Islam vs. the Western World: off-topic posts from a Religion thread

[(Q)]

Well I know a Pakistani woman who was raised partly in Pakistan and Malaysia, went to university in the U.K and is presently working as a psychologist in Cambodia. From the looks of her she could be from NY, she doesn't wear a hajib, she can drink alcohol and even smokes cigarettes at a party but she doesn't see herself as 'in revolt' nor would she deny being 'muslim'. Any suggestion of that would make her cringe in the same way a Jewish person would think someone a moron for expecting them to adhere to kashrut and telling them they are somehow in 'revolt' or questioning their culture and its customs; some do some don't but those who dont are still considered 'jewish' are they not? Or better yet its like thinking a catholic is somehow revolting against tradition by using birth control, we never expect a woman who calls herself catholic to be a 'staunch catholic'. All of a sudden if a muslim woman wearing a dress and heels in a western environment is 'revolting against customs and tradition' when in her eyes she is just being a modern muslim woman.

Yes, but they're just hypocrites, aren't they? They pretend to be Muslim or Catholic or some other bowling team, but don't really hold any of the tenets, or will interpret a few tenets to suit their agendas.

U.S foreign policy has brought about a clash of religion. Where do you find a conflict between the Islamic State and western lifestyles? And in those examples what would that have to do with you as a westerner who does not live in those States? How does these conflicts affect you? The fact that western policies have presently and historically created internal problems within much of the muslim world is so well documented I don't know how anyone can deny them. Maybe if we left them alone long enough and treated them fairly they wouldn't have an excuse not to focus on those issues and would, given their own time, organically find ways of addressing their own problems.

No, they won't address their own problems. They've had 14 centuries to do so and their state of affairs is worse than ever. They'll blame the US, much like you do, for all their problems never once thinking about it, but instead will turn to their holy book to find the answers. And, what does their holy book say about it? Go to war and fight for your god.

 

[(Q)]

I'm not interested insaying anything to someone who makes specious allegations and is then unwilling to back them up.

Put up or shut up

Definitely, a spewing-coffee-through-the-nose hilarity coming from you, Sam.

 

[GeoffP]

Its your allegation. You support it. I'm not interested insaying anything to someone who makes specious allegations and is then unwilling to back them up.

This is what I thought you'd do. I remember the statement quite well. I've given you the chance to confirm or retract, which is more than you've ever done for your actual slanders on me.

So your actions speak for themselves, I guess. You "put up".

Now: why do you feel this way? And in some circumstances, but not in others?

You may still retract if you wish.

 

[S.A.M.]

This is what I thought you'd do. I remember the statement quite well. I've given you the chance to confirm or retract, which is more than you've ever done for your actual slanders on me.

So your actions speak for themselves, I guess. You "put up".

Now: why do you feel this way? And in some circumstances, but not in others?

You may still retract if you wish.

So you can speciously "remember" it again differently?

Like this?

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2195500#post2195500

Thanks but no thanks

Your lies and misrepresentations have become toxic and you should be made to substantiate them

 

[GeoffP]

So you can speciously "remember" it again differently?

Like this?

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?p=2195500#post2195500

Thanks but no thanks

Your lies and misrepresentations have become toxic and you should be made to substantiate them

Your link was back to your own post and entirely irrelevant.

I see, however, that you have decided not to retract. Shall I assume you support such a statement? If I'm incorrect, please so indicate.

Note: I couldn't possibly "remember it again differently"; even were I motivated to do so, which I certainly am not, your allegation doesn't really apply to the way in which the question was asked, Sam.

Anyway, I'll give you a chance here: which "lies and misrepresentations" are these? How are they "toxic"? Feel free to locate any such example and we can discuss it wherever you like.

 

[S.A.M.]

Now you cannot even click on a link effectively?

I've made my position pretty clear. When you pretend to represent my views, back them up.

Otherwise, I have plenty of links to show how you misrepresent other people's viewpoints.

 

[GeoffP]

Please illustrate them then. I'm certain you have some material bookmarked somewhere, showing not at all what you hope it will.

I will consider your answer to my question - kindly offered again for your consideration - a yes.

 

[S.A.M.]

I already did.

Or if clicking on links is still beyond you, we'll consider it an admission of failure.

 

[GeoffP]

Hahaha. I did already. That's how I generated the follow-up questions.

I think you're done.

 

[Bells]

Sure. Its not a secret. The Sahawat, touted as a success story, was armed and funded by the US. So was Saddam. After he killed the Kurds.

So were the warlords in Afghanistan.

Were. But your words on the subject seem to indicate as though you believe the US Government is currently funding the very extremists they are at war with, paying them to kill civilians:

Because the Americans pay them to do it.

Do you think the Americans are currently funding the extremists and the terrorists they are currently at war with, with the intent that those extremists and terrorists bomb civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan?

 

[S.A.M.]

Were. But your words on the subject seem to indicate as though you believe the US Government is currently funding the very extremists they are at war with, paying them to kill civilians:



Do you think the Americans are currently funding the extremists and the terrorists they are currently at war with, with the intent that those extremists and terrorists bomb civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Let me respond with a question. Do you think the US government did not notice the ethnic cleansing in Anbar?

Do you think John McCain talks to dead people?

 

[James R]

Funny. I thought Bell's question would have been easy to answer with a simple "yes" or "no".

 

[S.A.M.]

Funny, I thought this was a discussion forum.

 

[Baron Max]

Let me respond with a question. Do you think the US government did not notice the ethnic cleansing in Anbar?

Muslims killing other Muslims?

Sure we noticed it, SAM, but if we'd have done anything to stop it, you would have been the first to complain about our ....interference!!

Now, of course, you're complaining that we didn't ....interfere!!

You're a hoot, SAM.

Baron Max

 

[S.A.M.]

Is that why the Awakening is called a success?

 

[James R]

SAM:

You make an outrageous claim that the US is directly funding the very groups they are supposed to be fighting, for the purpose of hurting innocent civilians, then you refuse to take ownership of your own statement when pressed about it.

I suggest you either retract the claim or support it.

 

[Baron Max]

Is that why the Awakening is called a success?

Well, in Anbar, there's a distinct lack of Muslims killing Muslims now, so most people except you would call that a success.

You seem happiest when Muslims are killing other Muslims, which I just can't grasp ...and I've asked you why you defend that tactic, yet you've never, ever explained it except with idiotic statements about Mexican hitmen????????

Baron Max

 

[S.A.M.]

SAM:

You make an outrageous claim that the US is directly funding the very groups they are supposed to be fighting, for the purpose of hurting innocent civilians, then you refuse to take ownership of your own statement when pressed about it.

I suggest you either retract the claim or support it.

I already supported it. The much acclaimed Awakening which the US claims is a "success" was an ethnic cleansing of the Shia. If you read Greg Palasts independent report, the US troops have occupied the empty homes of the Shia and the much touted Abu Risha was denounced as a fake sheik by the very Awakening members he is purported to lead. The Shia have moved out of Anbar and no al Qaeda member has been identified as killed or dead. John McCain is getting reports of Anbar from a dead man.

What more do you need?

 

[Bells]

Let me respond with a question. Do you think the US government did not notice the ethnic cleansing in Anbar?

Do you think John McCain talks to dead people?

You still didn't answer my question.

As I said, your statement was way wayyyy out there in the realm of 'what the fuck'. I am seeking clarification as to what you meant. I am well aware of US policy to fund regimes to suit their own agenda. But again, this is vastly different. You made a claim that the US Government is paying extremists and terrorists to blow up civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan. When questioned about your statement, you started talking about past incidents, completely ignoring the fact that your statement was addressed to current incidents where terrorists and extremists are murdering civilians, most of whom Muslims.

So again, do you think the US is currently paying the extremists they are currently at war with, to murder civilians in Iraq and Afghanistan?

 

[S.A.M.]

Yeah I think so. The evidence is that the US is lying about its motives and what it is actually doing there.