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

[quadraphonics]

So this religious leader who is part of 10% of Muslims used his revolution and all his suppression methods to force people to act like that?

No, he ordered his own subordinates (military, intelligence, political and otherwise) to act on such a basis, while exorting his tens of millions of citizens (including millions of devout followers), and millions of other sympathetic believers around the world, to do likewise.

He was not without real influence and power, both official and unofficial.

 

[quadraphonics]

Looking back at materials that are banned in certain countries or the publication of materials which is banned in, lets say, Germany, brings a couple more reasons to mind.

BTW, you should stop citing European examples of censorship when challenging Americans on the issue of free speech. Americans in general (and certainly the ones that are really active on the free speech issue) regard Europe as having disappointingly unenlightened, restrictive speech laws. When we aren't busy fending off international terrorism aimed at our free speech, you'll often find us lambasting Europeans over their backwards hate speech and incitement laws.

 

[S.A.M.]

They refer to it as "The Islamic Revolution." It represents of co-option of the 1979 Iranian revolution, which was promptly consolodated by the Islamists, who spent the following decades trying to use the country as a base for a Shia-led worldwide Islamic Revolution..

Ah you mean they want to spread liberalisation, the Iranian way. Its a natural consequence of the exuberance of success, apparently. The desire to share it, by force even.

What did they do specifically to spread this revolution?

 

[iceaura]

There are more reasons that can prevent the publication of material or that can apply forced censorship than just coercion and public nuisance. Looking back at materials that are banned in certain countries or the publication of materials which is banned in, lets say, Germany, brings a couple more reasons to mind. isnt antagonising a large group of people a public nuisance?

Inciting to riot and commit crimes is. But that wasn't Rushdie's doing - he just wrote a novel. That was other people's doings.

You guys, as adults, are responsible for your own behavior.

 

[Arsalan]

No, he ordered his own subordinates (military, intelligence, political and otherwise) to act on such a basis, while exorting his tens of millions of citizens (including millions of devout followers), and millions of other sympathetic believers around the world, to do likewise.

He was not without real influence and power, both official and unofficial.

So those tens of millions of people went out and killed other people?

 

[Arsalan]

BTW, you should stop citing European examples of censorship when challenging Americans on the issue of free speech. Americans in general (and certainly the ones that are really active on the free speech issue) regard Europe as having disappointingly unenlightened, restrictive speech laws. When we aren't busy fending off international terrorism aimed at our free speech, you'll often find us lambasting Europeans over their backwards hate speech and incitement laws.

I was born in Pakistan but raised in Africa and Europe. So I dont know what Americans think about all this. Im just looking at the various things that were banned and burned in the USA to see exactly what the problem with offending people is.

 

[quadraphonics]

Ah you mean they want to spread liberalisation, the Iranian way.

No, they are hard-line conservatives. They don't want to liberalize anything, as such. If they had their way, you would long since have been executed in public for stepping out of your place as a woman.

What did they do specifically to spread this revolution?

You mean besides tracking and murdering Iranian dissidents the world over, issuing hit contracts on the heads of authors in other countries who criticize their leader and religion, holding revolutionary training seminars for recruits from other countries, attempting to overthrow the government of Bahrain, and supporting insurgent movements throughout the Middle East?

Did you sleep through the 1980's or something?

 

[iceaura]

So those tens of millions of people went out and killed other people?

A few did, yes.

I was born in Pakistan but raised in Africa and Europe. So I dont know what Americans think about all this. Im just looking at the various things that were banned and burned in the USA to see exactly what the problem with offending people is.

Not much has been banned or burned "in the USA". At the federal level, some obscenity is about it - and that many years ago, long set aside by the courts.

We have fundies in the US, too. They occasionally ban books from the local libraries, etc - they haven't called for the murder of authors and so forth, but they probably would if allowed - fundies have a lot in common the world over.

 

[quadraphonics]

So those tens of millions of people went out and killed other people?

Some of them, yes. Others merely intimidated, and still others stuck to lending moral support to the whole operation.

 

[Arsalan]

Inciting to riot and commit crimes is. But that wasn't Rushdie's doing - he just wrote a novel. That was other people's doings.

You guys, as adults, are responsible for your own behavior.

I wasnt involved in anything related to Rushdie. And even now I find it hard to care about exactly what he does and or did. But thats probably because I wasnt as close to the colonial period as they were or I didnt feel the pain personally.

 

[quadraphonics]

Im just looking at the various things that were banned and burned in the USA

Then why do you keep citing examples from Europe?

I don't recall you citing any such examples from the US.

 

[Arsalan]

Some of them, yes. Others merely intimidated, and still others stuck to lending moral support to the whole operation.

How many of those tens of millions that supposedly listen to him as devoutly as they breathe? That act on his every word?

 

[quadraphonics]

And even now I find it hard to care about exactly what he does and or did.

Could have foold me.

 

[Arsalan]

Could have foold me.

Meh, I just laid out some of the reasons the people responded the way they did. Im too lazy to actually care about a lotta stuff. Besides, why not follow the example of the Prophet by not actually caring and or responding negatively if other people are calling you names and or offending you, right?

 

[S.A.M.]

No, they are hard-line conservatives. They don't want to liberalize anything, as such. If they had their way, you would long since have been executed in public for stepping out of your place as a woman.

Would that have happened under Mossadegh?

You mean besides tracking and murdering Iranian dissidents the world over, issuing hit contracts on the heads of authors in other countries who criticize their leader and religion, holding revolutionary training seminars for recruits from other countries, attempting to overthrow the government of Bahrain, and supporting insurgent movements throughout the Middle East?

Are we talking about the CIA now?

 

[quadraphonics]

Would that have happened under Mossadegh?

There's no way to know. Regardless, though, that doesn't make the Iranian dictatorship any less malign, or any more "liberalizing."

They easily beat the Shah's lifetime record of human rights abuses within a year or two of taking power, by the way.

Are we talking about the CIA now?

Nope.

 

[iceaura]

Are we talking about the CIA now?

So my suggestion about the Tyrannosaurus in Jurassic Park doesn't suit you?

 

[S.A.M.]

There's no way to know. Regardless, though, that doesn't make the Iranian dictatorship any less malign, or any more "liberalizing."

They easily beat the Shah's lifetime record of human rights abuses within a year or two of taking power, by the way..

Are you sure? I think the Savama used to be the Savak. The problem with training and funding extremist factions is that they behave like extremists.

Nope

Hard to tell which is which here.

 

[spidergoat]

Spreading hatred, spreading lies etc etc

A work of fiction is a lie? No shit. Why are we supposed to hate Islam, just because Mohammed was portrayed as a human being who acted according to the customs of his time? What is there to hate about that?

 

[Arsalan]

A work of fiction is a lie? No shit. Why are we supposed to hate Islam, just because Mohammed was portrayed as a human being who acted according to the customs of his time? What is there to hate about that?

oh no reason, after all its not like anyone has written about any other group that they have a barbaric culture and want to spread that culture and control others through lies, conquest or other means.