Israel

[Daggers]

reading a lot of the tendentious posts on here , i'm beginning to think that truth is whatever people want to believe

LINK Seeing as there is little agreement on what is meant by truth, getting a consenss on it with regards a political topic is a non-starter.

[macbeth]

LINK Seeing as there is little agreement on what is meant by truth, getting a consenss on it with regards a political topic is a non-starter.

oh no if we can't decide what the truth is how can we decide what the errr......... truth is

[Dr The Singh]

I think it was I who talked about Muslims taking over the UK in 20 years and I'm happy to stand by that. There is already considerable Moslem influence and representation on the councils of many major British cities and it is already clear they have great influence and are given great consideration at a national level.

This opinion results in the predictable but utterly outrageous declaration that I am "terminally bigotted" because I am "too full of BNP bullshit".

Talk about the pot calling the kettle. I certainly hope your other opinions are more soundly based. I have never been on a BNP website nor had any contact/connection with the BNP in my life. Nor would I ever expect to.

As I understand it the BNP reputedly has Nazi sympathies. My extended family lost close to 120 fathers, sons wives and daughters to the Germans in the First and Second World Wars.

I have read the history of the German Reich in huge detail on several occasions and there is nothing I have ever read which is more shameful and more disgusting - and nothing could possibly mirror the Nazi's attitude to Jews, except perhaps the Iranian President and those who sympathise with him.

Despite that I have said that I feel the Germans have tried hard to re-invent themselves - and showed it at the Wold Cup - and that there is no sensible purpose in maintaining hatred an-infinitum.

Indeed it would be grossly hypocritical of myself to do so. But it is not an attitude the rests easy with me as you might imagine.

Both you and Moseeds seem upset that I asked some questions for no other reason than I was interested in Moseeds point of view on the matters. I thank him for taking the trouble to reply and wouldn't dream of calling him bigotted or any other insult as a result.

I have always considered the whole purpose of debate was to understand an issue more clearly.

If Moseeds says that he thinks the Iranian President's desire to destroy Israel is a daft suggestion I fully accept and welcome that.

I would howver disagree that there is no connection between the Iranian President's statement and the Hezbollah action because Hezbollah are clearly supported by Iran and Israel are right to feel threatened by them.

Moseeds says that Muslims come to the UK for one reason - for reason of economics only. I would have no problem whatsoever with that were it true.

Indeed if I were young I would probably leave the UK tomorrow for economic reasons which makes a nonsense of any suggestion that I am in some way a "nationalist" although I do love much about my country and the values it stands for.

Unfortunately what Moseeds says on that is not true. If it were, then fundamentalist agitators like Omar Bakri and Abu Hanza et al wouldn't have preached their hatred and wouldn't have tried to aggle young Muslim minds.

And, of course, people from Leeds and Luton and significant others wouldn't be operating as suicide bombers and blasting people as innocent as the Israelis ever killed to shreds.

I would like to ask many other questions to try and understand Muslim thinking because there seem to be so many contradictions and far too much desire to control other people's thinking including that of their their own people.

But Ultra is right that it is probably utterly futile to continue this debate when minds are so clearly made up on certain matters and certain beliefs.

And does that statement imply any sort of disrespect to you Utlra or to Moseeds?. Not a bit. I respect and value your opinion on most matters, even agree on many occasions. We just have a different viewpoint on this subject and although I don't know about you, I can live with that.

I also find it disappointing that you give the impression there seems so little reason to believe that hatred between Arab and Israeli will diminish.

It would be welcome to think that good sense and genuine dialogue will find a lasting solution which stops all the unnecessary bloodshed in Palestine and Lebanon which has emanated from two sides' intransigence and the utterly immoral opportunism of outsiders who fan the flames of conflict.

This intransigence has cost so many lives and plunged an entire country into despair for no defensible reason whatsoever when the dialogue I mentioned was and will be the way forward in the end.

Unless, of course, we have a wider conflict, which is not impossble. And if that happens it will reflect even more shamefully on the current intransigence.

Thracian as always makes some great points.............Islamization isn't a new concept it was one started by it's for fathers and is ever continiuing till now. If a regime, country or tribe of people believe that there religion is superior, and that it is the will of god to impose there beliefs on others this will always bring conflict against those that wish not to be assimilate.

We have seen in the past the christians attempt to convert the world to christianity, we are seeing Moslems (not all but a %) through various means trying, in the past through there own conquest ie Mogul Empire etc, and more recent Jahidi's and devious groups such as HUT etc, and also India with Hindu nazi's that wish to make India a Hindu only nation. The only difference is that in more recent times the pro religious groups are doing there deeds in a devious, covert methods, trying to aviod public outcry.

Moseeds, not all muslims are the same, and majority are decent human beings but Islamization is a problem and it does exist....and duo to the foriegn policies of UK\US has fueled and catalysed the Islamization process all over the world. It only takes a small % of people to inlfuence the majority, ie Hitler\Nazism. But to blame the UK\US for the problem is 'bull', because there actions acted as catalyst, the Islamization process was still already there, ie they were not the source of the problem (not that UK|US are blme free)........I remember, long before Iraq war, while at Uni, there were groups\activist giving speaches on Islamization at Islamic Societies, handing leaflets in the street etc.

Like I have said, Moslem nations are run by religion, (Quran), which is a very old 'document' one which has several interpretations and issues which would concern the western world (Sharia Law), compared to other nations that have moved away from religion being do all and end all of life and which people have made and changed doctrines according what is applicable to the time and nature of the people. Mosseds has mentioned a 'special relationship' between muslims, one which I find disturbing, without clarity and total independant thought, the relationship will always be biased towards it's kin and kind, which can be influenced towards it's own even if they are wrong!!! This can be seen, as when Hamas\Hizbollah or any terrorist organisation kill innocents, non of the muslim countries or people are in outcry, yet when brits or any western nation kill an innocent, you see droves of brits showing discontent towards there own!!!!!

[Ultra]

But the West have been happy to encourage and even fund militant Islamic groups when it suited their purposes.

Remember Reagan's covert support for the Iranians during the war with Iraq in the 1980s, and open support for the Taliban in its attempts to force the Soviets out of Afghanistan.

Osama bin Laden didn't arrive from another planet - he was a monster the Americans themselves helped to create.

[macbeth]

But the West have been happy to encourage and even fund militant Islamic groups when it suited their purposes.

Remember Reagan's covert support for the Iranians during the war with Iraq in the 1980s, and open support for the Taliban in its attempts to force the Soviets out of Afghanistan.

Osama bin Laden didn't arrive from another planet - he was a monster the Americans themselves helped to create.

nobody else arrived from another planet....... thats the point .......this constant blaming of the US for everything religious zealot nutters keep doing is ridiculous .......you may as well blame britain for helping to create the usa and everything bush does henceforth

[macbeth]

this cartoon seems to sum up a lot of peoples view on "moderate" islamist reactions

[breadandcheese]

But the West have been happy to encourage and even fund militant Islamic groups when it suited their purposes.

Remember Reagan's covert support for the Iranians during the war with Iraq in the 1980s, and open support for the Taliban in its attempts to force the Soviets out of Afghanistan.

Osama bin Laden didn't arrive from another planet - he was a monster the Americans themselves helped to create.

I think this attitude sums up my problem with some of the agendas that are pushed, to the point where the main issues are neglected. Convoluted thinking pervades.

Your arguments here should lead to two logical conclusions:

1) The West should take responsibility for their actions and deal with the Iranians and Islamic fundamentlists.

2) You reap what you sow so should put up with Islamic fundamentalism and extremists.

Somehow, I feel through your previous posts that you side with the second conclusion (please correct me if I am wrong).

[Dr The Singh]

But the West have been happy to encourage and even fund militant Islamic groups when it suited their purposes.

Remember Reagan's covert support for the Iranians during the war with Iraq in the 1980s, and open support for the Taliban in its attempts to force the Soviets out of Afghanistan.

Osama bin Laden didn't arrive from another planet - he was a monster the Americans themselves helped to create.

Yes that is very true.............and as I have said the west has been a catalyst for extremisn and now they are suffering from there deeds!!! Even so, the issue would still errupt, the middle east outlook towards non muslims ie calling them infedils was apparant many moons ago and still is!!!

[DanTheFoxBhoy]

alas i don't think so ; it will take a few more generations for that.....we are stuck with religious zealotry and bigotry

I think religion is underestimated. It is a tool by which anyone can study and come to appreciate the spiritual.

A beautiful and fluid thing, things go awry when people try to fix too many constants to the equation which breeds stubborness and bigotry.

Daoist is to Muslim is to Jew is to Christian; one painting can be viewed in many aspects. Tolerance and an open mind will nurture understanding and acceptance. That's what we have to aim for, not obliteration of the natural - there's been too much of that done already.

[Ultra]

I think this attitude sums up my problem with some of the agendas that are pushed, to the point where the main issues are neglected. Convoluted thinking pervades.

Your arguments here should lead to two logical conclusions:

1) The West should take responsibility for their actions and deal with the Iranians and Islamic fundamentlists.

2) You reap what you sow so should put up with Islamic fundamentalism and extremists.

Somehow, I feel through your previous posts that you side with the second conclusion (please correct me if I am wrong).

Actually I have serious issues with Islamic fundamentalism. I find it narrow-minded, misogynistic, reactionary and homophobic - precisely the reasons why the US ruling elite have found it so easy to do business with.

It has been around for years, though, in countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, but the excesses of the rulers of these countries have been tolerated as long as they keep supplying us with cheap oil.

Although I despise much of what Hamas and Hizbullah stand for I can understand the circumstances in which they have grown. The hypocrisy of America and Israel will only help fuel this growth still further.

[macbeth]

I think religion is underestimated. It is a tool by which anyone can study and come to appreciate the spiritual.

A beautiful and fluid thing, things go awry when people try to fix too many constants to the equation which breeds stubborness and bigotry.

Daoist is to Muslim is to Jew is to Christian; one painting can be viewed in many aspects. Tolerance and an open mind will nurture understanding and acceptance. That's what we have to aim for, not obliteration of the natural - there's been too much of that done already.

most arguments against religion are not based on whether there is any truth in them or not ; logically there are or have been so many religions that it is a mathmatical certainty that most must be false as the contradictions are too great for them to be coexistant

the problem is when believers expect non believers to accept principles based on religious thought or doctrine...personally (as an aetheist) i really dont care if anyone wants to believe in fairies at the bottom of their garden as long as no attempt ever is made to make me live by rules made by said fairies through conduits of believers .........which is what all religions eventually end up doing.

i'm glad that you get beauty or solice through your chosen faith but you must question whether it should ever hold any sway in law-making or moral issues in the secular world....i do not ; we should make ALL decisions based on mankinds own thought process and never retreat into "because it is written" excuses

[breadandcheese]

Actually I have serious issues with Islamic fundamentalism. I find it narrow-minded, misogynistic, reactionary and homophobic - precisely the reasons why the US ruling elite have found it so easy to do business with.

It has been around for years, though, in countries such as Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, but the excesses of the rulers of these countries have been tolerated as long as they keep supplying us with cheap oil.

Although I despise much of what Hamas and Hizbullah stand for I can understand the circumstances in which they have grown. The hypocrisy of America and Israel will only help fuel this growth still further.

In which case, you are allowing your anti-americanism to convolute your views on world politics. One of the most intriguing sites I have seen is the embracing of left-wing groups with facist Islamic fundamentalist groups. All uniting under the banner of anti-americanism. This enemy of my enemy is my friend approach.

It is this convoluted approach that has allowed Islamic fundamentalism to thrive and helped to spur on the American action that you detest. As much as America may have acted as a catalyst for Islamic fundamentalists, so Islamic fundamentalists have done the same for American foreign policy and military action.

[Head Honcho]

Don't 'bother' then.

It'll happen in Oz before it happens in the UK. The divorce rate is through the roof and we're aborting ourselves out of existance. The only people left with some sound moral values are people of the Islamic faith.

How moral would you say is executing 16 year old girls?

http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/arti...php?storyid=137

There is no place for Sharia in the 21st Century!

[DanTheFoxBhoy]

most arguments against religion are not based on whether there is any truth in them or not ; logically there are or have been so many religions that it is a mathmatical certainty that most must be false as the contradictions are too great for them to be coexistant

the problem is when believers expect non believers to accept principles based on religious thought or doctrine...personally (as an aetheist) i really dont care if anyone wants to believe in fairies at the bottom of their garden as long as no attempt ever is made to make me live by rules made by said fairies through conduits of believers .........which is what all religions eventually end up doing.

i'm glad that you get beauty or solice through your chosen faith but you must question whether it should ever hold any sway in law-making or moral issues in the secular world....i do not ; we should make ALL decisions based on mankinds own thought process and never retreat into "because it is written" excuses

The secular is not the spiritual - the age-old Caesar and God argument - but the two co-exist. As a conduit, the believer uses the faith to administer the spiritual. Personal spiritual beliefs should therefore not influence the secular. Instead, a system of secular moral values should influence the secular, which are developed through the tangible experience of the living world as opposed to the intangible experience of the spiritual realm.

Contradictions arise through interpretation of doctrine, which has itself been developed through human experience. The experience itself is not contradictory, but subjective. Hence the faires are really dolphins - one could argue the point, or expand the mind based on and share the experience of the interaction with the said fairies/dolphins

[Ultra]

most arguments against religion are not based on whether there is any truth in them or not ; logically there are or have been so many religions that it is a mathmatical certainty that most must be false as the contradictions are too great for them to be coexistant

the problem is when believers expect non believers to accept principles based on religious thought or doctrine...personally (as an aetheist) i really dont care if anyone wants to believe in fairies at the bottom of their garden as long as no attempt ever is made to make me live by rules made by said fairies through conduits of believers .........which is what all religions eventually end up doing.

i'm glad that you get beauty or solice through your chosen faith but you must question whether it should ever hold any sway in law-making or moral issues in the secular world....i do not ; we should make ALL decisions based on mankinds own thought process and never retreat into "because it is written" excuses

Indeed.

All faiths should be respected, as long as their practitioners respects the rights of others to follow other faiths, or no faith at all.

[DanTheFoxBhoy]

How moral would you say is executing 16 year old girls?

http://www.iranfocus.com/modules/news/arti...php?storyid=137

There is no place for Sharia in the 21st Century!

I was refering to moderates... I can't recall the last 16 year old that was executed in these parts

[Head Honcho]

I was refering to moderates... I can't recall the last 16 year old that was executed in these parts

Don't know about Oz but these have become quite common over here lately.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Honour_killing

[DanTheFoxBhoy]

Don't know about those, but we have plenty of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion

I bet this act would disgust a Muslim following Sharia law about as much as their act disgusts us really.

[Dr The Singh]

The secular is not the spiritual - the age-old Caesar and God argument - but the two co-exist. As a conduit, the believer uses the faith to administer the spiritual. Personal spiritual beliefs should therefore not influence the secular. Instead, a system of secular moral values should influence the secular, which are developed through the tangible experience of the living world as opposed to the intangible experience of the spiritual realm.

Contradictions arise through interpretation of doctrine, which has itself been developed through human experience. The experience itself is not contradictory, but subjective. Hence the faires are really dolphins - one could argue the point, or expand the mind based on and share the experience of the interaction with the said fairies/dolphins

One must remember all 'religious text' are written by man, and man will make mistakes and many religious text are written in poetry and then there are those that re-write religious text and malign the original to there own beliefs..................................................religion does not evolve and doctrines remain the same from since it was written. I believe religious is a personal thing, my beliefs are my beliefs not others, religion brings only peace to the believer on a humanitarian level, not imposed on others.

As concious beings we should be able to make concious decisions on our own and not from a 'text' box, text book may help if one decides!!

[Dr The Singh]

Don't know about those, but we have plenty of these:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abortion

I bet this act would disgust a Muslim about as much as their act disgusts us really.

Abortion has be done by many throughout the ages, it's not a western concept, the west is just very open about it!!!!

[Head Honcho]

Abortion has be done by many throughout the ages, it's not a western concept, the west is just very open about it!!!!

I would imagine that back street abortions are quite common in Iran as the consequences of falling pregnant whilst unmarried are quite severe

[DanTheFoxBhoy]

One must remember all 'religious text' are written by man, and man will make mistakes and many religious text are written in poetry and then there are those that re-write religious text and malign the original to there own beliefs..................................................religion does not evolve and doctrines remain the same from since it was written. I believe religious is a personal thing, my beliefs are my beliefs not others, religion brings only peace to the believer on a humanitarian level, not imposed on others.

As concious beings we should be able to make concious decisions on our own and not from a 'text' box, text book may help if one decides!!

Spot on. It is a very personal thing, and a treasured tool to be shared but not imposed. Texts are written by man through his own experience and so are subjective, but his way might not be the way another believer sees the picture.

[DanTheFoxBhoy]

I would imagine that back street abortions are quite common in Iran as the consequences of falling pregnant whilst unmarried are quite severe

Quite a few 'back street' murders go on in our society as well, putting it that way

[macbeth]

Spot on. It is a very personal thing, and a treasured tool to be shared but not imposed. Texts are written by man through his own experience and so are subjective, but his way might not be the way another believer sees the picture.

but when do any organised religions ever stop at sharing ...........once they have gained enough support it invariably leads to imposition by some means;...

sometimes overt but more worryingly insidious and in a style the mafia would be proud of

[Ultra]

In which case, you are allowing your anti-americanism to convolute your views on world politics. One of the most intriguing sites I have seen is the embracing of left-wing groups with facist Islamic fundamentalist groups. All uniting under the banner of anti-americanism. This enemy of my enemy is my friend approach.

It is this convoluted approach that has allowed Islamic fundamentalism to thrive and helped to spur on the American action that you detest. As much as America may have acted as a catalyst for Islamic fundamentalists, so Islamic fundamentalists have done the same for American foreign policy and military action.

Some purportedly "left-wing" groups (eg George Galloway's "Respect" party) have indeed aligned themselves with some undoubtedly reactionary Islamic elements for cynical and opportunistic reasons. This alliance has been roundly criticised by other left-wing groups and rightly so.

However this should not be used to condone or excuse the excesses of the USA, which are numerous not only in the Middle East but in other areas of the planet.

And the US started bankrolling Israel long before Hamas and Hesbollah came on the scene.