Muslims bash Il Papa for bashing Muslims

[E20]

[phyzik]

they fight and fight and fight... then turn around and say its only a small percentage.... then fight and fight and fight..... then complain when someone questions thier religion which is supposedly about piece...

Im sorry, either pull out of the middle east and let them kill eachother so we can take the oil for free, or bomb them until the sand turns to glass.... they are obviously not getting it.

for the record, I hate ALL religion... its only good for creating war.

[NuGGeTs-FaN]

Interesting video that was on one of middle eastern tv stations

http://switch3.castup.net/cunet/gm.a...wmv&ak=nu%20ll

[NuGGeTs-FaN]

what the heck do people expect from a religion that is built on worshipping satan?

The sad thing is that they dont even know they are worshipping nothing more than a fallan angel from heaven.

Only one God, one way to him (salvation through Christ) and one heaven, thats what i believe but it doesnt mean im going to kill or hate anyone else who doesnt believe that.

Its a load of rot that all religions are only good for creating war. Wars today arent about religion, the wars are about people the Muslims hate vs Islam , its not about Christianity or Buddhism vs Islam.

[cheguevara]

ppl still listen to the Pope these days??

the Pope's position is as useless as the queen of englands. come on

Even though I used to like the last pope. This one looks like Dracula.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Not so fast my friends! Third-world muslims are angry at the Pope because of a QUOTE by a Byzantine emperor--He's urged them to read the rest of his speech, but they wouldn't want to do that...might be blasphemous...

[quote=Well, you're half right. Islam and Christianity have been going at it for most of that period.[/quote]

Zunni,

The only times Shi'ia and Sunnis stopped fighting each other was to fight 'Christians'.

Like I said, they've been at war with someone their entire existence, and wonder where people get the idea they're violent.

Then you get dumbasses like the one holding the poster in the pic, and well, what the do they expect?

[Extra Stout]

This is an example of why trying to have a dialogue with the Muslim world is futile.

[DarkReign]

This is an example of why trying to have a dialogue with the Muslim world is futile.

Never known you to have a sense of humor....was this your first attempt?

[smeagol]

ppl still listen to the Pope these days??

1 billion Roman Catholics do.

[cheguevara]

1 billion Roman Catholics do.

I meant actually "listen". out of those "1 billion" catholics, im sure at least 1/2 of them don't attend church regularly.

[Nbadan]

`Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached'."

AL-QAEDA in Iraq has said in response to remarks by Pope Benedict XVI linking Islam with violence that it will wage jihad until the West is defeated, in a statement posted on the Internet today.

"We say to the servant of the cross (the Pope): wait for defeat ... We say to infidels and tyrants: wait for what will afflict you. "We continue our jihad. We will not stop until the banner of unicity flies throughout the world," said the statement attributed to the Mujahideen consultative council.

"We will smash the cross ... (you will have no choice but) Islam or death," the statement added, citing a hadith (saying of the Prophet Mohammed) promising Muslims they would "conquer Rome ... as they conquered Constantinople".

Two other armed groups in Iraq, Jaish al-Mujahideen and Asaeb al-Iraq al-Jihadiya, have already threatened the Vatican with reprisals in statements posted on Islamist websites.

Herald Sun

So in order to prove Benedict wrong, Al Queda is gonna prove Benedict right? Now that is wack!

[Yonivore]

A piece in today's Los Angeles Times by Sam Harris got us to thinking. Harris, who describes himself as liberal (and who describes his own views in ways that make clear he is one), is the author of a 2004 book called "The End of Faith," which, he writes, is "highly critical of religion. . . . I argued that the world's major religions are genuinely incompatible, inevitably cause conflict and now prevent the emergence of a viable, global civilization."

But this critic of religion takes fellow liberals to task for failing to take radical Islam seriously:

My correspondence with liberals has convinced me that liberalism has grown dangerously out of touch with the realities of our world--specifically with what devout Muslims actually believe about the West, about paradise and about the ultimate ascendance of their faith.

On questions of national security, I am now as wary of my fellow liberals as I am of the religious demagogues on the Christian right.

This may seem like frank acquiescence to the charge that "liberals are soft on terrorism." It is, and they are.

A cult of death is forming in the Muslim world--for reasons that are perfectly explicable in terms of the Islamic doctrines of martyrdom and jihad. The truth is that we are not fighting a "war on terror." We are fighting a pestilential theology and a longing for paradise.

This is not to say that we are at war with all Muslims. But we are absolutely at war with those who believe that death in defense of the faith is the highest possible good, that cartoonists should be killed for caricaturing the prophet and that any Muslim who loses his faith should be butchered for apostasy. . . .

And yet, despite abundant evidence to the contrary, liberals continue to imagine that Muslim terrorism springs from economic despair, lack of education and American militarism.

To be sure, the history of Christianity has its violent periods. But apart from a few Eric Rudolph types, Christianity in America today is almost totally domesticated. The fearsome religious right threatens the secular left with nothing worse than the adoption, through democratic means, of policies with which the latter disagree. By contrast, the goals and methods of radical Islamists are genuinely terrifying.

Why is the liberal left more frightened of George W. Bush than of Osama bin Laden? Why do they see the Christian Right as more of a threat than Islam? It is a classic reaction formation, a neurotic response that a feminine Freud who dubs herself "Answer Girl" defines concisely as "behavior or emotion that is the polar opposite of the way someone is or should be feeling, because the authentic emotion is too frightening to deal with." Other examples:

Reaction formation explains the Stockholm Syndrome, where kidnap victims ally themselves with their captors. It's why abused children often seem more attached to their abusive parent. It's also why I apologize profusely to total strangers who want to know why I have not yet done them massive favors other people have promised on my behalf.

In the L.A. Times, Harris describes just such a pattern:

At its most extreme, liberal denial has found expression in a growing subculture of conspiracy theorists who believe that the atrocities of 9/11 were orchestrated by our own government. A nationwide poll conducted by the Scripps Survey Research Center at Ohio University found that more than a third of Americans suspect that the federal government "assisted in the 9/11 terrorist attacks or took no action to stop them so the United States could go to war in the Middle East;" 16% believe that the twin towers collapsed not because fully-fueled passenger jets smashed into them but because agents of the Bush administration had secretly rigged them to explode. . . .

I don't know how many more engineers and architects need to blow themselves up, fly planes into buildings or saw the heads off of journalists before this fantasy will dissipate.

Now there's a scary thought.

[ChumpDumper]

Unicity?

[smeagol]

So where are the defenders of "peaceful" Islam?

[ChumpDumper]

Being drowned out by the violent ones.

[Yonivore]

So where are the defenders of "peaceful" Islam?

Silent, as usual. Where are the vegetarian jackals?

[johnsmith]

what the heck do people expect from a religion that is built on worshipping satan?

The sad thing is that they dont even know they are worshipping nothing more than a fallan angel from heaven.

Only one God, one way to him (salvation through Christ) and one heaven, thats what i believe but it doesnt mean im going to kill or hate anyone else who doesnt believe that.

Its a load of rot that all religions are only good for creating war. Wars today arent about religion, the wars are about people the Muslims hate vs Islam , its not about Christianity or Buddhism vs Islam.

Is this a joke? Who worships satan?

[Mr. Peabody]

what the heck do people expect from a religion that is built on worshipping satan?

The sad thing is that they dont even know they are worshipping nothing more than a fallan angel from heaven.

Only one God, one way to him (salvation through Christ) and one heaven, thats what i believe but it doesnt mean im going to kill or hate anyone else who doesnt believe that.

Its a load of rot that all religions are only good for creating war. Wars today arent about religion, the wars are about people the Muslims hate vs Islam , its not about Christianity or Buddhism vs Islam.

I thought the Jews caused all of the wars...

[101A]

A piece in today's Los Angeles Times by Sam Harris got us to thinking. Harris, who describes himself as liberal (and who describes his own views in ways that make clear he is one), is the author of a 2004 book called "The End of Faith," which, he writes, is "highly critical of religion. . . . I argued that the world's major religions are genuinely incompatible, inevitably cause conflict and now prevent the emergence of a viable, global civilization."

But this critic of religion takes fellow liberals to task for failing to take radical Islam seriously:


To be sure, the history of Christianity has its violent periods. But apart from a few Eric Rudolph types, Christianity in America today is almost totally domesticated. The fearsome religious right threatens the secular left with nothing worse than the adoption, through democratic means, of policies with which the latter disagree. By contrast, the goals and methods of radical Islamists are genuinely terrifying.

Why is the liberal left more frightened of George W. Bush than of Osama bin Laden? Why do they see the Christian Right as more of a threat than Islam? It is a classic reaction formation, a neurotic response that a feminine Freud who dubs herself "Answer Girl" defines concisely as "behavior or emotion that is the polar opposite of the way someone is or should be feeling, because the authentic emotion is too frightening to deal with." Other examples:


In the L.A. Times, Harris describes just such a pattern:


Now there's a scary thought.

Very good post.

[Ozzman]

that pic of the pope.....did you see the guy next to him??? what the heck is he doing?????

[Mr. Peabody]

A piece in today's Los Angeles Times by Sam Harris got us to thinking. Harris, who describes himself as liberal (and who describes his own views in ways that make clear he is one), is the author of a 2004 book called "The End of Faith," which, he writes, is "highly critical of religion. . . . I argued that the world's major religions are genuinely incompatible, inevitably cause conflict and now prevent the emergence of a viable, global civilization."

But this critic of religion takes fellow liberals to task for failing to take radical Islam seriously:


To be sure, the history of Christianity has its violent periods. But apart from a few Eric Rudolph types, Christianity in America today is almost totally domesticated. The fearsome religious right threatens the secular left with nothing worse than the adoption, through democratic means, of policies with which the latter disagree. By contrast, the goals and methods of radical Islamists are genuinely terrifying.

Why is the liberal left more frightened of George W. Bush than of Osama bin Laden? Why do they see the Christian Right as more of a threat than Islam? It is a classic reaction formation, a neurotic response that a feminine Freud who dubs herself "Answer Girl" defines concisely as "behavior or emotion that is the polar opposite of the way someone is or should be feeling, because the authentic emotion is too frightening to deal with." Other examples:


In the L.A. Times, Harris describes just such a pattern:


Now there's a scary thought.

So your assertion is that liberals are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and have become sympathetic to Osama bin Laden? Are you serious? You really believe this?

Yoni, I give you too much credit sometimes.

It's just the standard GOP-mantra that anyone who opposes Bush and his administration on any issue are on the side of the terrorists.

[101A]

So your assertion is that liberals are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and have become sympathetic to Osama bin Laden? Are you serious? You really believe this?

Yoni, I give you too much credit sometimes.

It's just the standard GOP-mantra that anyone who opposes Bush and his administration on any issue are on the side of the terrorists.

The piece was written by a left-coast liberal, who is charging (accurately, at that) that liberals don't fully comprehend the nature of the hatred toward the West that the militant Muslims have; that yes, they did fly those planes into the WTC, that they saw the heads off of reporters, etc...AND that those people believe that is the single greatest act they can perform in this lifetime! The author further suggests that it is the liberal's hatred for George Bush that is bliding them to this reality.

Your response kind of makes his point.

[Mr. Peabody]

The piece was written by a left-coast liberal, who is charging (accurately, at that) that liberals don't fully comprehend the nature of the hatred toward the West that the militant Muslims have; that yes, they did fly those planes into the WTC, that they saw the heads off of reporters, etc...AND that those people believe that is the single greatest act they can perform in this lifetime! The author further suggests that it is the liberal's hatred for George Bush that is bliding them to this reality.

Your response kind of makes his point.

Oh, the piece was written by a liberal? Oh , it must be accurate then, right? Because he obviously attended the secret liberal meetings that we have where we talk about how we prefer bin Laden to Bush.

The article is simplistic and condescending. Obviously, if we all don't react the same way to the threat of terrorism (i.e., willingly surrendering our liberty) then it must be because we don't understand the threat as much as other people do. Because if we all understood the threat the way the author or the Bush administration does, we would give the administration carte blanche to do anything they want. That's ridiculous.

Also, I haven't heard too many people state that they sympathize with bin Laden more than Bush (I actually haven't heard anyone, but if I make that statement, someone is sure to mention some nutty liberal who make some ridiculous statement). But if anyone opposes Bush's policies, they must like bin Laden more than Bush, right?

Also, how does my response make the author's point. I don't have a blinding hatred for Bush. I just don't like the fact that you can't disagree with his policies without being labeled a terrorist sympathizer by his administration or its followers (which is basically what the article alleges).

[cheguevara]

So where are the defenders of "peaceful" Islam?

I ain't a defender but I can tell you most of Islam wants peace. We have many things going on here,
- muslims take their religion very seriously so yes they will get very pissed and talk if insulted
- the media like ususal is taking out of proportion even maybe influenced by some goverments
- terrorist organizations and extremists(iran) are taking this opportunity to stir up more and the whole world is eating it up
- everyone is using the dumbass pope to achieve their means

yes it is hard to beleive most muslims want peace, but it's probably even harder for a muslim living in Iraq or Lebanon to beleive americans want peace.

2 billion crazy muslims and only 1 nun killed? you kiddin me? I thought they were all crazy killers

now I ain't defending their religion, cause I think it's pretty ed up, but catholics being ruled by a scary dracula looking old man with a scary hat ain't that great either

[Yonivore]

So your assertion is that liberals are suffering from Stockholm Syndrome and have become sympathetic to Osama bin Laden? Are you serious? You really believe this?

Well, to be sure, liberals are more concerned with "understanding" why Islamofascists want us dead and, further, seem overly concerned with making sure the "peaceful" Muslims aren't lumped in with the violent ones -- even as the "peaceful" Muslims don't make as much of an effort, on their own, to differentiate themselves from their violent religion-mates.

So, you tell me? Why are liberals more concerned with the wellbeing of the Islamic religion than are the "peaceful" Muslims of the world?

Yoni, I give you too much credit sometimes.

Well, I give you no credit at all so, we're even.

It's just the standard GOP-mantra that anyone who opposes Bush and his administration on any issue are on the side of the terrorists.

When it comes to liberal/left stances on the administration's foreign policy, as it relates to terrorism, they are on the side of the terrorists.