The last has been covered here quite a bit. The killing of innocents in the middle east, and the killing of innocents in Africa. Which circumstances are we speaking of? For example in Africa I have heard of the fighting in the Sudan where the Christians and Aminists have been put in slavery by the Northern Muslims.
Not really. There's a lot of Arabic text for it to be directed at the American people.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I can't read arabic, but they put Pearl's statement in English, and the list of demands at the end of the video was in English. They even tell you in English at the end that this scene will be repeated over and over again until their demands are met. If that isn't directed to us, who is it directed to? The 'other' Americans that have a military presence in the middle east?
I don't disagree that it is designed to rally people to their own cause, I was just more interested in pointing out specifically what it meant to the American people.
And at the end of the video, there are about 3 seconds where they are sawing off his head. There is a lot to cut through, so this would take a while. After the initial 3 seconds, they make a cut where the camera angle has changed, and his head is practically hanging by a thread. Then it would appear that they cut again quickly to his head being lifted and brought up towards the camera. So that's three edits so far in the final "scene" if you will.
So who knows just how long it took them to sever the entire head, I would guess based on how the camera angle changed, and knowing just how much they have to cut through, that it was probably around half a minute.
This doesn't seem to be his execution though. In the video, once they start cutting at his neck (I'm a licensed EMT, and we don't study as much as Doctors, but we know enough about the human body), Daniel Pearl already appears to be dead, based on his facial expression and lack of any resistance or signs of life. And as mentioned before, if he was alive and his cardiovascular system functioning, cutting the carotid artery would have been much messier.
So yeah, the video is designed to rally 'their' troops, but it is also clearly designed to influence the american people, else they wouldn't have gone through the added trouble of having produced the video with so much English. It was clearly intended for us to see it as well, which is my point.
Noah, that text that you quote is propaganda. Propaganda works by having the truth told in a way that distorts it dramatically till it is no longer true (such as Saladin was a killer of christians, true but he defended against the Crusades which were all about killing the Moslims...true but not true)
Jakorz, your post was very insightful, particularly here: [quote] With all misconceptions, misleadings, prejudices, etc. that we naturally possess as character traits, it is hard, therefore, to see what it should be rather that what it is. How can we resist a behavior or fight back a bad trait in which we, in general, fool ourselves of not possessing or deny that traits existence. <hr></blockquote>I appreciate that kind of straight forwardness.
I think, however, that what my previouse post was saying was not describing "what should be" but was saying what is. I was saying what I thought Evil is, and how it works and why it is bad.
Now, with my analysis, we can see that even we are partly evil whenever we rally against a person or group and constrict their transcendence with our ideas of what they are, such as people saying that all Moslems are blahblah, or all jews are etc etc... this is a tendency which I see as partly within all and everybody (though I wouldn't define anybody as being 'purely evil' and thus then act in a bad way myself)... anyway, just some thoughts.
I would hate to see a religion (set of ideas about how to act and what is true) create a following that excludes those that don't thnk the same idea.... that would be an evil way of acting . . . unfortunately that seems to be par for the course as far as 'religions' go.
also, an addendum to my definition of evil:
part two said Evil is anger, and anger is evil. the addition would say that hatred is a form of anger a form that works be acting out part one of my definition.
<strong>Noah, that text that you quote is propaganda. Propaganda works by having the truth told in a way that distorts it dramatically till it is no longer true (such as Saladin was a killer of christians, true but he defended against the Crusades which were all about killing the Moslims...true but not true)</strong><hr></blockquote>
But the question becomes who is doing the distorting. The post merely states that:
But history shows that the Moslems, when in power, have not been sympathetic at all to Christians. For instance, one of the most popular figures in Arab folklore is Saladin, the Moslem-Arab warrior who defeated the Crusaders in the Holy Land.
That is a fact. It is not a distortion. I see where your point is leading, but the deeper point here is that the Muslims of today are rallying around that figure still with the next phrase you see the outcome.
The Koran itself warns Moslems, ?Do not take Jews or Christians as your friends.? During the Arab conquests, Jews and Christians alike were massacred, and synagogues and churches destroyed. A Moslem phrase often quoted in this region is: ?On Saturday we kill the Jews and on Sunday we kill the Christians!?
Those were not massacred by Muslims defending their lands. They were killed by Islamic warriors conquering surrounding territories. And I should not have to point out that even I have heard the last phrase stated on the news and seen it written in other news sources. Sure it was not there for long and buried, but it was there. Do you deny that this is a rallying cry still for some of the more radical followers of Islam?
[quote]<strong>I think, however, that what my previouse post was saying was not describing "what should be" but was saying what is. I was saying what I thought Evil is, and how it works and why it is bad.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, I somewhat enjoyed your description as well.
[quote]<strong>Now, with my analysis, we can see that even we are partly evil whenever we rally against a person or group and constrict their transcendence with our ideas of what they are, such as people saying that all Moslems are blahblah, or all jews are etc etc... this is a tendency which I see as partly within all and everybody (though I wouldn't define anybody as being 'purely evil' and thus then act in a bad way myself)... anyway, just some thoughts.<hr></blockquote></strong>
No man is perfect. All people have some evil in them, I would be lying if I said otherwise about humans. Only one in the history of the world was perfect and he was the son of God. And he was also not a fan of "all Muslims are blahblah" type thinking either. In fact he not only advocated loving God, loving your neighbor as yourself (the golden rule), but he also took it a step further in Matthew 5:43-48.
43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
The Christian is not called to hate any, not even those that hate them. Unfortunately this is a tall order for any person and there have been many (during the crusades and the inquisition for some) who have lost sight of this important passage. I have not said, and do not want it to be construed here or anywhere that I think, that all Muslims are blahblah, or even that all followers of Islam are blahblah. However, there is a significant portion of them that are. When you have 1,000,000,000 Islamic people any portion over 1% is quite significant when they are willing to do what they have shown they are willing to do. And I bet that 5-10% of them may be at or near that line. that is a lot of people.
[quote]<strong>I would hate to see a religion (set of ideas about how to act and what is true) create a following that excludes those that don't thnk the same idea.... that would be an evil way of acting . . . unfortunately that seems to be par for the course as far as 'religions' go.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Question, if a religion is based on the tenet that there is only one God and any others are false does that make the religion evil just based on that fact according to your definition here?
[quote]<strong>also, an addendum to my definition of evil:
part two said Evil is anger, and anger is evil. the addition would say that hatred is a form of anger a form that works be acting out part one of my definition.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hatred is insidious, it destroys any that are consumed and run their life by it. Hatred is, according to the bible, as bad as the sin of murder. In fact it draws a direct parallel between the two. If you hate someone in your heart and only wish evil for them it is only a very short step between thoughts and actions. Hatred is indeed evil. I harbor no hatred for Muslims or even Islamic radicals. Fear, yes, concern, yes, anger even, yes. But hatred, no, that goes to far.
part two said Evil is anger, and anger is evil. the addition would say that hatred is a form of anger a form that works be acting out part one of my definition.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I can't tell you how much I disagree with this. You can love the wrong thing and there is evil in this world that should make one angry. Ephesians 4:26 says, "Be angry and yet do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger." (NASB) In other words, we should not harbor anger in our hearts. But that is different than simply declaring anger to be evil. Most anger is probably self indulgence but sometimes anger is the proper response. Even so, if we give it a home in our hearts, no matter how justified it initially was, it will eventually corrupt us.
I can't tell you how much I disagree with this. You can love the wrong thing and there is evil in this world that should make one angry. Ephesians 4:26 says, "Be angry and yet do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger." (NASB) In other words, we should not harbor anger in our hearts. But that is different than simply declaring anger to be evil. Most anger is probably self indulgence but sometimes anger is the proper response. Even so, if we give it a home in our hearts, no matter how justified it initially was, it will eventually corrupt us.
Good catch, I knew that even though I liked his description and saw where it was going that something sounded just this side of off. Anger unchecked and unbridled by our sin nature is definitely a sin. However even God is angered by things that occur in this world, and God is not capable of sin, therefore, all anger is not sin. However, God does not hate, and hate is a sin.
Some people should readed more about the Qur'an. Then they will realized on how foolish some of their comments are.
In Al Baqarah, paragraph 190.
It was stated there that in God's way you should have war against those who war against you, but you are told on not to go over the limit. And that God doesn't like those who had gone over the limit.
Note: What can be consider as gone over the limit? Having a war against people who don't war against you!
In Al Anfaal, paragraph 61.
It was stated there that if the enemy leaned toward peace, you should also leaned toward peace. And that God is all hearing and all knowing (God knows on who is only talking about peace but doesn't have a care for peace at all, and God also know those who truly WANTED peace but might not say anything at all).
So.... If one said that the lines in the Qur'an promote attack on people who are not fighting against you, and that it doesn't promote peace toward an enemy who wanted peace.
I have three words to say. That's a lie!
People... Please do some thinking here, we are being divided and manipulated to fight against each other.
As for the Daniel Pearl movie.
People... Does it ever came across in your mind that the movie is purporsely made up and then distribute to the public so that you will be upset and say nasty things? And that you will end up in a conflict with your own brothers?
digix... we know fully well that you are allways espousing a vast conspiracy . . . just answer me this one question: for you "they" are behind it all. are "they" jews?
Is that what grounds your ideas?
and another question... did you used to be on this board by the name of Naim?
------------
Noah, I'm glad to see that someone found a bible quote so that yu can justify my answer as not being right . . . and also the idea of religion as a god jeaulous of other gods meaning that that religion would be 'evil'
because yes, that's what I believe. If your idea of god is such that it excludes then your idea is 'evil'.
and yes, we can justify anger . . . but then again that is not being at the hieghth that an ethic with such demanding definitions as I have laid out would demand . . . .
Comments
<strong>I wonder how you all saw it if it's a RAM file? Just curious. I am not into watching death on tape.</strong><hr></blockquote>
RAM is a Real Audio file. You have to use the Real Player.
There is much sarcasm there. However, it stands up better to scrutiny than "Hey .. what's your problem ? the guy was an American Jew ( from Israeli decent as well ..) he deserved to die ... ..
All right, rhetoric to try and douse rhetoric.
Interesting reading for those that care. <a href="http://www.vicmord.com/newsletter/newsletterdir.html"; target="_blank">http://www.vicmord.com/newsletter/newsletterdir.html</a>;
However, you have to read it all before you come back and tell me it is full of it (and there is a LOT there). I just heard this guy speak and the cse is made quite clearly that Islam is not based on peace, and Allah is not the same as the christian God. If you don't care, then don't read it
<hr></blockquote>
I have read the source you have heard. Here are my comments:
At first I was laughing so sarcastically. Then as I read further I realized there is some truth in the claims your source makes. Unfortunately he does manage to twist things around and you personally would believe him due to your lack of knowledge and due to the fact that evil includes and good excludes. That is the terrorist Bin Laden represents 1,000,000,000 muslims and unfortunately I can not give you an example of a good muslim who you would agree with, again for the lack of your knowledge.
I have compiled many paragraphs in which the author's claim are easily refuted for those who are without knowledge, and another set that can not be refuted without compiled cross reference since from my experience with your posts on AI states that ONLY Judeo-Christian references are credible.
Such a discussion should be dedicated to another thread titled "Is Islam Evil?" with what you provided as a reference put for everyone's scrutiny. That is, if you really believe that "Allah" is "Satan".
<a href="http://www.yahoodi.com/peace/arabs.html"; target="_blank">I also direct you to another link which holds similar views only about 100,000,000 Arabs rather than 1,000,000,000 Muslims, courtesy of PC^KILLA.</a>
There is more than what you have provided in the above link all summed up in one page.
[quote]
As for the terrorists, I just hope that their own so claimed just rules be applied on them and get them beheaded, only this time in public and for the rest of the world to watch.
Throw that stone, hey throw that stone. Oops, I guess because you are not religious this does not apply to you?
<hr></blockquote>
It Applies to me if I wanted to prosecute them according to my rules. But I asked for their rules to be applied on them which calls for beheading those who kill the innocent.
In your sarcastic statement however you have labeled 1,000,000,000 (and growing, which will contribute to your fear even more) individuals regardless of race, ethnicity, nationality, or even secular believes. Do you want to face your solely biblical GOD with a hand that typed what might contribute to more hatred afterward and lead to the killing of one innocent man out of the 1,000,000,000? Or let us bring them down to 100,000,000? It says in the Bible that that who kills an innocent soul is like killing all humanity, you could correct me here with your vast knowledge in this field.
[quote]
A valid fear. However I doubt that you could get any farther than:
As for the terrorists, I just hope that their own so claimed just rules be applied on them and get them beheaded, only this time in public and for the rest of the world to watch.
<hr></blockquote>
Yes it is a valid fear. Reasoning tells me that if they claim to be muslims, then they should suffer the consequences and not I or you. No body has forced Islam unto them. Certainly I did not, nor have you.
Same reasoning applies when I ask you to turn the other cheek for the terrorist. But then, that is another topic that might fit in your religious thread regarding the teachings of the Bible.
As a Christian, I hope you take more moderate peaceful approach in life because deep inside you there should be a realization that vengeance is better practiced by GOD [by the way of practicing His laws].
Killing of the innocent in the middle east by muslims has nothing to do with Islam, just like the killing of the innocent by christians in Africa has nothing to do with Christianity, and the killing of the innocent [I should add bystander] by Israeli army in the OT has nothing to do with Judiasm.
---
Consider seeing a smile after each paragraph above, I was asked by the server to remove them because they exceeded a certain predefined number.
Edited for a missing closing bold tag.
[ 05-25-2002: Message edited by: jakkorz ]</p>
OBL was evil because the ideas he promulgated negated the reality of others: negated their Being, a reality that necessarily transcends the human definitions of what they, as others, are.
pard' the arrogance of 'knowing' here but:
These are the two things that make up evil:
1> exclusion and negation of all that is other (usually done through catagorization (definition) of the other's transcendence)
and
2> Anger is evil, and Evil is anger (as the Dalai Lama says)
(note; there is no mysterious power here, and yet it doesn't deny evilness, it just grounds it in the multifarious world of human behavior)
<strong>this is wrong, evil excludes that is why it is evil, it negates the otherness of others through exclusion and negation. . . . I can't stress this enough!!
OBL was evil because the ideas he promulgated negated the reality of others: negated their Being, a reality that necessarily transcends the human definitions of what they, as others, are.
pard' the arrogance of 'knowing' here but:
These are the two things that make up evil:
1> exclusion and negation of all that is other (usually done through catagorization (definition) of the other's transcendence)
and
2> Anger is evil, and Evil is anger (as the Dalai Lama says)
(note; there is no mysterious power here, and yet it doesn't deny evilness, it just grounds it in the multifarious world of human behavior)</strong><hr></blockquote>
Thanks for the logic in explanation.
I totally agree with you in this logic and that this is how it should be. But I was talking about what it is in general, not what it should be.
With all misconceptions, misleadings, prejudices, etc. that we naturally possess as character traits, it is hard, therefore, to see what it should be rather that what it is. How can we resist a behavior or fight back a bad trait in which we, in general, fool ourselves of not possessing or deny that traits existence.
Again, I do understand what you have laid out above and I do agree with you in what have you logically explained.
Many thanks.
<a href="http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg052402.asp"; target="_blank">Killing Journalists</a>
What's so special about Danny Pearl?
[quote]Danny Pearl's execution is a recruitment video for savages. According to CBS News, the film is being distributed out of Saudi Arabia, our strategic partner for peace and the war on terrorism. The footage is titled "The Slaughter of the Spy-Journalist, the Jew Daniel Pearl." It must trip off the tongue better in Arabic.
Apparently the footage is very popular with Saudi college kids, high-school students, and other folks whose idea of downloading porn from the Internet involves getting the latest pictures of Americans and Jews being carved up like animals. So much for the idea that education is the solution to all social problems.
Dan Rather introduced the footage by saying, "Enemies of this country are spreading on the Internet a gruesome piece of propaganda: It is videotape of the execution of the Wall Street Journal reporter Daniel Pearl."
Now, I realize I'm at least a week late in writing about this, but Dan Rather and the rest of the media are years behind schedule.
I think Rather and CBS were right for airing the video and I think the rest of the media is wrong for not following suit...<hr></blockquote>
[ 05-26-2002: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</p>
<strong>Apparently the footage is very popular with Saudi college kids, high-school students, and other folks whose idea of downloading porn from the Internet involves getting the latest pictures of Americans and Jews being carved up like animals. So much for the idea that education is the solution to all social problems.</strong><hr></blockquote>I think it was scotthphd that posted this before, too.
Maybe I'm naive about the depths that their culture has sunk to, but I just find it hard to believe that college kids are really watching that and thinking it's cool.
I haven't watched it, but they actually show him being beheaded?
Sorry, but normal people, Saudi Arabian or not, just aren't going to see that and think it's a good thing. They usually engage in denial about what their terrorists do - like blaming Jews or Americans for 9/11.
I just don't believe that article's implication that it's popular among average Arabs. I think it would have the opposite effect. If it really is true, it's deeply ironic that the Muslim world thinks our culture is corrupt because of McDonalds and Baywatch.
<strong>I think it was scotthphd that posted this before, too. </strong><hr></blockquote>
I missed that. I saw the Best of the Web link which I read almost everyday too but I hadn't read that day. Then I quickly scanned his post and focused on The Atlantic Monthly piece.
Anyway, there's no doubt that this is a recruitment video. (Yes, I watched it.
About being in denial about what terrorists do, well, that's why I watched it. Violence is so often used as a form of entertainment and yet so many are opposed to the airing of this. It's not that I don't understand the arguments against showing the video. It's just that there's a "disconnect" here. I think the murder of Danny Pearl needs to be seen. But it's truly awful.
[ 05-26-2002: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</p>
<strong>I haven't watched it, but they actually show him being beheaded?
</strong><hr></blockquote>
It's not like it is a straight and uncut shot of them decapitating Daniel Pearl. It apparently took them a minute or so to complete the job, so there are a couple of edits during that part of the video.
On one hand, the video is propaganda designed to scare the American people, which it will no doubt do. But then again, it *is* directed towards the American people, so we do have a right to see it.
Sure, it's a disturbing video, but I didn't find it as bad as it's been made out to be in this thread. He looked like he was dead when they began cutting his had off, so I don't think we're seeing the actual execution. Were he alive, it would have been a lot messier when cutting through the carotid arteries, but in the video, that isn't the case. Added to it the fact that the total running time where they're acually decapitating him totals about 3 seconds, it didn't affect me as much as it could have. I guess it takes a lot to really bother me...
<strong>
On one hand, the video is propaganda designed to scare the American people, which it will no doubt do. But then again, it *is* directed towards the American people... </strong><hr></blockquote>
Not really. There's a lot of Arabic text for it to be directed at the American people.
Umm, the three seconds shows then finishing sawing off is head with a knife or something (I am not going to go back and look again) and then holding it up to the camera. He was likely already dead, but that does not make it less grotesque or sick.
[quote]<strong>On one hand, the video is propaganda designed to scare the American people, which it will no doubt do. But then again, it *is* directed towards the American people, so we do have a right to see it.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, it is propaganda designed to show possible future terrorists that Amerians are running scared and are not safe in the world. Of course this will have the added "benefit"
This is a heinous and barbaric video, and the way it is put together with music and flashes of supposed Israeli, American and UN "atrocities" it is definately made to bring sympathy to their cause and attract people to their cause. The last scene however shows you the mindset you are up against...
<strong>At first I was laughing so sarcastically. Then as I read further I realized there is some truth in the claims your source makes. Unfortunately he does manage to twist things around and you personally would believe him due to your lack of knowledge and due to the fact that evil includes and good excludes. That is the terrorist Bin Laden represents 1,000,000,000 muslims and unfortunately I can not give you an example of a good muslim who you would agree with, again for the lack of your knowledge.
I have compiled many paragraphs in which the author's claim are easily refuted for those who are without knowledge, and another set that can not be refuted without compiled cross reference since from my experience with your posts on AI states that ONLY Judeo-Christian references are credible.
Such a discussion should be dedicated to another thread titled "Is Islam Evil?" with what you provided as a reference put for everyone's scrutiny. That is, if you really believe that "Allah" is "Satan".</strong><hr></blockquote>
I would start the thread, but I do not think that many would be interested in me starting another religious thread right now. I anyone disagress with this then I would be more than happy to oblige, or you could do this as well.
Lets just say that he makes a very strong case for his points, and that in light of recent events I am n=more inclined to believe that radical islam is not the peaceful religion that it is made out to be in the media. That is not to say that Muslims are evil people, just like Germans were not evil, but the radical Muslems that practice Islam as it is written in the Koran and the Kadish(?) or in the case of Germans that were Nazis there is an obvious disconnect there.
[quote]<strong>Yes it is a valid fear. Reasoning tells me that if they claim to be muslims, then they should suffer the consequences and not I or you. No body has forced Islam unto them. Certainly I did not, nor have you.</strong><hr></blockquote>
That is no necesarily true. The muslim holy texts have very strong statements about those who do not follow their religion in this world, not in the afterlife. Some point to Christianity and say, well that is a very intolerant religion that calls for the death of those that don't follow it, but it is quite different with fundamentalist Islam.
I will quote another article I have read recently that sums up what I mean.
<a href="http://www.israeltoday.co.il/article/Default.asp?CatID=5&ArticleID=82"; target="_blank">http://www.israeltoday.co.il/article/Default.asp?CatID=5&ArticleID=82</a>;
While the Arab-Israeli conflict pits Moslems against Jews, it concerns Christians as well, because ultimately, it is a conflict over revelation ? the revelation of the Bible and that of the Koran. By opposing the Jewish presence in the Land of Israel, the Moslems effectively reject the Divine promises of the Jewish ? and Christian ? Bible, and replace them with another, diametrically opposed doctrine ? the Koran.
The Moslem Palestinians have tried to make allies of the powerful Christian Churches, to win international support for their aspirations to statehood. But history shows that the Moslems, when in power, have not been sympathetic at all to Christians. For instance, one of the most popular figures in Arab folklore is Saladin, the Moslem-Arab warrior who defeated the Crusaders in the Holy Land.
The Koran itself warns Moslems, ?Do not take Jews or Christians as your friends.? During the Arab conquests, Jews and Christians alike were massacred, and synagogues and churches destroyed. A Moslem phrase often quoted in this region is: ?On Saturday we kill the Jews and on Sunday we kill the Christians!?
In Islam, the world is divided between the believers and the infidels, between Dar al Islam (?the world of Islam?) and Dar al Harb (?the world of war?). All non-Moslems are included in the world of war, and thus, can be forced to accept Islam through Jihad, Holy War.
This theology enables us to understand the roots of the Arab-Israeli conflict, and should warn the Christian West about what power lies behind the attempts to divide the Land of Israel. This does not mean that Moslems are evil; but Christians should be aware that they are under a deceiving, evil influence and power ? that of Islam. Therefore, Islam as a power must be resisted.
[quote]<strong>Same reasoning applies when I ask you to turn the other cheek for the terrorist. But then, that is another topic that might fit in your religious thread regarding the teachings of the Bible.
As a Christian, I hope you take more moderate peaceful approach in life because deep inside you there should be a realization that vengeance is better practiced by GOD [by the way of practicing His laws].</strong><hr></blockquote>
Turning the other cheek does not mean allowing innocents to be slaughtered by zealots. I am not asking for someone to gie me a gun so I can go and kill "dirty Arabs" or something. However, Muslims live in this world and are under the law of this world and should be held accountable just as you and I are accountable. If you have read my other threads you will know that I do not call for me to be the instrument of God's vengence. Not once. But there is nothing wrong with wanting those guilty to pay for what they have done wrong. Nothing at all.
[quote]<strong>Killing of the innocent in the middle east by muslims has nothing to do with Islam, just like the killing of the innocent by christians in Africa has nothing to do with Christianity, and the killing of the innocent [I should add bystander] by Israeli army in the OT has nothing to do with Judiasm.
These statements are made with no links to actions. The last has been covered here quite a bit. The killing of innocents in the middle east, and the killing of innocents in Africa. Which circumstances are we speaking of? For example in Africa I have heard of the fighting in the Sudan where the Christians and Aminists have been put in slavery by the Northern Muslims.
<a href="http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_sud.htm"; target="_blank">http://www.religioustolerance.org/sla_sud.htm</a>;
<strong>
Not really. There's a lot of Arabic text for it to be directed at the American people.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I can't read arabic, but they put Pearl's statement in English, and the list of demands at the end of the video was in English. They even tell you in English at the end that this scene will be repeated over and over again until their demands are met. If that isn't directed to us, who is it directed to? The 'other' Americans that have a military presence in the middle east?
I don't disagree that it is designed to rally people to their own cause, I was just more interested in pointing out specifically what it meant to the American people.
And at the end of the video, there are about 3 seconds where they are sawing off his head. There is a lot to cut through, so this would take a while. After the initial 3 seconds, they make a cut where the camera angle has changed, and his head is practically hanging by a thread. Then it would appear that they cut again quickly to his head being lifted and brought up towards the camera. So that's three edits so far in the final "scene" if you will.
So who knows just how long it took them to sever the entire head, I would guess based on how the camera angle changed, and knowing just how much they have to cut through, that it was probably around half a minute.
This doesn't seem to be his execution though. In the video, once they start cutting at his neck (I'm a licensed EMT, and we don't study as much as Doctors, but we know enough about the human body), Daniel Pearl already appears to be dead, based on his facial expression and lack of any resistance or signs of life. And as mentioned before, if he was alive and his cardiovascular system functioning, cutting the carotid artery would have been much messier.
So yeah, the video is designed to rally 'their' troops, but it is also clearly designed to influence the american people, else they wouldn't have gone through the added trouble of having produced the video with so much English. It was clearly intended for us to see it as well, which is my point.
[ 05-26-2002: Message edited by: M3D Jack ]</p>
Jakorz, your post was very insightful, particularly here: [quote] With all misconceptions, misleadings, prejudices, etc. that we naturally possess as character traits, it is hard, therefore, to see what it should be rather that what it is. How can we resist a behavior or fight back a bad trait in which we, in general, fool ourselves of not possessing or deny that traits existence. <hr></blockquote>I appreciate that kind of straight forwardness.
I think, however, that what my previouse post was saying was not describing "what should be" but was saying what is. I was saying what I thought Evil is, and how it works and why it is bad.
Now, with my analysis, we can see that even we are partly evil whenever we rally against a person or group and constrict their transcendence with our ideas of what they are, such as people saying that all Moslems are blahblah, or all jews are etc etc... this is a tendency which I see as partly within all and everybody (though I wouldn't define anybody as being 'purely evil' and thus then act in a bad way myself)... anyway, just some thoughts.
I would hate to see a religion (set of ideas about how to act and what is true) create a following that excludes those that don't thnk the same idea.... that would be an evil way of acting . . . unfortunately that seems to be par for the course as far as 'religions' go.
also, an addendum to my definition of evil:
part two said Evil is anger, and anger is evil. the addition would say that hatred is a form of anger a form that works be acting out part one of my definition.
<strong>Noah, that text that you quote is propaganda. Propaganda works by having the truth told in a way that distorts it dramatically till it is no longer true (such as Saladin was a killer of christians, true but he defended against the Crusades which were all about killing the Moslims...true but not true)</strong><hr></blockquote>
But the question becomes who is doing the distorting. The post merely states that:
But history shows that the Moslems, when in power, have not been sympathetic at all to Christians. For instance, one of the most popular figures in Arab folklore is Saladin, the Moslem-Arab warrior who defeated the Crusaders in the Holy Land.
That is a fact. It is not a distortion. I see where your point is leading, but the deeper point here is that the Muslims of today are rallying around that figure still with the next phrase you see the outcome.
The Koran itself warns Moslems, ?Do not take Jews or Christians as your friends.? During the Arab conquests, Jews and Christians alike were massacred, and synagogues and churches destroyed. A Moslem phrase often quoted in this region is: ?On Saturday we kill the Jews and on Sunday we kill the Christians!?
Those were not massacred by Muslims defending their lands. They were killed by Islamic warriors conquering surrounding territories. And I should not have to point out that even I have heard the last phrase stated on the news and seen it written in other news sources. Sure it was not there for long and buried, but it was there. Do you deny that this is a rallying cry still for some of the more radical followers of Islam?
[quote]<strong>I think, however, that what my previouse post was saying was not describing "what should be" but was saying what is. I was saying what I thought Evil is, and how it works and why it is bad.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Actually, I somewhat enjoyed your description as well.
[quote]<strong>Now, with my analysis, we can see that even we are partly evil whenever we rally against a person or group and constrict their transcendence with our ideas of what they are, such as people saying that all Moslems are blahblah, or all jews are etc etc... this is a tendency which I see as partly within all and everybody (though I wouldn't define anybody as being 'purely evil' and thus then act in a bad way myself)... anyway, just some thoughts.<hr></blockquote></strong>
No man is perfect. All people have some evil in them, I would be lying if I said otherwise about humans. Only one in the history of the world was perfect and he was the son of God. And he was also not a fan of "all Muslims are blahblah" type thinking either. In fact he not only advocated loving God, loving your neighbor as yourself (the golden rule), but he also took it a step further in Matthew 5:43-48.
43"You have heard that it was said, 'Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' 44But I tell you: Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, 45that you may be sons of your Father in heaven. He causes his sun to rise on the evil and the good, and sends rain on the righteous and the unrighteous. 46If you love those who love you, what reward will you get? Are not even the tax collectors doing that? 47And if you greet only your brothers, what are you doing more than others? Do not even pagans do that? 48Be perfect, therefore, as your heavenly Father is perfect.
The Christian is not called to hate any, not even those that hate them. Unfortunately this is a tall order for any person and there have been many (during the crusades and the inquisition for some) who have lost sight of this important passage. I have not said, and do not want it to be construed here or anywhere that I think, that all Muslims are blahblah, or even that all followers of Islam are blahblah. However, there is a significant portion of them that are. When you have 1,000,000,000 Islamic people any portion over 1% is quite significant when they are willing to do what they have shown they are willing to do. And I bet that 5-10% of them may be at or near that line. that is a lot of people.
[quote]<strong>I would hate to see a religion (set of ideas about how to act and what is true) create a following that excludes those that don't thnk the same idea.... that would be an evil way of acting . . . unfortunately that seems to be par for the course as far as 'religions' go.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Question, if a religion is based on the tenet that there is only one God and any others are false does that make the religion evil just based on that fact according to your definition here?
[quote]<strong>also, an addendum to my definition of evil:
part two said Evil is anger, and anger is evil. the addition would say that hatred is a form of anger a form that works be acting out part one of my definition.</strong><hr></blockquote>
Hatred is insidious, it destroys any that are consumed and run their life by it. Hatred is, according to the bible, as bad as the sin of murder. In fact it draws a direct parallel between the two. If you hate someone in your heart and only wish evil for them it is only a very short step between thoughts and actions. Hatred is indeed evil. I harbor no hatred for Muslims or even Islamic radicals. Fear, yes, concern, yes, anger even, yes. But hatred, no, that goes to far.
<strong>
also, an addendum to my definition of evil:
part two said Evil is anger, and anger is evil. the addition would say that hatred is a form of anger a form that works be acting out part one of my definition.</strong><hr></blockquote>
I can't tell you how much I disagree with this. You can love the wrong thing and there is evil in this world that should make one angry. Ephesians 4:26 says, "Be angry and yet do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger." (NASB) In other words, we should not harbor anger in our hearts. But that is different than simply declaring anger to be evil. Most anger is probably self indulgence but sometimes anger is the proper response. Even so, if we give it a home in our hearts, no matter how justified it initially was, it will eventually corrupt us.
[ 05-27-2002: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</p>
<strong>
I can't tell you how much I disagree with this. You can love the wrong thing and there is evil in this world that should make one angry. Ephesians 4:26 says, "Be angry and yet do not sin; do not let the sun go down on your anger." (NASB) In other words, we should not harbor anger in our hearts. But that is different than simply declaring anger to be evil. Most anger is probably self indulgence but sometimes anger is the proper response. Even so, if we give it a home in our hearts, no matter how justified it initially was, it will eventually corrupt us.
[ 05-27-2002: Message edited by: spaceman_spiff ]</strong><hr></blockquote>
Good catch, I knew that even though I liked his description and saw where it was going that something sounded just this side of off. Anger unchecked and unbridled by our sin nature is definitely a sin. However even God is angered by things that occur in this world, and God is not capable of sin, therefore, all anger is not sin. However, God does not hate, and hate is a sin.
In Al Baqarah, paragraph 190.
It was stated there that in God's way you should have war against those who war against you, but you are told on not to go over the limit. And that God doesn't like those who had gone over the limit.
Note: What can be consider as gone over the limit? Having a war against people who don't war against you!
In Al Anfaal, paragraph 61.
It was stated there that if the enemy leaned toward peace, you should also leaned toward peace. And that God is all hearing and all knowing (God knows on who is only talking about peace but doesn't have a care for peace at all, and God also know those who truly WANTED peace but might not say anything at all).
So.... If one said that the lines in the Qur'an promote attack on people who are not fighting against you, and that it doesn't promote peace toward an enemy who wanted peace.
I have three words to say. That's a lie!
People... Please do some thinking here, we are being divided and manipulated to fight against each other.
As for the Daniel Pearl movie.
People... Does it ever came across in your mind that the movie is purporsely made up and then distribute to the public so that you will be upset and say nasty things? And that you will end up in a conflict with your own brothers?
Is that what grounds your ideas?
and another question... did you used to be on this board by the name of Naim?
------------
Noah, I'm glad to see that someone found a bible quote so that yu can justify my answer as not being right . . . and also the idea of religion as a god jeaulous of other gods meaning that that religion would be 'evil'
because yes, that's what I believe. If your idea of god is such that it excludes then your idea is 'evil'.
and yes, we can justify anger . . . but then again that is not being at the hieghth that an ethic with such demanding definitions as I have laid out would demand . . . .