1451. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161700 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 2:12 pm

Kardashovel,





Do explain what is faith based about saying:


"Global warming is potentially deadly."

????

1452. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161695 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 2:09 pm

Frankus,





No fair, you used a dictionary.

1453. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161689 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 2:05 pm

kardashovel,

Do let me know when you've grasped the point.

Do let us know when you make a point.

1454. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161685 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 2:00 pm

Kardashovel,






The process isn't "creative" at all. It is totally random. And it may lead to the extinction of everything. Especially if this global warming phenomenon is as bad as some predict. There may be next to no life left on this planet in a few years. That wouldn't be very creative, now would it.

1455. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161679 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 1:54 pm

Kardashovel,

The point is that in spite of the randomness, evolution generally leads to more and more complex forms of organization, assuming that you keep pouring energy into the system.

Or it leads to extinction.

1456. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161671 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 1:49 pm

Billy,





Since I have no scruples....



What is the difference between a priest and Acne??????




Acne doesn't come on your face until your 15.



*rim shot*

1457. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161657 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 1:29 pm

Billy Sands,




God loves his children. Priests just love children.



*Rim shot*

1458. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161622 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 1:07 pm

Kardashovel,




I have said nothing but nice things about you for some time now.

I think it was the voices bit, and maybe threatening to throw people into landfills. Other than that I think you're square.

1459. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #161601 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 12:49 pm

42nd,




The real issue is that these people know gay men are the only men who can dance worth a shit, and so the straight men don't want to get shown up.


It's very simple.

1460. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161600 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 12:48 pm

MaxD,




My concept. Like a combinaiton Mormon-Jewish thing.


Fancy cotton underwear, and no shellfish.


That is purity... Itchy and boring, but pure.

1461. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161582 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 12:26 pm

Sn70-74,






Don't drop Pascal's Wager as your intro. Bad form indeed.

You are assuming there is one God, right to the exclusion of others. In that case, RD will be standing in line with all the Hindus, Zoroastrians and Rastafarians. No matter which God you believe in, you have to assume that nearly 5 billion peope currently alive today will be going to hell.

1462. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161569 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 12:13 pm

Hey asshole.



I happen to sell used cars for a living. And I do pretty well at it.


It isn't easy turning the damn odometers back, so have a little respect would you.

I have never been so offended.

1463. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161547 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 11:57 am

I just look for cheap produce.



Budget budget budget.

1464. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161534 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 11:31 am

Diacanu,






It is another whacko hearing voices in his head.

1465. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161528 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 11:19 am

MaxD,





This guy's name is Clinton Dawkins.... and he is a Jew who served in the IDF, uses british slang and lives in MN.


I smell something funny.

1466. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161515 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 11:05 am

strength,




You are clearly to stupid to understand the foundation of my moral code. I am going to throw a wild guess and say you haven't read Kant.

It may be a waste of my time to explain it to you, I was never cut out for a special education job. Just go back to finger painting. And stop picking your nose.

1467. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161513 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 11:02 am

Diacanu,




Strength throws the anti-semite card. A standard play for the semi-literate such as this turd.


Strength,


Actually our state (Diacanu's and Mine) was not founded on Jewish anything. And certainly not on Christian values. It was founded as a secular republic where the role of religion is minimized. The Founding Fathers were very very very specific about the non-role of religion, and even specific about their own hostility.


Unlike Israel where women are beaten by "brave" Orthodox Jews, for riding in the front of the bus. We took care of those people many years ago. Yet you Jews still keep the torch of stupidity burning bright. A light unto the nations....

1468. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161501 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 10:54 am

Diacanu,





It looks as if G-d is a P-ssy!

1469. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161496 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 10:52 am

strength,




A Jew that says ya'll?


In the IDF, how many small children did you use as a human shield?

How many women did you force to give birth at checkpoints? Does this mean you have a big "weewee". Abusing children and women. You must be proud, a credit to the Jewish people.

All the while you Israelis allow the truly brave Jews (Shoah Survivors) live below the poverty line in Israel (almost 40%).

You could handle max with ease? I must inform you he isn't a 70 year old Palestinian women, so he might be out of your league. And since he is faster than an 8 year old, you won't be able to shoot him either.

1470. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161491 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 10:46 am

ofir,

No I won't concede. Military strategy and strength of borders is open to opinion and is not a simplistic matter as you like everything to be. The narrower Israel becomes, the harder it gets to defend. Is that simple enough for you? Where the exact border should be is a matter of great debate in Israel, within the army and govt.

Tough shit. Talk to the group that made Israel... the UN.


As for water rights, you discussed this Israeli "wall" as some kind of security measure. It is nothing more than an attempt to steal land and water. Calling it security helps to sell the notion.

"Someone like you". Someone who conveniently invokes the Bible to justify some comment, then claims atheism. No one on the planet calls the West Bank "Judeah", except Israelis. Judeah is a specific reference to the kingdom that was there, a Jewish Kingdom.

I no longer refer to Russia as the Soviet Union, and neither do Russians. No one calls Bangladesh "Eastern Pakistan", certainly not Bangladeshis. Yet Judeah persists. It is indicative of the mentality.

I am condescending becuase that is how I feel towards atheists who invoke the Bible in a defense of a fundamentally religious notion. No one cares about 2,500 year old place names except some Israelis. I have said it several times and I will say it again. 2,500 year old contracts with a Sky Daddy does not engender sympathy by me, for the Israeli cause.

As for a narrow Israel. It isn't like the Israelis could not see a Jordanian Army marching towards the specific area to which you refer. Israel could fight this army well away from its borders. And certainly the settlements, inhabited by fanatic Brooklyn Jews aren't going to repel and invading army. So I am not really sure what your point about that was.

I also highly doubt that several Syrian Armored divisions could sneak into the West Bank and launch a surprise attack on this emaciated Israel you keep describing. For a country with the 6th largest standing army, nuclear weapons and one of the most advanced air forces, you sure do act the possum. It is this notion of perpetual victimhood of the Chosen People that really wears me down.

Any land trade to widen the narrow portion of Israel would make another portion more narrow. So it would have to be a unilateral land grab, something Israel has not shied away from in the past.

And as for your "pre-emptive strike" I think you should take a look at the dishonest causus belli forwarded by Israel regarding the 1967 war for more land.

1471. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161446 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 9:55 am

Diacanu,




"Bueller, Bueller..... Bueller."

1472. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161445 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 9:54 am

Quine,




You are right about Jewish law.


It is also forbidden to have uncircumcised sex with a shell fish. Bet you didn't know that about Halacha.

1473. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #161442 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 9:52 am

Steve,




Glad I could help!

1474. School bars same-sex partners at formals

Comment #161431 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 9:37 am

I agree. You have to ban the same sex.



People always need different sex. The same sex gets boring after a couple of weeks, and this can lead to the deterioration of the relationship. Any sex expert will tell you, keeping it lively in the bedroom is key to a healthy relationship.


Well done to the Anglican Church.

1475. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161419 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 9:25 am

irate,




He is like that filthy attorney Sukelow, a Jew for Jesus. Arguing the Evangelical agenda in front of the supreme court.

1476. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161414 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 9:20 am

ofir,

Using your markers all nations should evacuate immediately, especially Americans and Australians should go back to Europe.

I never said this. I said the Israelis should leave the West Bank. This is a totally false analogy. They have a country, and they continue to steal land from someone else. The Natives in North America and Australia were never seeking a national unity. They were not asserting self determination. They were fighting and scalping one another.

But I think the better analogy is if the Indians wanted America back, and Americans were forced to give up a large mass of land to accomodate some ancient claim. The Israelis are the Indians and Palestinians the Americans (Australians).

Yet it does to most Israelis. The way the wall has been constructed is to protect Israeli strategic interests as judged by people who are experts on the matter, of course they can be wrong, but you are not qualified to judge that.

Israel has one of the top 10 strongest militaries in the world. I am sure they can secure any border they wish. And by strategic elements, you must mean... Palestinian aquifers. Which is in general how the wall and settlements are set up right now. So theft of water must have been what you meant.

If you now accuse me of lying you really have stepped over the mark. I have no idea how to respond to such idiotic rubbish.

You said a return to the 1967 borders was impossible, yet it is what Israel claimed it offered several times. So either they are lying or you are lying. I was willing to accept either one. The willingness of Israel to manipulate history is unparalleled.


So the debate has nothing to do with my approach to dealing with someone like you, it has everything to do with your willingness to be honest about what is happening. The 1967 border offer being paramount in this.

You must concede that either you are wrong in saying that Israel can't be safe within the 1967 borders or you must admit that Israel lied about offering such a deal to the Palestinians. These two positions are irreconcilable with one another.

So either you are wrong, or Israel has maintained institutional dishonesty for years. Like I said, I think both are possible.

1477. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161401 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 8:51 am

Kardashovel,





Allow me to say, that Anna thinks you are a little whacky as well.

I don't really mind you. You have always been nice, and I rather like following these discussions.

1478. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161358 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 7:53 am

Steve,




That was a curious bit.


More Israeli nonsense. This is why I get fired up about this stuff. The Jews should no better than anyone that this kind of thing isn't "only a label".


Plasticity,


I feel it is a little "conceded" (arrogant may have been strong) to tell people which deaths are "worse". Like I said, I will respect that opinion (I respect it now, but more so) when you explain your moral distinction to the families of the dead Sudanese. We need to be sensitive to all death equally. Ranking the kinds of death as more or less acceptable is a road to loss of humanity.

OK Breakfast burrito time. In the words of MacArthur in the Phillipines... "I shall return".

1479. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161351 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 7:41 am

Ofir,



Israel is building a wall now, claiming it will protect them. How is that different if it follows a border.

Is there a standard book of lies you guys use, or do you make it up as you go?

If you want to call Israel racist (which means the majority of Israelis are racist) then fine, but then USA and EU are also racist. Same goes for Russia and Australia and of course the muslim world wins the #1 award for racism and xenophobia.

Here we go again. "Other people do it too". How come when I discuss anything with a Zionist I get the same exact arguments, every single time? You are so uninteresting.

Do I have to keep telling you that no one is arguing that the Arab/Muslim world isn't racist? NO ONE IS SAYING THAT. Maybe you will be able to figure it out after round 10, but I have little hope for your comprehension abilities. We are discussing Israel here, perhaps you could do us a favor and stay on topic.

I have no idea what you are talking about.

Regarding my reference to the Bible.

I said:

Why does Judea persist as a name?

You say:

Because that's the name in the bible, that's the name in modern Hebrew, that's the name archeological evidence supports. Why should the Israelis accept a name forced on them by the Romans? And then again by the Turks? The British? Jordan and Egypt?

The jewish culture is to resist such things.

Here you cite the Bible. I am glad you honor the Bible as a foundation for current Israeli policy. Which is odd because you said Zionism is totally secular a few posts ago. Honesty is not your forte.

The Romans.... really? Are you really blaming the Romans? In English it is Palestine, as it has been for centuries, Palestine being a Romanization of the term Philistine (In Arabic Falasteen). You are really deluded. Then when called on this you describe it as Israel:

OK - Israel it is.

You have no right to claim land inhabited by others as your own. The fact that you do suggests you yourself still feel some legitimacy in making the claim. So much for your support of a Palestinian state.

I also apologize to you, Moshe Dayan, for not having your detailed tactical knowledge about border security.

Yet if the Israelis claim that they can secure themselves with a wall that cuts into parts of the West Bank, why can't they do the same along the 1967 border? Your logic doesn't add up at all. It doesn't pass the smell test. And it means you are either ignorant to Israeli claims, or you are a liar. I think that is a toss up.

As for 2000 at Camp David, you say:

I don't know what Israel offered, as there are many versions and everyone says the other side is lying and remember that both Barak and Arafat are very good at lying

It isn't what they offered, please actually read what I say, it is about what the claimed they offered. They claimed they offered exactly what I proposed to do. If they actually offered the Palestinians this, then they would have no problem implementing it.

What they actually offered Palestinians was 3 horizontal Israeli access roads, with checkpoints, to a border with Jordan leased to Israel for 999 years. They offered Israeli control of water, they offered Israeli control of airspace. In short, an open air prison. It would have been a Warsaw Ghetto in the 21st Century.

1480. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161332 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 7:18 am

Plasticity,




Don't assume... It makes an ass out of u and me.


That wasn't my intention. I am not in the business of handicapping casualty counts. When you are a democracy, one which pronounces its commitment to human rights, there is a high standard to be met. For instance Israel routinely calls itself the "most moral army in the world", people like Ofir claim I am holding them to a different standard. Untrue, I am holding them to their own standards.

As for al-Qaeda, there is no standard, they are animals, I would expect them to kill people without much regard. I wouldn't expect that from a country like the United States, which used to be a defender of the weak and oppressed, and now an oppressor, despite claims to the converse.

As an American I hold myself and my country to a higher standard than I do for some ass hole like Bin Laden.

So to say again, I don't sit here and handicap deaths. Which is worse, which is better due to "intentions". Acts should be judged in part on intentions, but those are inherently messy and difficult to understand, especially with administrations that have taken dishonesty to new heights.

So both were equally repellent to me. I don't think the Sudanese much care for your arrogant distinctions. Not to mention the Sudanese that are dying even today, due to a preventable genocide. The US could stop this, but it has tied itself down with an unjust war, and now people who desperately need our help won't get it, and must rely on the French (*shudder*).

1481. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161324 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 7:02 am

ofir,





This is what Israel claims they have offered the Palestinians already. A return to the 1967 borders and an end to settlemenst. If I am naive, so are the Israelis. So either you are an idiot or the Israelis were lying about their 2000 Camp David offer. Both seem very very very probable.

How does securing your border, and keeping your citizens within these borders end in a "war zone"? Or is this more of your "Another Holocaust" scare tactics?

You have justified Israeli expansionism on Biblical grounds. You have cited lying propagandists as evidence for your position on Arabs. You have absolutely zero credibility.

I am becoming suspicious that you may actually be an Orthodox Rabbi in his Brooklyn office, simply taunting the atheists.

More to come later.

1482. Lying for Jesus?

Comment #161314 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 6:46 am

Karda,





That is odd. I am also a "progressive libertarian".

It is a wonderful position to have where people on the left (just look through the responses to some of my old posts) call you a right wing whacko, and people on the right call you a communist. It is fun having no friends.


I don't see why the government can't provide basic services, and otherwise, leave people the hell alone. What is so difficult about that? Give people free medical care and leave their guns, taxes, gay marriages, and beliefs alone. It's not that hard.

1483. Richard Dawkins' secular army must be stopped. God is behind some of our greatest art

Comment #161309 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 6:34 am

Wooter is back to Mona Lisa.




Clearmind, you are fucking annoying. You make absolutely no sense. Despite your claim:


"These are my logics. The logics can be are king over the thoughts of the Darwinism."

1484. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161306 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 6:29 am

irate,



He told us to "trust him" that all the Holocaust survivors lied. I think once you get to that place, you might as well leave.


He was a total ass clown.

1485. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161303 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 6:26 am

ungodly,




I have little respect for people who simply regurtitate Sam Harris' tired arguments about moral legitimacy of certain kinds of violence.

It was like I was reading The End of Faith when reading Plasticities posts.

Oh well I read Harris once, no need to do it again. Has Plasticity addressed the subsequent deaths due to the destruction of al-Shifa/? Or does he still only count one security guard as the casualty count?

1486. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161297 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 6:19 am

ofir,

And please go check memritv.org before you talk to me anymore about racism. If in my self defence I appear racist to you, so be it.

Classic Israeli anti-logic.


"Oh the Arabs are mean, they say mean things, go look over there, don't look over here."

No one is debating the Arab and Muslim anti-semitism. NO ONE. You wish we were, so you could further distract from the issues, but it won't happen.


No one on this forum, NO ONE, has been harder on the occassional anti-Semite, most notably the Holocaust denier ASMarques. I spent two days letting him have it for such disgusting racism. I call it how I see it, ok. When I see racism, even in myself, I call it racism. If you don't like that, then fine, but I won't stop calling a spade a spade. Israel is a spade, even if every Arab state is too.

"He is doing it too" stopped working in about the second grade. Maybe you should act your age, as Plasticity loves to say.

1487. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #161296 by al-rawandi on April 15, 2008 at 6:12 am

ofir,





memritv?


Are you kidding. They have been caught fabricating translations... Or to be generous, stretching the truth. It is a racist organization seeking to stir shit with regards to the Muslim world.

I am not whitewashing the nasty and anti-semitic proclamations of Muslims, such as the Grand Mufti of Mecca's Ramadan sermon where he called Jews "Apres and monkeys", this doesn't require lies to make the point.

As for what I would do as Israeli PM:

I would unilatterally withdraw from the settlements. Pull all Israeli assets out of lands that weren't mine to administer. I would rectify the theft known as "Tax descrepency" in East Jerusalem. I would announce that the 1967 borders are now our official borders, no negotiation until there is an end to Palestinian attacks. I would seal these borders and only grant work permits to Palestinians with no links to any terrorist group. I would offer every neighborly benefit to any Palestinian who does not have links to violence or terror.

I would end the genocidal siege of Gaza, where children are dying of treatable things. I would declare my willingness to send humanitarian assistance to Gaza. I would withdraw from the Golan Heights and begin peace negotiations with Syria (as this is their sole prerequisite for peace negotiations).

I would seek to empower the more secular powers in the West Bank, and show prosperity as the model for cooperation. I would propose to the UN a joint economic cooperation zone with Palestine providing attacks are ended. I would assist Palestinians to rebuild the olive groves bulldozed by the Israeli Army.

I would release Palestinians held hostage in Israeli jails, who have been deprived of due process (the prerequisite for the release of IDF soldier Gilad Shalit, currently held in Gaza). I would put an absolute end to the racist proclamations of fanatic and racist Rabbis. And marginalize such parties as Kahane Chai.


Those are a few things I would do. I wouldn't wait for Palestinians, I would simply do the right thing with or without them. Then once I had done the just thing, I would re-evaluate my position.

But the continuing expansion of settlements is the greatest impediment to peace at this point. The undying Israeli claim to Eretz Yisroel (Greater Israel) which is religious, and is a cornerstone of Likud politics.


As for your reference to Judea. How dare you refer to it as "Israel". It is the West Bank, Palestine. It is not Israel, no body recognizes it as Israel, there is no UN mandate as such. The partition plans have not given it to Israel, and Israel itself has not claimed it in peace negotiations. It has not been Israel for thousands of years. And the fact that you play the Bible card shows me quite a bit.

If you wish to honor Biblical edicts, I suggest David Robertson's "Free Church of Scotland" forum. You can debate the stoning of homosexuals in Leviticus there. Disgusting.

1488. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #160925 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 2:46 pm

Quetz,




It's like watching a fat man down greasy burgers... a heart attack is only a short ways away.

1489. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #160916 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 2:40 pm

Artful,



Reciprocal altruism. I tell you this everytime you throw down the "nihilist atheist" crap, and as your monicker denotes, you dodge the whole point.

Society functions better when people cooperate. That is a simple evolutionary issue. Unfortunately the devisive religious whack job gene has yet to be naturally selected out, and may never be, so long as it isn't fatal to its holders and these people continue to breed like rabits.

1490. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #160911 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 2:37 pm

I'm always abrasive.



You are new, so you get the scrutiny until you are a bona fide ass hole. You have a few stripes to earn.


And your premise is wrong. There is nothing guaranteed in a terrorist attack. It is luck, you may or may not live in the city targeted. You are assuming the terrorists give enough of a shit about you to target you personally. Your reasoning is flawed.... again.

In randomness these two options are precisely the same.

1491. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #160895 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 2:24 pm

Steve,





If you kill civilians for a political end, there can be debate on the end, and whether it justifies the means. But if it is indifference, there is no end that can ever justify it. Indifference to human life is far worse.

Saying "I will kill you for gain"... I may be remorseful, I may be unhappy, or even happy. But if I say "I am doing this and I don't care if you or anyone else dies in the process", that is far more pernicious.

1492. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #160892 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 2:21 pm

Plasticity,




Well I suggest you go elsewhere. Everyone else here seems to be discussing things just fine. You seem to be the odd man out.

By the way, letting them die for financial gain was strongly implied through context, or so I believe.

1493. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #160888 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 2:16 pm

Adam,




Yemen is just a different place. It is so sick. Most people in Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Egypt would be disgusted by this. Yemen is the worst of the worst when it comes to this kind of thing. A guy like that would be beaten to death in prison in the US.

1494. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #160878 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 2:02 pm

Plasticity,




You accusations that I am fucked up, for exploring a moral question, is really piss poor.


I think it is equally morally reprehensible to kill someone for political gain as it is to allow them to die for financial gain. The dead won't much care how they got dead, to quote full metal jacket:


"The dead only know one thing, it is better to be alive."


I think you have wasted enough of everyone's time here with your nonsense.

Next time you come, bring a contribution instead of defeaning stupidity.

1495. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #160874 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 1:57 pm

Steve,




Thanks. I agree with you. The Occupation of Iraq has become far more complex then when I first visited the issue here sometime ago. Not more complex in an absolute sense, but less simple for me.

I must concede that Hitchens has made some very very good points about the potential value in the Iraq conflict for humanity as a whole and Iraqis and Americans in particular. There is no simple answer to the "What do we do now" question in regards to Iraq. I vote the US stays on and not let the genocide ensue post occupation. The results of a US withdrawal at this point would be awful. It would mean countless lives lost for no tangible benefit, and that would be tragic.

1496. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #160868 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 1:50 pm

Plasticity,




What can I say to the fact that you have refused to answer any question posed of you. Are you perhaps David Robertson in disguise?

As for loaded, the US has in the past acted callously with regards to civilian life. I have given examples, with precise numbers... see Iraq sanctions... which you of course ignored... no doubt due to my "mentality". You are constantly saying "act your age" etc...this is getting annoying when combined with your lack of responses.

What motivates al-Qaeda? There are several ideologies at work. One is the manifest Jahili accusation leveled against governments in the Muslim world which can be traced directly to Sayyid Qutb. There is a substantive contribution from Abdullah Azzam who was a friend and colleague of Muhammad Qutb in Meccca. There is the teachings of the modern day followers and perverters of Muhammad Ibn Abd al-Wahhab. There are tendencies influenced by the Egyptian Ikhwan. There are several other more minor points to be made, but not really important at this point.

The result is a general hostility to non-Islamic governments in Muslim countries. This combined with the Wahhabi position that it is permissible to shed the blood of sinful Muslims, has led to indiscriminate attacks in the Muslim world. A fair bit of rage is directed at the US for supporting these Jahili governments. And this rage is combined with Bin Laden's highly westernized youth, with which he has become disgusted. This has engendered greater hostility.

They certainly ascribe to Sayyid Qutb's notion that the west is fundamentally corrupt morally, and that next to communism, capitalism is wretched.

Their general rage is manifested in a scattered approach to inflicting maximum damage on American and British interests and citizens. Bin Laden has also said explicitly "There is a reason we have not targeted Sweden."

There is a general feeling of impotence in the Arab/Muslim world. Exacerbated by the Israel situation, constantly dealing defeats to the Arabs and Muslims. Allah guarantees victory for those who fight in his cause, yet no victory has arrived.

So perhaps you could add some substance on the "indifference to civilian deaths" aspect. And maybe without calling me a "hormonal teenager" for the 12th time.

1497. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #160853 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 1:30 pm

Palsticity,




So what is worse, intentionally causing civilian casualties or being absolutely indifferent. Al-Qaeda intentionally targets them, the US administrations of the last few decades seem to be indifferent, seeing financial goals as being more important than worrying about innocent lives.

Civilians are only avoided because they are inconvenient for a number of reasons. The US has supported and funded people who simply didn't care about civilian life. And as you may well, hiring a hitman makes you guilty of Murder 1 as well.

1498. For sale: 13-year-old virgin

Comment #160842 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 1:10 pm

Vaal,



The consumation (marrying) age for a "woman" in Iran is 9 years old. Shi'a Jurisprudence is beyond strange. They have temporary marriage, where a dowry is given and a marriage is performed lasting from one day to 100 years... And you guessed it, people are using it as a means of prostitution.

There is another bit, where once you divorce your wife, to take her back she has to be with another man, and there has to be a witness and it cannot be the former husband. So a man is hired to hide under the bed during coitus.

Religion never ceases to amaze. And Allah is all knowing and all seeing.

1499. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #160834 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 12:57 pm

ungodly,





I am a "hormonal teenager" (at 25 I object to the teenager part), so I doubt we will see him back. Usually when someone attacks the form your message is delivered in instead of your message, they are emotionally wound up, or they have no substantive position worth mentioning. Plasticity did not seem emotional to me.

1500. Hitchens vs. Hitchens

Comment #160828 by al-rawandi on April 14, 2008 at 12:45 pm

ofir,




To this day the Neturei Karta sect of Orthdoxy oppose Zionism. They are a tiny minority, and the orthodox remain the rabid settlers shooting Palestinian children and what not.

Maybe I wasn't clear. I want people to treat Jews like humans. There shouldn't be any specialness about being Jewish. I hope people understand that this is my point.


For Jews who view themselves as special, they have agreement from Hitler, Eichmann, Duke, Goebbels, and other whacked out nuts. Specialness has to go, on all sides.