An Intelligent, Reasoned Treatise On The Muslim Problem:

[usmbguest5318]

All deflections aside, if we just honestly focus on the religion itself for a change, most reasonable people would agree that Islam is in desperate need of a modern Reformation.

Well, if we're to abjure theistic chauvinism, one'd have to accord the same of all the foundational monotheisms: Catholicism (Roman and Orthodox), Islam and Judaism. It's not as though any of them espouse avant-garde ideas. What is different is that there are multiple highly influential and relatively powerful states ruled by the dicta of Islam whereas there is one state run by Catholic Canon Law (two countries -- Lebanon (Maronite) and Andorra (Roman Catholic) -- require their presidents to be adherents to specific branches of Christianity and one state arguably verging on being Halachic.

 

[Mac1958]

All deflections aside, if we just honestly focus on the religion itself for a change, most reasonable people would agree that Islam is in desperate need of a modern Reformation.

Well, if we're to abjure theistic chauvinism, one'd have to accord the same of all the foundational monotheisms: Catholicism (Roman and Orthodox), Islam and Judaism. It's not as though any of them espouse avant-garde ideas. What is different is that there are multiple highly influential and relatively powerful states ruled by the dicta of Islam whereas there is one state run by Catholic Canon Law (two countries -- Lebanon (Maronite) and Andorra (Roman Catholic) -- require their presidents to be adherents to specific branches of Christianity and one state arguably verging on being Halachic.

Try as I might, I just can't keep the topic of Islam just down to Islam. I understand why, but I only put so much effort into this at this point.
.

 

[usmbguest5318]

The Manchester bomber was home grown 2nd generation British with Libyan roots.

These self radicalized criminals will continue to be a problem for the next 50 or so years.

Fortunately their attacks are only pinpricks and can and should be ignored.

23 dead, mostly children is not a "pinprick" and can't be ignored.

What makes 23 out of 2.55 million be anything other than a "pinprick?"

I realize that to the families who lost loved ones, it's not a "pinprick;" however, in the context of managing a nation or city, what you fail to realize is that people and public policies are considered in terms of measurable risks and impacts.

According to Annalisa Merelli:

Between 1970 and 1994, however, terrorist attacks in Europe were much more common. From Northern Ireland’s Irish Republican Army (IRA) to Spain’s Basque separatist group Euskadi Ta Askatasuna (ETA) to Italy’s Anni di Piombo (Years of Lead), extremist political groups organized bombings in each of those countries.

In the past 45 years, there have been more than 16,000 terror attacks in Western Europe, an average of more than 350 per year, according to the Global Terrorism Database, maintained by the National Consortium for the Study of Terrorism and Responses to Terrorism. The peak was reached in 1979, when 1,019 attacks were perpetrated in Europe, but all through the 1970s, 1980s, and mid-1990s attacks occurred with an average frequency of about 10 per week. Since 1997, the trend line has been even lower.​

I don't recall in the 1960s and 970s hearing about travel bans -- most especially not religiously themed ones -- and the other foolishness that's been proposed by Trump, and yet the incidence of airplane hijackings between 1968 and 1972 averaged one per week. 1973 marked the start of individual passenger screenings.

I'm sure the NRA trots that argument out after every mass shooting in the USA.

I wouldn't know what NRA "trots out."

I can aver that I am no friend of the NRA, and that has nothing to do with their pro-gun rights political stance.

 

[usmbguest5318]

[...]


What makes 23 out of 2.55 million be anything other than a "pinprick?"

I realize that to the families who lost loved ones, it's not a "pinprick;" however, in the context of managing a nation or city, what you fail to realize is that people and public policies are considered in terms of measurable risks and impacts.

[...]

And what you fail to realize is the current "pinprick," along with many other "pinpricks" occurring all over the Western world, outstandingly including destruction of the World Trade Center which took the lives of 3,000 Americans, are harbingers of what history will call the Tenth Crusade. By permitting hundreds of thousands of military-age Muslim males to position themselves within our borders when we have ample cause to believe a substantial percentage of them harbor a murderous disposition toward infidels, which is what we are, is simply foolhardy.

Again, the conflict between Muslim and non-Muslim is not new. While it has been dormant for a few centuries, as George Santayana has wisely observed, They who ignore history are doomed to repeat it.

Oh, f*ck. Another conspiracy theorist. Ciao.

 

[usmbguest5318]

All deflections aside, if we just honestly focus on the religion itself for a change, most reasonable people would agree that Islam is in desperate need of a modern Reformation.

Well, if we're to abjure theistic chauvinism, one'd have to accord the same of all the foundational monotheisms: Catholicism (Roman and Orthodox), Islam and Judaism. It's not as though any of them espouse avant-garde ideas. What is different is that there are multiple highly influential and relatively powerful states ruled by the dicta of Islam whereas there is one state run by Catholic Canon Law (two countries -- Lebanon (Maronite) and Andorra (Roman Catholic) -- require their presidents to be adherents to specific branches of Christianity and one state arguably verging on being Halachic.

Try as I might, I just can't keep the topic of Islam just down to Islam. I understand why, but I only put so much effort into this at this point.
.

Well, TY for telling me so. That is what it is. We both now know of it. Owning that is honorable, which is more than I can say of much of the discourse and individuals I've encountered on USMB wherein posters predicate their remarks on jaundiced premises and argue as though their approach isn't canted so.

I will try to keep your revelation in mind if/when I find myself about to engage on Islam-related matters with you. I will try to demur from engaging with you on that topic; however, if I don't, remind me of your post above, and I'll happily withdraw from the discussion. I don't want to find myself in or entreat for a discussion with one who admittedly cannot dispassionately converse with a neutral frame of mind. That has nothing to do with you; it's just not something I care to do, at least not here with total strangers.

 

[Mac1958]

All deflections aside, if we just honestly focus on the religion itself for a change, most reasonable people would agree that Islam is in desperate need of a modern Reformation.

Well, if we're to abjure theistic chauvinism, one'd have to accord the same of all the foundational monotheisms: Catholicism (Roman and Orthodox), Islam and Judaism. It's not as though any of them espouse avant-garde ideas. What is different is that there are multiple highly influential and relatively powerful states ruled by the dicta of Islam whereas there is one state run by Catholic Canon Law (two countries -- Lebanon (Maronite) and Andorra (Roman Catholic) -- require their presidents to be adherents to specific branches of Christianity and one state arguably verging on being Halachic.

Try as I might, I just can't keep the topic of Islam just down to Islam. I understand why, but I only put so much effort into this at this point.
.

Well, TY for telling me so. That is what it is. We both now know of it. Owning that is honorable, which is more than I can say of much of the discourse and individuals I've encountered on USMB wherein posters predicate their remarks on jaundiced premises and argue as though their approach isn't canted so.

I will try to keep your revelation in mind if/when I find myself about to engage on Islam-related matters with you. I will try to demur from engaging with you on that topic; however, if I don't, remind me of your post above, and I'll happily withdraw from the discussion. I don't want to find myself in or entreat for a discussion with one who admittedly cannot dispassionately converse with a neutral frame of mind. That has nothing to do with you; it's just not something I care to do.

Ironic.
.

 

[usmbguest5318]

All deflections aside, if we just honestly focus on the religion itself for a change, most reasonable people would agree that Islam is in desperate need of a modern Reformation.

Well, if we're to abjure theistic chauvinism, one'd have to accord the same of all the foundational monotheisms: Catholicism (Roman and Orthodox), Islam and Judaism. It's not as though any of them espouse avant-garde ideas. What is different is that there are multiple highly influential and relatively powerful states ruled by the dicta of Islam whereas there is one state run by Catholic Canon Law (two countries -- Lebanon (Maronite) and Andorra (Roman Catholic) -- require their presidents to be adherents to specific branches of Christianity and one state arguably verging on being Halachic.

Try as I might, I just can't keep the topic of Islam just down to Islam. I understand why, but I only put so much effort into this at this point.
.

Well, TY for telling me so. That is what it is. We both now know of it. Owning that is honorable, which is more than I can say of much of the discourse and individuals I've encountered on USMB wherein posters predicate their remarks on jaundiced premises and argue as though their approach isn't canted so.

I will try to keep your revelation in mind if/when I find myself about to engage on Islam-related matters with you. I will try to demur from engaging with you on that topic; however, if I don't, remind me of your post above, and I'll happily withdraw from the discussion. I don't want to find myself in or entreat for a discussion with one who admittedly cannot dispassionately converse with a neutral frame of mind. That has nothing to do with you; it's just not something I care to do.

Ironic.
.

Okay.

 

[MikeK]

[...]

1. Naturally, of course, you omitted that remark in quoting me, thus discarding part of the contextual tenor in my response to the question that was posed.

[...]

I didn't ignore your generous reference to hypothetical "pinprick" victims. What I said is you might feel differently if you were among the bombed, burned, or shot.

So never mind how others should or would feel. Think, feel, and speak for yourself -- not for hypothetical others.

 

[Mac1958]

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is another amazing and brave Muslim who must fight both the Regressive Left and the jihadists, as she puts her life on the line to advocate for modern Reformation of Islam:
.

 

[MikeK]

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is another amazing and brave Muslim who must fight both the Regressive Left and the jihadists, as she puts her life on the line to advocate for modern Reformation of Islam.

Hopefully she will inspire others, because the solution to the problem will reside with them.

 

[Mac1958]

Ayaan Hirsi Ali is another amazing and brave Muslim who must fight both the Regressive Left and the jihadists, as she puts her life on the line to advocate for modern Reformation of Islam.

Hopefully she will inspire others, because the solution to the problem will reside with them.

Most of it, yeah, but the rest of us can assist by holding the most regressive and anti-liberal religion on the planet far more accountable. That could help provide leverage. Right now, there are too many who don't want to do that.
.

 

[MikeK]

How many children died in Iraq?

The answer on the right "Who gives a ****"

I don't think so.

I watched the bombing of Baghdad on television and it came across like a holiday fireworks display. One could only wonder how many Americans watching it would realize they are witnessing a shameful war crime in which hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, at least half of whom were women and little children in their cribs, were being cruelly, brutally, and unnecessarily killed, an unavoidable fact which was not mentioned by any of the commentators.

If the true nature of the Iraq invasion were revealed to the general public I am sure they would not have tolerated it.

 

[Mac1958]

Two of my favorite thinkers, liberals Sam Harris (an atheist) and Maajid Nawaz (a Muslim), on the battle they are having to wage with both jihadists AND the Regressive Left:
.

 

[frigidweirdo]

How many children died in Iraq?

The answer on the right "Who gives a ****"

I don't think so.

I watched the bombing of Baghdad on television and it came across like a holiday fireworks display. One could only wonder how many Americans watching it would realize they are witnessing a shameful war crime in which hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians, at least half of whom were women and little children in their cribs, were being cruelly, brutally, and unnecessarily killed, an unavoidable fact which was not mentioned by any of the commentators.

If the true nature of the Iraq invasion were revealed to the general public I am sure they would not have tolerated it.

But it wasn't. The whole point about foreign wars is that they don't have an impact at home, so they're easier to carry out and keep the public happy. You say "I don't think so" and then give the reasoning why people didn't give a ****.

 

[MikeK]

But it wasn't. The whole point about foreign wars is that they don't have an impact at home, so they're easier to carry out and keep the public happy. You say "I don't think so" and then give the reasoning why people didn't give a ****.

Foreign "war?" What "war?" What George W. Bush did in Iraq was not a war. It was by all international standards a criminal invasion -- and if the World Court could get its hands on him he probably would be hanged.

So what foreign wars are you talking about? World War One? World War Two? The Korean "police action," which was in fact a war? The Vietnam "containment," which was in fact a war? These were wars because there was prolonged and substantial armed conflict. What Bush did in Iraq was not a war. It was a brutal, stupidly wasteful, wholly unnecessary invasion of an already vanquished, virtually defenseless, non-aggressive, non-provocative, sovereign nation. And much of the terrorist threat we are facing today is retribution for that monolithic crime.

I believe the outstanding reason why the American people have remained largely ignorant of what was done in Iraq in their name is they simply can't believe the truth about it and the mainstream media has never tried to awaken them to it.

 

[frigidweirdo]

But it wasn't. The whole point about foreign wars is that they don't have an impact at home, so they're easier to carry out and keep the public happy. You say "I don't think so" and then give the reasoning why people didn't give a ****.

Foreign "war?" What "war?" What George W. Bush did in Iraq was not a war. It was by all international standards a criminal invasion -- and if the World Court could get its hands on him he probably would be hanged.

So what foreign wars are you talking about? World War One? World War Two? The Korean "police action," which was in fact a war? The Vietnam "containment," which was in fact a war? These were wars because there was prolonged and substantial armed conflict. What Bush did in Iraq was not a war. It was a brutal, stupidly wasteful, wholly unnecessary invasion of an already vanquished, virtually defenseless, non-aggressive, non-provocative, sovereign nation. And much of the terrorist threat we are facing today is retribution for that monolithic crime.

I believe the outstanding reason why the American people have remained largely ignorant of what was done in Iraq in their name is they simply can't believe the truth about it and the mainstream media has never tried to awaken them to it.

Invasion is war. I don't care what you choose to call it, I'm calling it war and you can either deal with it or not. Semantics can be stuffed.

No, the reason why the American people don't know the truth is they don't care. They want to win, they want to feel like they're special and their country is special.

It's the "cowboys and injuns effect", the injuns were the bad guys because they weren't us. They were protecting themselves and their lands from genocide and ethnic cleansing, while the cowboys were the good guys committing genocide and ethnic cleansing. Same attitude. We're special, we're not wrong.

 

[MikeK]

Invasion is war. I don't care what you choose to call it, I'm calling it war and you can either deal with it or not. Semantics can be stuffed.

Semantics are important for proper understanding -- and war means a fight. E.g.,If you walk up behind someone, hit him in the head with a pipe and kick his face off when he goes down, that's not a fight.

No, the reason why the American people don't know the truth is they don't care. They want to win, they want to feel like they're special and their country is special.

The reason the American people don't know the truth is the truth is hidden from them and they are methodically fed deceptive ideas and concepts.

[...]

 

[frigidweirdo]

Invasion is war. I don't care what you choose to call it, I'm calling it war and you can either deal with it or not. Semantics can be stuffed.

Semantics are important for proper understanding -- and war means a fight. E.g.,If you walk up behind someone, hit him in the head with a pipe and kick his face off when he goes down, that's not a fight.

No, the reason why the American people don't know the truth is they don't care. They want to win, they want to feel like they're special and their country is special.

The reason the American people don't know the truth is the truth is hidden from them and they are methodically fed deceptive ideas and concepts.

[...]

Again, I'm not playing these game. I told you that you can accept what I said or not, I don't care.

The people are fed stuff, but they could use their brains if they chose to, but they choose not to.

But the point is the people take the killing of 22 as bad, but the killing of 100,000 as "I don't care", that's the way it is, it exists.

 

[2aguy]

How about we deport the children of immigrants...since they are the ones committing these acts of murder? The problem is that you have these children of immigrants attending government schools filled with educators who don't like the countries they live in...and they are passing that down to these children...who are already on the fringe of society....and instead of teaching love and respect for their country, they are learning that there is nothing to value in their country..making it easier for them to be radicalized by islam...

 

[MikeK]

[...]

But the point is the people take the killing of 22 as bad, but the killing of 100,000 as "I don't care", that's the way it is, it exists.

That is the very bone of contention in this discussion.

There is no question that the vindictive rage engendered by the Iraq invasion and other unnecessary military incursions in the Middle East is justified. Unfortunately it would be useless for me, and you, and millions of other Americans to say we strongly disapproved of those actions and we deeply regret they took place. So we are left with the choice of either passively inviting retributive violence against us or assuming a defensive posture and taking appropriate steps to prevent any such action.

What is your choice?