Well Wavelength, I suspect that like much of what you write, this is pretty much just your opinion, which unfortunately has no connection to the content of my post.

....."What a bitter and abusive post.  And shockingly arrogant, especially since you appear to be writing and comprehending at about the 10th grade level”....

Things like “bitter, abusive,” don’t have context in an intellectual debate, and nothing that I’ve written could or would be described as such, by a mature and reasonably balanced mind.

A little arrogance might be read in my text, but in reality, it’s more like personal frustration with an uncomprehending pupil, who “wants” to play like an adult, but still has to slip into their emotional sling, because maybe the realities of the truth are indeed too painful for many minds to deal with. So, some take escape in simply denying the unvarished truth. It makes me sad, but not bitter.

On the other hand, I do understand that pain and denial. So, I’ll let you have that escape. It won’t make things any BETTER for you or the world, but it won’t make anything worse either.

Cyrena,

What a bitter and abusive post.  And shockingly arrogant, especially since you appear to be writing and comprehending at about the 10th grade level.  Don’t fret about your skills at this stage in the game.  Everything will get ironed out when you move on to junior college.

BF Punk
You’ve totally missed the entire parameters of the debate, and you’ve taken it off into a whole different straw channel, to justify the destruction, and to argue with either me, or Nahida, or whomever else. You can’t even tell the difference between my own position, (which is strictly academic and based on the social behavior of all global groups of people *IN CONFLICT* at any given period in time…in the HISTORY and trajectory of these conflicts.) and the position of those who have been living the nightmare of it most of their lives.

Bf the punk has proven this, with this comment:

• Again Nahida, not the topic of the video.
The discussion of Iraq and all of the various histories related to the middle east are not appropriate… the topic we have before us is big enough. 
It’s pretty amazing that anyone would say something as totally ignorant as “THE DISCUSSION OF IRAQ AND ALL OF THE “VARIOUS HISTORIES” RELATED TO THE MIDDLE EAST ARE “NOT APPROPRIATE”. The topic we have before us is big enough.”

Well, moron, you cannot HAVE a discussion about the MIDDLE EAST, WITHOUT discussing the VARIOUS HISTORIES. Get some education and learn how to connect the dots.
Now, here is the prompt AGAIN:

Is religion the reason for the violence in the Middle East, or is it a compilation of socio-politcal-economic repression.

Yes, this is in fact a very broad “topic” considering the fact that neither you or the accusers of the religion, have even specified what the “Middle East” is, nor have you considered the fact that Islam is not the only religion practiced in the region, so you have just broadly narrowed it down to “Qur’an totin’ religious extremists who carry it with them into battle and into the ballot boxes, which they never had before 3 years ago in Iraq, and before 18 months ago in the Palestinian “terrortories.”

I’m also not sure that you even understand the meaning of “secularist” who you claim are NOT the ones setting off IED’s that kill our troops, (that wouldn’t kill our troops, if our troops were not THERE). So let me give you a fairly clear idea of what secularists are. Secularists may or may not have religious beliefs as part of their tradition or culture, or personal belief system, but they are clear in that those religious beliefs don’t have anything to do with the price of tea in China or oil in the Middle East. The Tamil Tigers in Indonesia are about as “secular” as any Muslim, Christian, or Jew could be, and they have heavily engaged in asymmetrical warfare for decades. (asymmetrical warfare again being the tool of the weak against the strong, in any struggle for self-determination).

So for now, we’re gonna take the holy books (all of them) and religion in general –off the table-. When we do, we will find the REAL reasons for “the violence in the Middle East”. So, get to reading.

As for me allowing the Iraqis to speak for themselves, I think I mentioned before, that THEY ALREADY HAVE. They’ve been asking us to LEAVE, but nobody wants to hear that.

So, it’s not about religion. It’s about we are there as an occupying force, in a country that is not ours, where we have no legitimate business. Period.

And, contrary to your assertion that those crazy Islamists with Korans in hand, are the ones that are preventing any reconstruction of the areas that we have demolished, I would point you to the Green Zone in Baghdad, which includes the newly constructed American Embassy, (the largest in the world, and to the tune of nearly a billion dollars of your parents’ taxpaying dollars). Let me add that the entire compound includes apartment complexes, a movie theater, a golf course, independent transportation system, and it is completely sealed off from the rest of the city, with it’s own independent sources for electricity and water, and trash collection, etc, etc.

How is it, that these crazy bomb wielding religious fanatics weren’t able to interrupt THAT construction?

Again Nahida, not the topic of the video.

The discussion of Iraq and all of the various histories related to the middle east are not appropriate… the topic we have before us is big enough. 

Much of the “counter-culture” propaganda that you have seems to be produced by Americans for Americans.  Hmmm, didn’t you say that Americans are arrogant and don’t allow for other points of view?  Or are these claims just random missiles that you launch in hopes of doing damage regardless of the truth?

How many anti-muslim extremist documentaries have been produced in Palestine?  Or anywhere else in the middle east? 

I can watch pro-Palestine stuff at will here in America.

Car bombs in the UK… with the perpetrators shouting “Allah!  Allah!”.  A fully intentional civilian target (once again).  Was there a religious reason for the violence?  Gosh, it’s hard to tell.

THEN STEP UP TO THE PLATE AND START SWINGING SISTER

We’re not going anywhere.

You won’t thank us later.

But your children’s children will.

The Bases Are Loaded

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GQHeo-CMQyc&eurl=ht tp://www.ichblog.eu/index.php?option=com_seyret&task=vi deodirectlink&id=56018

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A6j3t82qCYI&mode=re lated&search;=

PS Nahida,

Stop yelling.
It makes your argument look weak.

Nahida,

We don’t attack you.
At all.
Ever.
And we don’t attack your people.
We attack your despotic and dangerous leaders, and their armies.
As BF pointed out, there have been many just and necessary wars.
Innocents die in the crossfire. It is very sad and unavoidable. 

Here is the question though.
Why do your people allow despotic mad-men to run your countries?
Did your people want Sadam Hussein as a leader?
Did they want the Taliban?
No?
Then why do you have them as your leaders?
Is it because your people are helpless to do anything about it?
Well we are not helpless.

As for Palestine, “your people” finally get a free vote to elect a leader and you elect Hamas? Talk about deserving what you get.

I swear I feel like I was walking down the street and saw a man beating his wife in the driveway of his house. I decide to be a hero.
I run over and jump on the man tackling him to the ground. I get him in a choke hold, and I am about to call to his wife and tell her to run inside and call the police when suddenly BAM!
His wife has picked up a baseball bat and is now beating me with it.
“Get off my husband you bastard!”
“Get off our property! This is none of your business!”

What goes on in your homeland Nahida is every bit as much my business as the bruises on my next door neighbors face.

If you can’t do anything about the despotic leaders running your countries then we will. You can thank us later when you recover from your brainwashing.

cyrena,

This isn’t a wartime strategy forum, but quickly…
“We” didn’t expect terrorist to create mayhem as we attempt to rebuild infrastructure.  If it weren’t for the extreme religious folks, we would have accomplished years of rebuilding by now.

I didn’t blanket Iraqi’s as religious nuts doing the violence...nice try… but there are certainly enough in Iraq that it is seemingly impossible to help the good citizens.

The construction workers need Army escorts for crying out loud… this is amazing.  People who translate for the Americans fear for their lives!  This makes it outrageously difficult to get things fixed up...to say the least.

How much is it helping (the rebuilding effort) for people to hold such a strong belief in the Koran? 

So keeping to the point of the video:
It’s the religious influences that are setting the Iraqi’s and Americans into this quagmire.  **Notice that these aren’t secularists setting the bombs off on roadsides and markets.**

Cyrena, like Nahida, perhaps you should let the Iraqi citizens speak for themselves.  I know you are upset with the invasion, but let’s deal with the *current* situation.  Voting is the best way to truly know the values of the citizens.  Not quite sure why this concept upsets you… perhaps the Iraqi’s would vote in ways that don’t support your views? perhaps?

90% of your post, Cyrena, was wishful thinking as you make silly and extreme inferences regarding my statements… fake straw man stuff to set yourself up for your favorite rant I suppose.

Timmy

You can criticise our faith as much as you like

BUT

DO NOT attack us in our own lands

STOP killing us in our homes because of our faith

3legcat and ender:
I have read rapidly through your latest posts directed at me and will spend more time later this weekend actually digesting them.  I have a few responses to each of you but it is time for a bit of a respite.

After all, it is nearing the 4th of July and this blogger does have a satisfying life outside this sphere.  I would like to spend a bit more of my time with those I hold close to my heart over this long and anticipated weekend.  Therefore, I will return in a few days, refreshed and ready to dive head first into more debate, dialogue and discourse on this commanding but alluring blog.

Nahida,

I’ve seen various news shows here in the U.S. documenting similar tragic events suffered my Muslim people in Palestine and elsewhere.  With freedom of the press, Americans are subjected to all sorts of information that points to the human costs even when it isn’t in our best light.  Can you say that for your region?

Nothing good is coming from the fearful reactions on both sides.  It appears to be a chronic problem.

Of course, you know that skirmishes and full blown wars in all of man’s history have produced these stories 1000 fold.  In the U.S. battle against Hitler, there are untold stories of nightmarish actions, unintended deaths, and children who suffered.

Do you have any videos of Palestinians dragging Muslim snipers out into the street and beating them.... you know, the one’s that run back into those civilian neighborhoods to hide? 

It’s one hell of a tricky issue to manage without harming others from a police perspective.  Where I’m from, hiding among civilians is considered the lowest possible tactic.

Many of the photographs on your web site show Israeli soldiers that appear to want to be anywhere else but Palestine.  Palestinian seem to be cheerfully shouting in the face of Israeli soldiers… some appear to be offering angry verbal attacks while others are grinning and enjoying the attacks on the soldier.

Somehow, these kids fail to give me the impression that the soldier is considered (by the kids) to be a threat..... I doubt those kids would dare do such a thing to a cleric (god forbid).  I only looked at a few photos, but the one soldier I remember was holding his weapon to keep the kids/adults at bay and yet his finger was completely away from the trigger and just holding the grip part of the rifle.  The soldier looked like, “oh please!  beam me up scottie!”

I know your intention was to show “Jew with gun points gun at Muslim babies”.  Granted, those are always the most effective emotional buttons (and occur as a tragic outcome of every battle) but perhaps you should edit your photos a bit better.  Those kids, for instance, don’t depict your “oppressed and fearful citizens” theme.

I am sure there are photos in there that better depict the frightened expressions of innocent victims of military action… I think I saw a few. 

Given the fear and despair on both sides, I am sure that the Israeli’s and Palestinians can produce many more horrible tales than you or I could ever know.

But no, the west does an excellent job of letting American’s know about the tragedy of war.  Sorry to disappoint.  I’ve seen many terrible and graphic news stories, and don’t see an end to it.

Although your bias is perfectly in line with the views of Truthdig and Sheers/Hedges, it isn’t in keeping with the dialog in the video. 

Religion is part of what keeps the Israels in defense of Israel, and it’s part of the reason Muslims think they deserve Israel for themselves and want to slaughter Jews.

Hence, whether you want to admit it or not, Religion is playing the biggest role in *YOUR* (Nahida) life as well.  (that’s the point of the video)

You can thank the beloved religion for the photos you like to share.

BFSkinner, I can’t believe you wrote this:
#82469 by BFskinnerPunk on 6/29 at 9:43 pm

• Nahida and her sort, will manage to find a way to continue blaming the U.S. for the unspeakable violence that would ensue, but that appears to be the only way religious people can divert blame from themselves and their magic book.
• I am continually amazed that we haven’t held such an election seeing as to how we seem to want out as badly as Nahida wants us out.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Here’s the thing BF….you’re living in a dream world, if you think that “we” should just have another election, and ask the Iraqis if they want us to leave. You don’t quite get the picture on the ground. Did “we” set up a free election for the Iraqis, to see how they felt about us invading them and occupying them? No. I would remember. And, since “we” have NOT, in over 4 years time, been able to provide even the most BASIC of services to the Iraqi population, having virtually DESTROYED the infrastructure that they HAD, and since that is only ONE of the many violations of the law that WE are responsible for, (the UN Conventions require that an occupying force provide for the civilization population, as in SECURITY, and basic services, food, shelter, water, schools, roads, hospitals…I could go on.)

So, now that we’re into the 5th year of this assault and occupation, and over a million of these citizens have been murdered, another 35-40 thousand are held in American prisons, (in Iraq), another 2 million have fled to neighboring countries, and another 2 have been internally displaced, and people are afraid to come out of their houses, (if they happen to even still be in them).

So tell me….can YOU set up a nice free election for the nation? Probably not, and you are showing a less than neutral position yourself, because you’ve already said that such an “election” would be “violent”, because of all the people having their “magic book”, the Qur’an. So, you’ve just tagged all Iraqis, as being religious fanatics, when in fact that isn’t even close to the truth. If I remember correctly, they supposedly pulled this off a few years ago, under the direction of the infamous Paul Bremer, and I didn’t see anybody being “violent”. Matter-of-fact, it was a major media event for the bush propaganda machine, to make sure that we all saw these dancing Iraqis with purple fingers.

And, we ALSO know, from so many journalists and other researchers who have spent extended time in the area in the past few years…people who are able to blend in with the local population at many levels, to actually KNOW what the people, as well as their local leaders, are thinking, and saying, and doing. So, we KNOW they want us out. And, I’m not talking from a Palestinian position, or a religious position, (because the new Christian “movement” in the US has turned me into an avid agnostic).

So, my primary position is –The LAW- and our being in Iraq is illegal, and is in violation of international law on multiple counts. And, NO, our leaving there cannot possibly make things any worse than we already have, because it is OUR PRESENCE that has created the disaster there. The Iraqis know that, and so do our troops. Matter of fact, anybody in the real world of it, will relay the same. The Iraqis also know, (ALL of them) that we are there to steal their oil, and a look at the permanent bases and the Green Zone, make that all very clear to them.

The Iraqis overwhelmingly supported the conception of a democracy when they first had an opportunity to create one, but now they clearly see that they have simply been colonized. Yes, they want us gone, and they can handle the small number of al-Qaeda terrorists that WE “invited” to their sovereign nation. The ones they didn’t have before we invaded them, and set the stage.

Now here’s an interesting link to something on the same topic as the debate, but much closer to home.

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/062907J.shtml

And?

Presented here are six videos that will not be screened on American or British

televisions. Nor will they be shown in the Cinema Houses there. Six videos that documentthe horrors of the Israeli Occupation.

They were produced and published by B’tselem (The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights in the Occupied Territories) This thread was originally posted on Sabbah’s Blog...’borrowed’ with thanks.

“Daddy will come at night, like a butter fly”
Author : Haitham

http://desertpeace.blogspot.com/2007/06/peace-loving-i sraeli-occupation.html

Nahida,

Your position as a Palestinian is confusing the topic.  When you say, for example, leave “us” alone I can only assume you are taking Palestinians as “us"… not the entire Islamic world!

OK.. but I have your answer.

I believe that you will witness a reign of terror that would make Stalin blush should be pull out.  Nevertheless, we should respect the views of the Iraqi’s on this matter (not palestinians, iranians, etc. etc.).

Instead of letting you speak for Iraqi’s, why not hold another free election in Iraq and let the Iraqi’s speak for themselves?
On the ballot is a simple question:
“Would you like the U.S. to leave Iraq completely as soon as possible?”

Of course, the election would be violent due to the actions of those who keep the Koran close at hand… but we could have our clear answer.

In this way, if we are voted out of Iraq we could leave because the citizens want us out.. not the bombers. 

The subsequent terror would be the responsibility of the citizens (and Islam) and the U.S. could sheepishly bow out of it’s vacation in the dark ages of the world.

Nahida and her sort, will manage to find a way to continue blaming the U.S. for the unspeakable violence that would ensue, but that appears to be the only way religious people can divert blame from themselves and their magic book.

I am continually amazed that we haven’t held such an election seeing as to how we seem to want out as badly as Nahida wants us out.

In the mean time, we could have a Manhattan Project directed at developing an alternative fuel (with all of the money saved from exiting Iraq).

With an alternative fuel, we can cease sending money to this bastion of religious hell...and allow them to stew in their own religious mayhem without getting rich for simply pumping grease out of the ground.

It would be nice to have no worries about oil from the middle east.  To have the luxury of viewing their frightening religious behavior from far, far away… allowing them to truly… for the first time in 80 years or so to “handle their own affairs”.

Again, I would like to offer the entirety of Israel to Muslims as well.  (remember? I gave Georgia to the Jews many posts ago!)

Nahida, on that matter we don’t differ at all. right?  Does my solution work for you?  So you would move back to Palestine or where ever you want to in the middle east feeling completely safe, right?

We could finally answer the question: Is religion causing violence in the region?  Are young girls who go astray safe from torture/death?  Will men be able to openly question an Ayatollah without fear?

My solution is cheap and fast.  What could be better?

The U.S. should, with hat in hand, bow out with all humility and the apology, “sorry, we just didn’t know.”

Wow Again! nahida!

I couldn’t agree with you more. We should pull out of the Iraq, and cut off all aid to Palestine.  We should deny immigration to anyone from a terrorist producing state, with Saudi Arabia at the top of the list, and evict all non US citizens from those countries immediately.  Unfortunately, al queada did kill 3000 americans on american soil while based out of Afghanistan, by their own admission, so we need to reengage the war on terror that we abondoned to attack Iraq, and wipe out every vestige of al queada from there and the Pakistani border.

BTW, if we do that, al queada or a nutbag ruler of an Islamic nation will step up attacks against Israel, and they won’t be as nice as us.

Say goodbye to Mecca, and so long Tehran.

Nahida,
So you’re saying that you think that if the US pulled out of Iraq this very day, you would be happy at the bloodbath which ensued? 
You’d be happy with all the muslims killing each other?
Just want to be clear that you’re answering the question we’re asking.
Thanks,
~JP

Josh & BFskinnerPunk

you keep asking:

{You have yet to answer whether you want America to pull out of Iraq right now (its been posed to you at least 3 times)} #82432 by Josh

{I still ask (3rd or 4th time), do you think it best that we simply pack our bags and leave?....letting devout worshipers of your one true religion take the reigns
Somehow, I believe that you are secretly thinking, “please no!”.  Why?  Could it be that you fear an increase in the sick Koran-based violence that we are seeing daily on the news? } #82431 by BFskinnerPunk

And somehow I started doubting that you even read and comprehend what I write!!

In plain English I wrote many times answering your questions, saying that YES,I want you to leave our countries, weather, Iraq, Afghanistan or Palestine

I/We want to see an end of your occupation NOW

Here what I said before:

{In simple words and in plain English:

GET OFF OUR BACKS, for God’s sake, leave us alone and get out of our lands; get out, for humanity’s sake!

Why don’t you spend your money at making your lives better than at destroying our lives? } #80718 by nahida

• {What about if we tell you nicely, to leave us alone NOW? } #82394 by nahida

Nahida

You said:
Atheists criticize religious fanatics for precisely what they themselves do (Refusal to accept that the other have the right to hold a different view about the world); yet they can’t even see the similarities.

You have it wrong Nahida
I accept the right of others to believe whatever they want.
You can believe that God created the universe and dictated your good book.
You have that right. I will never try to take that right away from you. It’s yours.

I have the right though, to criticize your wacky belief. And that’s all we are doing here is criticizing. Not trying to take away your right to believe. That is your straw man argument.

We criticize your beliefs in hope that some of you might come to your senses, but we are not threatening you with jail, or death for your beliefs. That sounds more like something you would find in a muslim country, but not here in this free forum.

Your RIGHT to believe is not being attacked here.
Your BELIEF is being criticized.

Feel free to criticize my non-belief all you like.
I promise you that I won’t act like a wounded animal who’s right to “not believe” is being attacked.
I will just laugh at being criticized for not believing in a primitive fairy tale.

Once again it is your belief that is being criticized Nahida.
Your right to believe is still very much in tact, and safe.
That is, so long as you live in a western secular society.

part 1 of 2
Nahida,
Its nice to see you respond, perhaps my declaration of death was a little premature.  But you are still cherry picking your responses...I’m about to respond to each and every point you make.  Please try to do the same.  I know it will be a daunting task as they continue to mount to even larger numbers.
In my response, it is not apparent that I support the war, it is only apparent that you need me to support the war to make the subsequent statements. 

Note, I didn’t try and state that the war was justified, or that killing people was good, I was simply rebutting your accusation that we’re trying to keep you from being free in your homelands.  I’m making the point that we’re not trying to take your land as ours.  In addition, you said you want to choose your own representatives and government, and for some reason (or lack thereof) you think having a dictator is a ‘governmental choice’?

You have yet to answer whether you want America to pull out of Iraq right now (its been posed to you at least 3 times)

You continue to post all these statistics.  Let me be completely clear - nobody is saying that innocent folks are not dying.  War sucks, that stuff happens.  We all agree.

Please stop wasting our time with links to these statistics on crime (they have nothing to do with our debate).  Furthermore, the disgusting photos that you keep sending us to will not change our minds.  An almost decided factor of logical people is that they decide with their mind over their heart.  Therefore, seeing sad pictures may move us to tears, but it will not change our mind—logical arguments do that.  These pictures aren’t happy htings, but neither do they support your cause.  They have no context.  I see pictures of children mutilated and bombed—you seem to think we’ll believe they got this way from our assault.  I imagine the children that were in market places that were bombed by their own countrymen (suicide bombers) would look much the same.  Again—its a ploy that will not work on a well-reasoning person.

If you want to change our minds, you can only do so logical defenses here (which I’m finding very few and far between from your end).

Now, back to your post and my responses (to each and every point you make—please try to do the same)

end of part 1

So Nahida is working the Iraq war bit.  No one is a big fan of what occurred in Iraq....so it’s difficult to find who you are opposing on that.  This is not the subject of the video debate.

Let me re-phrase the actual topic:
“Is religion playing a critical part in the violent acts we see in the middle east?”
(or is it “socio-political” oppression?)

I still ask (3rd or 4th time), do you think it best that we simply pack our bags and leave?....letting devout worshipers of your one true religion take the reigns?

Somehow, I believe that you are secretly thinking, “please no!”.  Why?  Could it be that you fear an increase in the sick Koran-based violence that we are seeing daily on the news?

The final hope is that something good *will* come of this fiasco.  Perhaps the worldwide focus on the extremes of behavior in the region will help. A recognition that all cultures *aren’t* created equal and they aren’t all equally good....they aren’t equally safe either!

I think some muslims must, surely, notice that there is something that seems very distasteful about the strongly *religious influenced* behavior of their fellow muslims.  God, I hope so!  Anyway, perhaps they can have a positive, revolution from within allowing the west to merely sit back encourage it.

Your sarcasm (which is “rude") toward Josh is sad.  He is reminding you that no one wants you to change your personal belief or your wardrobe.  It is *you* who is suggesting that people want to suppress your ability to believe things or your ability dress in accord with those beliefs.  (Which, again, begs the question as to why so many Muslims flock to the secular west?...this clearly indicates that you are purely disingenuous in your “concern” about secular oppression. The moves of your Muslim cohorts are are bringing your fake “concerns” to light! You are merely trying to create an argument where none exists!)

If a true muslim wanted to live in perfect peace, I would think they would want to live under a system ruled by those who never release their clutch on the Koran.  So why do so many spend their last dollar on a one-way trip to Holland!!! (land of atheist, by the way)

Hello Linda.  I think we are, uh, actually saying pretty much the same thing.  As I was thinking about this though, it occured to me that Iran actually practices a form of democracy still.  Unfortunately, their religious leaders can’t be voted out of office as their secular leaders can.  If we stopped brandishing our crusaders swords at them, backed off the rhetoric, and made as much of a concession to opening economic ties and trade with them as we have with China, there is decent chance that they demote the role of their ayatollahs and form a more secular gov’t.  They seem the most receptive to modernization.  But if we do as we did to their last secular gov’t, and confuse democracy and secularism with capitalism, and find in favor of capitalism, then we almost force them into the position of relying on whackjob fundamentalist supported by the state religion.  That kind of moral imperitive is the only thing that gives most gov’ts the nads to stand up to our economic power and war machine.
This may sound viscious, but it probably would have been better for the people of Iraq if we had left Saddam in power.  There was a much better chance of them throwing out a secular despot such as he was, than if he had religion on his side.  Don’t forget, that until this most recent war against Iraq, they were the home to more Jews and Christians than any other mideastern country than Israel.  He was an evil b@st@rd, but he was secular, and he was their evil B@st@rd.  And all of the evidence has shown that he was effectively contained, at least as far as being any threat to anyone but Iraqis.

Linda,

I wanted to praise your participation on this thread, more often than not, you have eloquently stated my position and done so more elegantly than I likely would have.  I hope you chose to post more.  I do have a few thoughts about the hedges vs. harris debate.

hedges

for chris hedges religion can not be to blame, for when a person acts destructively he/she is no longer following religion but is acting for other reasons.  he is confident that his definition of religious acts is on solid ground.  he sites as evidence that when the religious are not oppressed they do not gravitate to violence or if they do they are merely claiming religious dogma to prop up an authoritarian personality complex and if they didn’t have a religious cause they would find some other dogma to suit their needs.  chris believes that if you remove political oppression religion, including islam, will flourish in a benign and emotionally satisfying life enriching force of goodness.  he notes that most muslims are not fighting anyone, only the politically oppressed arab muslims. chris is quick to discard religious statements of motivation in acts of violence as mere after the fact justification for acts done solely for other reasons, that beliefs don’t really matter much, odd for a believer.  the contradiction in hedges position is that he can only acknowledge religion as tribalism when it serves a purpose he (and most of us) agree with (charity, civil rights, individual freedom), but not those he doesn’t. and some how he knows.

harris

sam acknowledges that there are many kinds of dogmatism and tribalism of which religion is just one, but for sam religion is the one that is the most disturbing, because it is ungrounded in evidence and it encourages wishful thinking.  disturbing because it is clearly man made and therefore can/should be man unmade.  furthermore it can easily be discarded, through open conversational pressure and by it butting up against modernity.  we can embarris people out of weird beleifs. 

sam has said many many times “what people believe matters”, beliefs are operative to (all?) actions.  in my opinion this is sam’s weakest point, that he can and should do the neuro-cognitive experimental work on this, rather than simply rely upon what people say as to why they do things.  ironically sam’s very funny “cracker eating behavior” commentary does highlight my point.  if you ask xtians why they stand in line for communion, they may expound glowingly about transubstantiation, however I suspect that for nearly all believers it is actually a symbolic ritual, that they do not taste and chew flesh, they eat a cracker and know it.  in The End of Faith, sam mentions the inquisition and highlights the pope’s hypocrisy in later granting financial rewards to snitches, but then sam fails to notice that this actual undermines his point, it took greed and envy to really get the inquisition going even then, in a pre modern society, it took greed to get neighbors to turn on each other, belief wasn’t enough on its own. 

scheer

yikes, nixon is dead, let it go man.

I look forward to hearing and reading more from sam, it is unlikely that I will buy chris’s book, he left me unimpressed

someone mentioned scott atran, and the beyond belief exchange with sam harris, I have watched that exchange many times and if you can get past scott’s dickishness he does present a strong challenge to harris.

on the iraq war I hold a position no one likes, I strongly and loudly opposed it before it began but now that my government (elected and reelected) did this, I feel we have a strong obligation to leave things better than we found them, including organizing a very large immigration (millions?) to the USA of Iraqi’s.

Josh
you asked about the ayatollah, and I thought I made the point clear, any educated Muslim can read and interpret and give his/ her opinion, no opinion is obligatory, no opinion is enforced, people can follow whatever opinion that coincides with their own thinking if they wanted, and if they haven’t got enough knowledge to make their own conclusions, but no one forces any opinion on anyone else.

That is generally the case… in the Shiite school of thought, there is more weight given to scholars, but my knowledge regarding how influential and how significant is limited, as most of the Shiite live mainly in Iran and I wasn’t directly exposed to the structure of society to measure or judge the level of influence by the ayatollahs.

I can only share my experience after living in at least 3 other Muslim countries, and I can confirm what I said earlier about fatwa. Educated people in Islamic studies can give their opinion but it’s up to the individual how to view or hold these opinions. The more educated individuals and societies are the more likely they are able to form their own opinions.

****************
Now, from your posts responding to mine, it is apparent that you support the war on Iraq, and you view it as necessary.
You said:
“we’re not trying to conquer your land and take it as ours………………I believe that’s what we’re trying to get Iraq to do—set up a democracy rather than a dictator”

Is this war done by the name of secular atheists then? Did you kill all those people to bring us democracy and secularism?

So, you as a secular atheist not only enthusiastic about killing of 665,000 Iraqis ( http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/) , but you also justify it. You give your country the right and liberty to murder us in the name of bringing democracy.

If that makes sense to you Josh, sorry, but to my limited mind it makes NO SENSE.

Your stance leaves me at loss…

Btw, did you know, (according to the narrative of the American establishment) that those who supposedly attacked the trade centres, none of them were Iraqi?

**************************
You also said:
“I believe that’s what we talk about when we state we’re trying to end the opression of women (note, if the ‘oppressive laws’ were removed, and all the women still chose to cover themselves, I don’t believe you’d see us over there demanding that you take it off—we just want you to have the ability to choose”

Now Josh, don’t give me propaganda blather please, show me the laws in Iraq that oppresses women and force them to cover up, produce your evidence or keep silent please.

While contemplating and reflecting trying to find these phantom laws; endeavour to count the number of women that your government have murdered while trying to liberate them from their veil.

Again you say: “if the ‘oppressive laws’ were removed, and all the women still chose to cover themselves, I don’t believe you’d see us over there demanding that you take it off—we just want you to have the ability to choose”

How very thoughtful!

So you would leave us alone (if we are still alive) after changing these laws, and after you realise that we still choose to cover, you will compassionately leave us alone then?

I am obliged! How very kind!

{You can see how thankful Iraqi women are, here:
http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article17921.htm }

What about if we tell you nicely, to leave us alone NOW?

What about if we tell you that we still want to cover?

What about stepping down from this high moral grounds where you standing, and listen to a Muslim woman’s request, to be left alone to chose how she wants to dress?

What about if I tell you as a Muslim woman that the way I dress is none of your business?

If going to another country, killing hundreds of thousands of its inhabitants (sorry liberating them) is considered in your eyes a civilised and enlightened act

I have nothing else to add!

Timmy:

Alas!  I believe we are beginning to make headway and find common ground.  When you say that “true and necessary dialogue is not rude” you are saying exactly what I have said in regards to Sam.

When one adds yelling, screaming, finger-pointing, emotional diatribes, verbal abuse and ridiculing to the equation---as one often sees with Rush Limbaugh or Bill O’Reilly on Fox (to name just a few)--- you will then see the true epitome of rudeness.

Sam is the antithesis of rude.  But you are right to say that those who do not agree with him will believe he as rude.  Instead of saying (in a respectful manner) they do not agree with him (which is a fact), they resort to criticisms towards him and call him a plethora of names including rude (which is their sorrowful opinion).  It is easier to attack him personally than to simply state why they disagree with him--because as we know they cannot logically support such disagreement.

Those who came before us thought talking about topics like sex, politics, women’s suffrage and other social issues were also rude (especially in mixed-company of gender.) And traditional convention, at the time, maintained these topics ought to be discussed only behind closed doors and not in the public foray.  It seems apparent some of this lingering midevil thinking still exists today in regards to religion.

Those of us who support Sam on this website and elsewhere, would do well to keep in mind the struggles he must incur from such wrath. If it is true (as he stated in the debate) that matters of religion give him bouts of insomnia, it might be fair to suppose such hostile rhetoric may do likewise.

I trust Sam will continue to shine the light on all this taboo and nonesense in the same manner he always has: with wit, charm, reason and diligence.  There is certainly nothing rude about that, one might claim.

Linda,

I believe that part of the reason for my ignorance (and the public ignorance) is that it would have been considered impolite to really “tell it like it is” to the public about the feverish religious views held by even the moderate muslims.

Anyone who cared to describe the true depth of religion would have been declared a racist or one who does not respect diversity.

My father lived in Saudi for over a year in the 70’s and spent a good deal of time with Oxford educated Saudi’s.  He had all sorts of tales of rather frightening viewpoints and practices.  Frankly, I thought he was merely telling tall tales. 

At the time, I thought the entire world was recognizing the beauty of a secular view and religion was becoming nothing more than a form of nostalgic nod to our primitive past. 

It wasn’t until the news directed our attention toward the middle east in the early 90’s that I began getting the hint!  Even then, I assumed it was only a few “Branch Davidians” that were so brutally religious.  I was wrong again.

I assumed that when someone said that they were a christian/muslim/jew, that their was an implied “wink wink...no one really believes it” sort of aspect to the conversation.

As Homer Simpson would say, “doh!”

Ender:

Allow me to jump into your circle of thoughts and comment on your recent remark that all this “discussion about our spread of democracy is premature.” (I brought up the topic of democracy yesterday in my statements about the Iraq War.)

If we could be so fortunate to simply be discussing the spread of democracy innocently and theorectically at a table in Star Bucks over a steaming cup of latte, or even here on this blog, then perhaps your remark could be taken with ingenuity and some serious consideration. 

But as you are aware, our not-so-good-intentioned-democracy-promoting government is beyond the prudent acts of discussing democracy’s role in foreign policy as they attempt to quell the spiraling damages of a civil war they incited under the auspices of “democracy” and being “greeted as liberators.”

To say discussion is premature belies the fact that those who didn’t give such consideration one moment of thought are now making the case indeed for why democracy in the Middle East is unmistakably premature or quite likely, ever possible at all. Talking about it in this context is not the unpardonable sin.  Taking action on it, as our government has done, in my opinion, is.

I stand by my words and quotes yesterday from Sam who basically says that expecting successful democracy in the Middle East today is like expecting 14th Centruy Christians to implement the right to vote successfully.  It is premature (in that sense), suicidal and illogical to boot.

Perhaps I have mistaken your intention, easy to do when one is not in a face to face conversation. You are an intelligent person and I agree with most of what you are saying.

This thread has become rather redundant, and is not moving forward.
Nahida appears unable to respond, so resorts to posting unrelated stats, poems, links, etc…
I believe this is the point Sam makes—none of the religious people can truly
debate their beliefs...because they keep circling and avoiding.
Therefore, until Nahida can actually answer the exact question that’s being asked (and they’ve been enumerated, bulleted, italicized, etc.), then all the rest of what she posts should be considered jibberish, specifically her ‘motivation to communicate’—preaching at someone is not communicating.  Communication requires talking and listening and then responding. 

(Note that when Scheer said something about Sam, and Sam replied that it was incorrect, Scheer quickly backpedalled saying that he wouldn’t pull his book out and put him on the spot.  This gave me the impression that Scheer really didn’t want to prove his foolishness, so gave himself the ‘noble’ out).

I do believe this thread to be dead.

Unfortunately, Nahida is the only active magic-believer who has bothered to participate in the forum discussion.  This says something about the willingness of her like-minded people to expose themselves to something other than their local witch doctor.

People who don’t subscribe to the supernatural childishness of religion (non-theists) would certainly like to see the rest of the world walk away from the dark ages of curses, satans, unicorns, prophets, fatwas, and angels. 

However, so long as your religion doesn’t affect the daily lives of your neighbors and community, then by all means, throw on your burka and bow to Santa Claus thirteen times a day! 

Diversity is an outcome of the freedom offered by a secular government...not fundamentalists. 

Not all sorts of “diverse” views are equal of course and no one knows this better than a magic-believer.  Nahida is utterly certain that Islam is the one true world view and all others are, sadly, misled.  Unfortunately she shares this single minded confidence with: Wiccans, Christians, Jews, Astrologers, Umbandas, Pagans, etc.

Interestingly, non-believers are not a part of that group.  This makes sense.  Not believing in any particular magic is not related in any way to a religious world view.  For example:  I don’t believe there is a Mule in my closet, but there is no particular actions, belief systems, dogmas, fanatical leaders,or rules associated with my non-mule belief.

I share a non-theist view with other non-theists, but that’s about all.  I also share a non-mule-in-my-closet belief with non-theists (which is exactly the same as our non-religious belief).  There simply is no evidence, and it’s HIGHLY improbable to say the least (mules *and* religions)

Beyond this non-believer stance, we atheists don’t share much in common in terms of life patterns, rituals, scriptures for life etc.  Religion *defines* the life and views of a believer.  Being a non-believer does no such thing.

To extend the example:
I also don’t play the game of Monopoly...but I don’t define myself as a non-Monopolyist.  I just don’t play the game!  (Just as non-believers don’t play the religious game)

Diversity:
So enjoy a belief in whatever you wish.  But there are limits to your “diverse” actions.
Regardless of how confident you are in your cleric or your prophet, you may not beat your daughter to death for childish rules about relationships with others (or any other reason).
You may not kill commuters on subway trains.
You get the point.

As long as you believe your receive instructions from the one true Zeus, I do not believe you should be entrusted with big weapons.  period.  atomic bombs, large explosives, whatever… you can’t have the capacity to mass kill if you are motivated by some sort of “divine intervention”.  Of course, many religionist leaders openly state that they want to squash infidels… so, that’s no good.  And it doesn’t say much for the “we respect diversity” view of some religionists.

Weapons are bad enough in the hands of the usual power-hungry, dogmatic leaders of the world… we do NOT need to add a belief that a leader’s hand is guided by a literal view of scripture!!! (pardon my lack of respect for diversity on this matter)

Like the irrational sports fan, Muslims may hate “the secular enemy” and at the same time stand in line to move to the land of the “the enemy”.  Ironically, this same secular enemy will protect their diversity, allow them to build mosques, and provide a land where they don’t have to fear the reprisal of some oppositional Muslim sect.  Religion is so powerful, that you can, at once, hate the secularist and yet trust the secularist at the same time!!!

It isn’t a fundamentalist view of Christianity or Judaism that is providing the open arms of the west.  nope.

Whatever warmth you may feel is brought to you buy the good atheist and otherwise secularist citizens!

BFSKINNER:

You were not alone when you thought the moderate Muslims in Iraq have taken you “by surprise with the severity of their religion” as the over 70% of Americans supporting the war at its inception bares out.  This is an example of how the American public was not given adequate information about the nature of the Iraq War and there was not enough debate and honest discussion leading up to it (much of that fault lies with the media ad Congress.)

But it indicates that Sam’s arguments pertaining to Islam reverberates this truth about many moderate religous believers. His views continue to demand serious consideraton in this world to shed light on such nuances.

Amicable minds have an uncanny tendency to seek out comman ground.  I believe we have done so at this time and for the moment.

Good luck with Nahida.  She needs an extreme form of guidance and you have displayed an incredible amount of patience in (hopefully) helping her come to grips with reality.

WoW nahida!

You make the same rediculous arguments fundamentalist xtians make in the US.  Foremost, Xtians are the MAJORITY. You stand zero chance of getting elected to public office if you ‘come out’ as an atheist.  I believe there is a muslim congressman now, but no professed atheist.  Next, atheist for the most part do not give a hoot what religion you practise, or what you teach your children.  That’s what your mosque, churches, temples and synaguoges are for.

Our Constitution, however, forbids any gov’t profession of any religion.  So our schools should be allowed to teach only generally accepted scientific method and theory.  Some states have broken this law and are facing the court challenges to have that breach of the constitution struck down, but by and large we are constitutionally a secular state. 

Since any state that recognizes any one religion as the only ‘true’ and acceptable religion, all religious states are predjudised against all other religions or lack thereof.  The same goes for any fundamentally religious person.  Your conviction of the correctness of you beliefs means that you consider my beliefs erroneous, and in the case of fundamentalist ztianity and islam, SATANIC.  Your very belief system is an affront to everyone not of the same faith.  The knowlege that you or anyone else considers me incapable of correct thought and action because regardless of what I do it comes from an evil source, offends me greatly.

So get over it.  Anything said to you here is nothing compared to the institutionalized demonization of other humans perpetuated by the Abrahamic religions.  The posters here have only called you an ignorant, misinformed and misled human.  Your religion has called us demons, and because of our intellectually sound belief systems, doomed to hell.

By the same token, the western, secularist nations will always find it impossible to deal rationally and peacefully with Islamic states. You’ve made up your mind that we cannot be correct because whatever we do, it isn’t in the name of your god or his pimp muhammed.

Like I said in an earlier post, the Islamic world must develope and accept secular forms of gov’t, or the only recourse for the rest of us will eventually be to bomb you back into the stone age...which might be an improvement for some Islamic nations.  So consider the ‘insults and affronts’ to your religion posted here as generous attempts to help you and all of Islam to realize the alternative is much, much worse.

Having a dialogue is never rude
Honest, well researched, and informed criticism is never rude.

Rudeness is:
Insults, name calling, belittling, hollering, verbal abuse… this is rude
This has been demonstrated evidently and eloquently by many fanatical atheists in this forum.
***********************
Choosing to be an atheist is not a problem.

The problem is:
Not accepting that others have the same right as you do in having a faith… that is a problem
Forcing atheists’ beliefs upon others under the disguise of science and rationality is unethical and oppressive.
*************************
Defending your beliefs and trying to convince people with them is not a problem

But fervent desire to destroy all other ideologies and to see an “end of faith” is a big problem
Absence of tolerance to all who disagree with you is a severe problem
Refusal and denial of plurality and diversity is a catastrophic nightmare for the future of our world

Atheists criticise religious fanatics for precisely what they themselves do (Refusal to accept that the other have the right to hold a different view about the world); yet they can’t even see the similarities.

BF

Of course I think it’s a great analogy. And a fun one.
But of course believers like Nahida will see it as an insult and an ill-informed attack.

I like how your analogy points out the important role that the taboo, on criticism of religion, plays in the whole equation.  It is a critical pillar in the structure of the problem.

And that is why I have hope when I see the outrage and indignation of people like Nahida on these Sam Harris blogs. For these are the noises of the taboo being lifted. These are the noises that we can expect. To hear them means that it’s happening. Blessed are the noises.

People got all semantical on me about the “rude” thing earlier.
All I was trying to point out, is that this discussion that we are having, used to be considered very rude. We are among the first people to be having these kind of conversations in such a public forum. Even atheists used to consider this kind of conversation to be rude when the faithful are listening. And now we are doing what we used to consider rude, and saying no, it’s not rude. It’s just true and necessary dialogue.

Ender,

I don’t know about your “50 year” estimate, but the current behavior of the middle east appears to bear out your appraisal of the current readiness of the middle east to absorb democracy and a respect for individuality.

In an attempt to sympathize with what it must be like to be raised in the conditions of a hard core religion, I can only imagine that the fanatic fans of a particular sports team must suffer the same handicap as a religious fanatic.

With the sports fan, a referree can make *no* calls against the fan’s favorite team.  In each case, the ref is accused of favoring the opposing team.  At best, the ref is accused of being just plain dumb.

In all other aspects of life, this sports fan is reasonable and seemingly normal, but get him in front of his favorite sports event when things don’t go his way, and it’s a real behavioral freak show.

And while the sports fan often does a brilliant job of producing a rationalization for his outrage against the refs and opposing team, it is clear to those who don’t suffer the same fanaticism that we are dealing with a truly deluded individual. (at least when discussing his game)

Of course, with a sports fan, we can question the value of having so much fanatical enthusiasm for such a silly and childish subject.  We do it all the time. -Not with a religious fanatic-

With a religious fanatic, it is considered very impolite to question a person’s religious fanaticism… and so we, in a sense, are witnessing the unbridled and drunken dance of delusions.  These delusions are politely protected by society. 

Of course, the content of a religious fervor consists of rules and meanings that have far greater and far more dangerous behavioral implications.

Ever watched a soccer hoodlum?  bad behavior, eh?  Now imagine giving that same hoodlum the notion that god wants him to protect and defend “the team”.  Now, even further, develop a taboo against questioning his world view!  (I would suggest that this is the final step in letting the venom flow.)

It’s an analogy that I’m kicking around.. maybe not perfect… but maybe it is.

This discussion about ‘spreading democracy’ in reference to the Middle East is premature. At least 50 years premature, and that only under extraordinary circumstances, such as a series of devistating revolutions where the people themselves overthrow their rulers and suffer through the birth pains of democracy on their own. Excepting Turkey, they’ve been living in tightly controlled and represive monarchies throughout their history.  There was no Greece or Rome, no tradition of the Citizen of the State, only of the subjects of the rulers. The only reason it has worked in Turkey is a heavy European influence over many decades, and a Constitutionally proclaimed Secular State.  Islam(much like pre-enlightenment Christianity) supports Monarchies and carries no concept of human equality in politics.  Of course their was a democratically elected Secular gov’t in Iran, but they nationalized Oil so we put an end to that.  Any wonder that Iranians generally like Americans and American values but hate our government and its policies wholeheartedly?

And Timmy - we don’t need suicide bombers.  We have Cowboys with cruise missiles, B52s, Momma Bush and apple pie.

Get real America.  I don’t necessarily believe in God, but I do believe in Karma, or cause and effect.  We are 15% of the worlds population, and until China’s very recent expansion, consumed 50% of the worlds energy resources and commercial output.  If you think we can be this ‘rich’ without their being a corresponding population made ‘poor’ by exploitation, then y