Islam--a rapist religion

[MJ]

He has led the Polish army to a wasteland.

 

Susaniin is a legendary Russian peasant, the hero of the renowned opera of Glinka.

[Paul bunyan]

MJ, no REAL Christian ever commits an

abominable crime, like rape or the

murder of child.

[MJ]

You are right. And with the same token, neither does any real Muslim.

[Mayja]

negative view on Muslims is influenced of America's politics....Muslims are nor killers nor rapists..they are very kind and sensitive people, they are religious - it is important

[MJ]

Negative views on Muslims in no way are generated by the American politics, but rather the historic image of some Islamic countries.

 

American politics is not religion oriented to any degree. To the contrary, American politics is strongly positive towards some Islamic countries (Arab countries with the exception of Iraq, Sudan, and partially, Syria). Even when the American politics is negative towards some Islamic countries, it is not on the grounds of religion.

 

But I agree with you that most of the Muslims are very kind and sensitive people.

 

P.S. You seem to have the same stereotypes about America as many people have about Islam.

 

[ July 12, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[THOTH]

I for one believe that there is inherent danger in any religion which espouses an "us versus them" philosophy - is exclusivistic - and calls for punishment (or at least can justify such) of unbelievers. Both Christianity and Islam clearly fall into these categories IMO. (I am not aware of any atrocities commited by Taoists/Daoists BTW ..perhaps some fanatic(?) neo-Taosist [not true(?) but some schismatic types]...but even then...they (the neo) are mostly hedonists - no where in Daoist philosophy is there room/call for violence or aggressiveness of any kind - as far as I know. Buddism is likewise non-aggressive - though perhaps has wider interpretational leway (I really don't know - though from what I do know I think it to be a much "friendlier" religion than either Christainity or Islam)

 

I further have problems with this concept of man(kind) being unworthy of some alien god who imposes strictures which violate (IMO) some of the very nature of out humanity. (and the inherrent contradictions [omnicient/omnipotent...free will, yet...etc)in the beleif of such are just to numourous to mention). Islam is particularly abhorrent in this regard (IMO) - but Christianity comes close second. Obviously both religions have been used to justify immense crimes. Is it the religion - or just human nature? I think some of both.

 

BTW - while the US certainly has its faults and Americans (like myself) in this time see themselves on top and as deserving and such - by and large the US has done pretty well - better than any other nation in our position (in history or as can be imagined with others in our current position). While the corporate greed and such surely has been influential to the negative - the US is also a land of ideals and regonition of certain human values which have positive influence as well.

 

IMO - no religion, belief, government etc to date has yet to (or likely will ever) live up to the ideals or implied responsibilities we as humans have to our earth (and its creatures) or to each other. Are we failing before God - perhaps - if this God is a metephor for life and creation (I reject the personification of such).

[MJ]

Thoth,

 

By referring to the atrocities committed by Taoists or Buddhists I had the Japanese cruelties in Korea and China in the past century.

 

But I am not relating it to the religion, but just wanted to make a point that representatives of all religions have committed similar atrocities when the circumstances have allowed.

[MJ]

Thoth,

 

By referring to the atrocities committed by Taoists or Buddhists I had the Japanese cruelties in Korea and China in the past century in mind.

 

But I am not relating it to the religion, but just wanted to make a point that representatives of all religions have committed similar atrocities when the circumstances have allowed.

 

[ July 12, 2001: Message edited by: MJ ]

[THOTH]

MJ

 

The Japanese are/were Shinto - a nationalistic offshoot (?) of Buddism.

 

Your point of course is pretty much correct - folks from different religions have commited atrocities etc - but have they all commited these atrocities in the name of the religion? I think this group is slightly smaller. Certain religions - (primarily western, though many tribal based as well) seem to have concepts of heathens etc worthy of destruction and abuse - and wars and subjugation has been prompted (or at least justified) on this basis. The patriarchal religions of Judaism, Christianity and Islam are the worst in this regard (IMO)

[MJ]

Thoth,

 

My understanding has been that some segments of the Japanese nation have been/are Taoists. Correct me if I am wrong, please. Whether they were part or a driving force in the Japanese army, I don’t know.

 

Christians and Muslims definitely have committed atrocities in the name of God and Religion. But I think that the Religion has not been the driving force of atrocities, in general. It has been/is rather used by the rulers – secular and religious. In most of the cases, it is used to either justify the atrocities, or to give the fighters hope for a better life in case they fall in the process. In general, Religion has not much to do with faith and spirituality, and it disgusts me - any religion. Neither in Judaic, nor in Christian or Islamic systems God has created Religion. It is men-made even if we arrive from the supposition that Jesus is the living Son of God, or Mohammed is a true prophet of God. Neither one of them has not established Religion.

 

As far as Christianity is concerned, we have to notice that it is primarily delivered to us in fables that Jesus has spoken or acted upon, allegedly. One of the interesting fables is the one of the damnation and distraction of the fig tree by the Messiah because the tree was not been producing fruits. In other instances there are other questionable statements by Christ - for example, “I have not come to bring peace, but sward.” It may be interpreted and exploited differently by different parties. And I am sure it has been done. Depends on one’s agenda.

[MJ]

THOTH,

 

Thanks. Hardly at this stage in my life I can commit time to studying Taoism. Hopefully can do it some day.

 

However, as a general comment, one may be tempted to think that hardly it is possible for Christianity to support a warlike philosophy or practice cruelty. However, the world history has ample evidence of Christian atrocities.

[THOTH]

MJ

 

While Taoism/Daoism exists in Japan - it is very much a minority religion there - as opposed to Buddism and Shintoism (the driving force behind the Japanese God-Emporer concept and Japanese militarism). Taoism is in no way a warlike philosophy - nor could I ever imagine adherrents to Taoism initiating an aggressive war or ever supressing anyone who beleived differently then they.

 

Here is some more info on Taoism if you are interested (though the best is to read Lao-Tzu himself...

http://www.crystalinks.com/taoism.html

[Mayja]

Originally posted by MJ:

 

American politics is not religion oriented to any degree. To the contrary, American politics is strongly positive towards some Islamic countries (Arab countries with the exception of Iraq, Sudan, and partially, Syria). Even when the American politics is negative towards some Islamic countries, it is not on the grounds of religion.

 

 

Why then, tell me dear MJ, messages on Palestians fighters (they are called terrorists - why? )are posted on the front and the main pages of New York Times? When there are more important news about e.g. prezident and inner politics. And why Sadam Husein is viewed like devil's friend by lots of average americans? And why while reporting news from Izrael - Palestin dead people's statistics always jews' number is emphasized and stressed? And all these economical sanctions against Iraq, bombing of Libya? America considers arabs the enemies, cos they are afraid of them.

 

But I agree with you that most of the Muslims are very kind and sensitive people.

most Lithuanians wont agree with that

 

P.S. You seem to have the same stereotypes about America as many people have about Islam.

 

It is a pleasure to know that u think so about me.

[MJ]

Dear Mayja,

 

I am not supportive of the American policy towards Iraq in the post Golf war era, even though I do think that Saddam is a “devil’s friend,” as you put it. There are great many Americans who don’t approve the American policy towards Iraq, in general, and among them such American nationalists as Pat Buchanan. However, it is not just American policy. The US and UK are unanimous in that regard, but I don’t hear you complaining about the UK. We have to also not forget that only less than two decades ago US was a supporter of Iraq, and it used to even arm Iraq. The relations went sore when Iraq occupied Kuwait. We also now that Iraq has committed crimes, including environmental crimes, against Kuwait, other than just occupying it. Iraq has committed also a lot of crimes against Iran. Do you have any feelings about it? We also have to remember that the US has fought Iraq during the Golf war with the full blessing of the most of the Arab nations, and the mission, by in large, has been financed by the Arab nations.

 

The recent bombing of Sudan was a shameful act by the previous President (seen as an act of diverting the public attention from some internal scandals), and it has been condemned by most of the thinking people in the US. However, Sudan indeed is a criminal regime.

 

In general, in the past eight years, the US foreign policy has been most incompetent and incoherent. There are reasons to believe that things are changing to the better in that arena.

 

The Palestinian issue is more complex. Indeed the US media is very biased against them. Most frequently, it doesn’t provide a full and honest information. It is a shame. I can report to you that the US media has also shown bias against Armenia in the past 8 years. That is very unfortunate. However, there are always programs and media outlets in the US, which provide impartial information. The problem is that they are outnumbered by the opposite camp. Therefore, the issue here is not that the US government doesn’t allow honest information about the Palestinians, but just the opposite stream of information is more powerful.

 

I am sympathetic to the Palestinians in terms of feeling pity for their misery, their living conditions, etc. In the past, I have had many Arab students, including Palestinians. I have loved them. They were good people. However, in my view, the Palestinian side has to take responsibility for a large portion of the formation of stereotypes against them. By in large, the media doesn’t invent their image. They make their image themselves. And a lot of things are judged by the image, unfortunately. Ordinary people don’t study or understand politics or history. They judge by the image that one makes about himself/herself. Additionally, the Palestinian side (along with some Arab countries) demonstrate great degree of unreasonableness in their attitude towards Israel by not recognizing the right of Israel to exist. By doing so, they basically declare war to Israel which, subsequently, acts under the premise of conducting war. If that is the case, Palestinians should understand that to a large degree they inflict their troubles upon themselves.

 

I am not in position to give advices neither to Israelites nor the Palestinians. But I think that the troubles of this scale are never resulted from the actions of one side. There are always at least two guilty parties in such conflicts.

 

As far as your statement about America considering Arabs as its enemies, and being afraid of them is concerned, I think you “took your army to a wasteland” again. First of all, America is in more than friendly terms with many Arab nations, including the most fundamentalist Islamic Saudi Arabia. Second, I don’t see what is it that may make America afraid of Arab countries.

 

You see, this is the problem with the Palestinians, too, in my view. While having strong basis for legitimate claims, due to the choice of their ways and means they put themselves in a disadvantageous position. You do act similarly in some respects. While some of the things that you say have merits, by expressing them through taking them to extremes your allegations lose credibility in the eyes of those, who might’ve been sympathetic to some of your thoughts.

 

I couldn’t follow your statement about being “pleased that I think so about you.”

[THOTH]

MJ

 

Excellent response (as usual)

 

There can be no question that the US acts in (what it percieves to be) its national interest on the world stage. Sometimes this approach is shortsighted and based on misperceptions (or narrow perceptions). Often, (as in the case of the previous administration), there is no "policy" per se at all - but knee jerk response - often driven by internal (or otherwise non related) factors. Again - this is not untypical of nations in general - just whatever the US does - in this time - is center stage - and is critically perceived by others (often rightly so). The current administration should have a better policy perspective - but the underpinnings (realpolitic and for whose [corporate] interests) may be cause for serious concern. Armenia is in a poor position in this regard IMO - but I will bet that the Arabs/Palestinians are likely to benefit vis a vis Israel in certain respects (particularly if the oil "squeeze" is on...). Hard to say - as Israel has its clout as well (Armenia hasn't got dogsh*t unfourtunatly...unless its (percieved as condusive) to benefit Azerbaijan and oil/gas access etc)

 

And to keep on topic I should address US - Muslim bias - etc. Islam is certainly percieved (perhaps rightly so) as the great bogeyman of today (where communism has basically fallen off of the map). I think we are mostly entering an economic/influence/access competitive period (more real then prior anti-communist/East versus West, somewhat false/contrived competition...[was communism really ever a viable alternative? Nations were either subjegated by such, or revolutionary groups professed such as a calling card for aid/assistance as the acceptable "opposition" etc]. We are now entering a period somewhat like what exisited prior to WWI (and the asscendency of the Bolshi's in Russia)...back to reality (and a more purely greed based [and shifting alliance] competition) I think....do you agree? (what are your thoughts, if any, if you care...etc?) Armenia is in a poor position to capitalize on such I think...more likely will be victim...(and can you see Russia as the Ottoman Empire of today? [always were even then...just delayed...] IMO...and if so what new dangers might be in store...for minorities within the "Empire" and for the rest of us...[think think])

 

BTW - I am curious regarding your background & what you do (you refer to teaching)...are you a prof somewhere? (and of what...etc.)...and you are an American/US citizen [or such] no?

[MJ]

THOTH,

 

I don’t see the current corporate expansionism as a greed based phenomenon. I think it is a rather positive thing for the world population. There is obviously a disproportionate concentration of wealth in the world (what’s new about it, right?). However, most of the world lives under misery. Such a picture is resulted from the segmentation of the world economy. Under the scenario of the elimination of such barriers I think the wealth may and ill propagate to the most disadvantageous corners of the world. Would this mean that the current owners of wealth would become wealthier? I think so. But so what? Why should it bother one? The issue is not that they would become wealthier, but that the devastated from poverty regions of the world would be lifted up much like Taiwan, Thailand, South Korea , etc, have done.

 

Armenia is not an exception in this sense. It has two choices – to accept the foreign corporations on its soil or to continue the current status quo. In my view, the only party who shouldn’t be interested in allowing the corporations in should be that 5% of the population who enriches itself at the expense of the misery of the nation. Obviously, under the conditions of open competition a large portion of that 5% may be diminished in terms of its viability since it cannot operate in such conditions and contribute to the growth. For the rest of the population I don’t see alternatives, and I don’t see what else they may lose.

 

To address your other question, yes, in the past I have held academic positions, including teaching.

[Kazza]

Dear Hakob,

 

Western Christians seem to be prejudiced and scared of other religions. Some have an idea that theirs is somehow more "civilised". (Inciting unfounded comments, like "rapist religion")

 

Other, Eastern Religions, some members think theirs is more civilised too, but in a different way. They think Christians arent strict enough in their daily living to lead a religious life.

 

I've said this before, religion is a huge politically driven institution...which couses many complications in people's lives. But many people can't live without religion. Many people that taken on any relgion have become better people for it. For example, the reason Jehovah Witnesses(a multi ethnic, racial religion) is such a popular religion is because it gives many people control in their lives, when they can't control it themselves.

 

People can also follow a relgion just becasue they are born into it, all their lives, and never question it.

 

Those are just my general thoughts...

A question: who thinks various parts of religion is demeaning to women? Because I certainly do.

[THOTH]

MJ - I just saw (again) the movie "Wall Street" on cable last night..."Greed is good"...LOL (have you seen it? Good flick...eye opening in a number of ways...

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:

THOTH,

 

I don’t see the current corporate expansionism as a greed based phenomenon. I think it is a rather positive thing for the world population.

---

 

The "issue" in my mind is nations attempting to secure preferential access to markets...not bad in and of itself (but is leading to competition and potential uncertainties...politicaly...militarily (who knows whats in store...) However, I think the purely market based world economy may/will be bad for humanity over the long term. Focus on the "bottom line" - short term profit etc - without regard to where it is taking us (humanity) - impact on the environment, use of natural resources, exploitative labor situations, perpetuation of elites at the expense of the many etc etc. We (humanity in general) are in a unique position of power/wealth/technology in this time - we can ensure a sustainig developing future where the prosperity & well being and technicval development (to the stars I say!) can be (perhaps) crafted and sustained...but we are proceding without vision...slaves to technology development driven by market forces...who knows where it will lead. I would never advocated a centralized system as we saw with comunism...but we need leadership with vision, humanity and incentive for long term thinking...etc

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:

There is obviously a disproportionate concentration of wealth in the world (what’s new about it, right?). However, most of the world lives under misery. Such a picture is resulted from the segmentation of the world economy. Under the scenario of the elimination of such barriers I think the wealth may and ill propagate to the most disadvantageous corners of the world. Would this mean that the current owners of wealth would become wealthier? I think so. But so what? Why should it bother one? The issue is not that they would become wealthier, but that the devastated from poverty regions of the world would be lifted up much like Taiwan, Thailand, South Korea , etc, have done.

---

 

Yea, do we care...could we change such if we wished (don't know). And what will the global impact be of increasing population/nations producing & consuming & wasting at US/European levels? Can the earth sustain it? Look already at the Global (Ocean in particular) Warming and other environmental indicators (not to mention the new disease vectors...)...and the oil will run out (soon). What is to be done? When will it be too late? What are we turning into and turning the world into...shouldn't we care...?

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:

Armenia is not an exception in this sense. It has two choices – to accept the foreign corporations on its soil or to continue the current status quo. In my view, the only party who shouldn’t be interested in allowing the corporations in should be that 5% of the population who enriches itself at the expense of the misery of the nation. Obviously, under the conditions of open competition a large portion of that 5% may be diminished in terms of its viability since it cannot operate in such conditions and contribute to the growth. For the rest of the population I don’t see alternatives, and I don’t see what else they may lose.

---

 

Agree (on this level...short term/narrow consideration...but for Armenia of course the issue at hand)

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:

To address your other question, yes, in the past I have held academic positions, including teaching.

---

 

University level? What field(s)? I sense some reluctance to say too much (understood)...

[Kazza]

Thoth I really want to comment on your post later, when I have more time..

[Kazza]

Please Thoth tell me what Ararat is up to. If you have his email?

[MJ]

Thoth,

 

No, I haven’t seen the movie. But I think I know the Wall Street from personal acquaintances. Don’t have a positive or negative attitude towards it. Both exist there, I think.

 

Regarding corporations. The way I understand is not preferential access but equal access. That’s what the free trade and the other provisions associated with NAFTA and other treaties are about.

 

Even in the US, with its market traditions, the system is not purely economy based. The government fulfills regulatory function. The regulations have to be directed at preventing and prosecuting the unfair and harmful practices.

 

I think the issues regarding the environment are taken way out of proportions. The environmentalism on its own has become sort of a religion and a way of making living (for the environmentalists). The fact is that the market driven countries are environmentally more conscious then the state controlled economies. Nobody has polluted the way USSR has done, or China has done.

 

I do agree with your statement “but we need leadership with vision, humanity and incentive for long term thinking.”

 

I don’t think that there is a negative impact from increasing population/nations producing & consuming & wasting at US/European levels. Primarily because if other nations would approach producing at US/European levels, that would automatically reduce the production levels in US and Europe. As far as the Global Warming goes, I am not aware of such evidence. There is such hypothesis, which needs to be confirmed, first, before crying “wolf,” I think. Few decades ago, similar scientists (to those supporting the notion of Global Warming) were claiming that the earth temperature is going down, and a new ice age is arriving. I remember these theories. The fact is that the world climate goes in cycles. There are daily, seasonal, yearly cycles. But there are also cycles of somewhat like 10-year duration. Understanding of the patterns of the climate is undoubtedly a high priority issue, and it has to be encouraged by all means.

 

I don’t think that the oil will run out soon. Clearly, the existing oil wells and refineries don’t have adequate for our times capacity. But there is ample oil in the world, which needs to be extracted. It is a different issue that it needs to be extracted in a responsible manner.

 

I think we certainly should care about what the world is turning into. However, I think it is turning to a better place than it has been in the past.

 

P.S. I have taught for a while at a university level (math).

[THOTH]

Kazza,

 

I have had very little contact with Ararat recently - (I have thought perhaps my stands concerning religion/christianity may have had something to do with it...but I think not..he is a good guy, and has known my position [and has seen it stated most harshly...]) He has been scarce on all forums (that I see) of late...so who knows...

 

BTW - nice post concerning religion - some very good points. Obviously (most all) people need religion (of some sort) - it fulfils many needs actually...and your comment concerning women is mostly true - though not for all religions (again, I refer to Taoism...LOL!). Most religions were developed by men (in part to perpetuate/legitimize the power structure....) Western/patriarchal (sheparding peoples based) religions are specifically hostile to women (in general) and to religions where women play(ed) more prominent roles (the agrarian based paganistic (more fun!) type religions). Notice the prohibitions against reverly in celebrations (only watered down a bit for inclusion upon absorption of people with other beleifs). Note - the pagan gods all have become demons/devils etc ...and the fertilization rituals (so vital/significant for agricultural peoples) - where women play a centralied role (obviously) are on the "out" as it were. F*ckin facists!

[THOTH]

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
Thoth,

No, I haven’t seen the movie. But I think I know the Wall Street from personal acquaintances. Don’t have a positive or negative attitude towards it. Both exist there, I think.

---

Movie is well worth seeing - (Oliver Stone...for better or worse)...its a good one though - nice insights.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
Regarding corporations. The way I understand is not preferential access but equal access. That’s what the free trade and the other provisions associated with NAFTA and other treaties are about.

---

Don't fool yourself...first of all many of these treeaties are expressedly designed to allow corporations that are located (HQ) in more restrictive labor/environmental/safety environments to circumvent such...all that being said I am in favor of "free trade" (and breaking down many/most barriers)...don't get me wrong...we must read between the lines however to see what is going along with such...there is also the issue of cultural/societal perogatives. A nation should be able to determine what parts of its culture/economy it wants to hang onto...as tradition or to support a part of its population & their way of life etc. And nations such as the US (or perhaps more accuratly Mega-Conglomerates based in...) have severe advantages over the much smaller native concerns...should they be freed up to undercut and destroy these others (then raise prices etc later once competition has been eliminated? and such...

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
Even in the US, with its market traditions, the system is not purely economy based. The government fulfills regulatory function. The regulations have to be directed at preventing and prosecuting the unfair and harmful practices.

---

understood...much more can be done (and there is also the issue of corruption)...in fact I think the US (and other) governments could use environmental clean laws (applied not only against manufacturing etc but for acceptance of products/services in the marketplace) to stimulate the economy and to regulate trade (and stimulate other nations to follow suit - to ensure clean industry etc). I have a plan - but if I reveal it to you now I may miss out on my Noble Prize or some such

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
I think the issues regarding the environment are taken way out of proportions. The environmentalism on its own has become sort of a religion and a way of making living (for the environmentalists).

---

I am totally in the opposite camp - our environment - our earth - our home - once destroyed will (likely) never be the same. We only have a limited insight into the true damage(s) we are doing....If it is a religion...it is one that is tangible and "correct" (LOL)...mankind has had and is having enormous (negative) impact...

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
The fact is that the market driven countries are environmentally more conscious then the state controlled economies. Nobody has polluted the way USSR has done, or China has done.

---

agreed...but we are resource hogs are we not? When people have a say/can influence government - they are going to say "hell no not in our back yard" (pollution/dangerous testing etc)...even in Russia we can see a growing environmental movement that has already had some impact.

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
I do agree with your statement “but we need leadership with vision, humanity and incentive for long term thinking.”

---

A bit of "mom & apple pie" I realize...still our political system(s) does/do not encourage/foster such...

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
I don’t think that there is a negative impact from increasing population/nations producing & consuming & wasting at US/European levels. Primarily because if other nations would approach producing at US/European levels, that would automatically reduce the production levels in US and Europe.

---

Not exactly. Certainly we have seen manufacturing shifts...but with increased demand there is need for increased production...and once again shifted away from nations with stricter controls/oversite for labor/environment etc. I don't want to say to developing nations - "no you can't" - but in order for our earth to sustain such on the grand scale we must revise many practices ("or else"...I beleive...)

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
As far as the Global Warming goes, I am not aware of such evidence. There is such hypothesis, which needs to be confirmed, first, before crying “wolf,” I think. Few decades ago, similar scientists (to those supporting the notion of Global Warming) were claiming that the earth temperature is going down, and a new ice age is arriving. I remember these theories. The fact is that the world climate goes in cycles. There are daily, seasonal, yearly cycles. But there are also cycles of somewhat like 10-year duration. Understanding of the patterns of the climate is undoubtedly a high priority issue, and it has to be encouraged by all means.

---

Evidence is there and near overwhelming at this point - and it will only get worse & quick (glacier melt & sea temperature rise most significant). Sure there are natural shifts (how frequent/durations etc?) - and we will always be at the mercy of these...but we are clearly impacting in a major way (perhaps soon beyond easy recovery). The impacts wil be enourmous - costly & hazardous (in a very many ways)...The (originally Ronald Reagan) approach - "more study needed" is a clear cop-out...the evidence is in and is clear (IMO) - we need to act now (and there are other issues such as nitrogen polution of the oceans & acid rain which are likely to have severe [potentially catestrophic] effects as well). I recommend to you the Science Fiction/Science book "Timescape" by Gregory Beneford...(at least look up the synopsis at Amazon or such)

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
I don’t think that the oil will run out soon. Clearly, the existing oil wells and refineries don’t have adequate for our times capacity. But there is ample oil in the world, which needs to be extracted. It is a different issue that it needs to be extracted in a responsible manner.

---

Again I disagree. There were only so many ancient trees & the like to produce our carbon based fuels - evidence is that we may run out within our lifetimes....(heavy shit...). We need responsible usage (restrictive to what can't be done other ways...and huge investment in alternative energy research & production....NOW!)

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
I think we certainly should care about what the world is turning into. However, I think it is turning to a better place than it has been in the past.

---

In some ways not saying much (LOL)...mostly agree though (too easy)

quote:

---

Originally posted by MJ:
P.S. I have taught for a while at a university level (math).

---

I see. BTW - didn't realize you were a Republican (until now)...LOL

[Mayja]

Dear MJ,

i see this topic is worth of attention... but why do u only stae facts without touching their reasons? U say that America is even friendly to arab states. Of course, they are friendly to Kuweit - because of their economical capital there- to Saudi - because that Saudi has almost the main role in the arab World in religious and political sides...I dont support Iraq's claims to have Kuweit, no way...But the main reason of the encounter of USA and Iraq is that of Sadam's wish to have the bomb and USA's resistence of that. There is no place for democracy and human rights principles which America claims to support. They are only pretext... What would u say, MJ, on Libya's case?? America forces has bomb Khadafi's villa...

 

Originally posted by MJ:

"We also now that Iraq has committed crimes, including environmental crimes, against Kuwait, other than just occupying it. Iraq has committed also a lot of crimes against Iran. Do you have any feelings about it?"

 

You want to say that we dont know facts when America's FBI commited crimes with purposes" of better future"? e.g. J.F.Kenedy;s assasination??But why everybody is silent about that? Cos somebody dont allow to know that to the World.

 

 

Originally posted by MJ:

 

"By in large, the media doesn’t invent their image. They make their image themselves. And a lot of things are judged by the image, unfortunately"

I will never agree with this statement

One can view another as suitable for one.. Me, fo e.g, i dont consider Palestians "terrorists fundamentalists extremists Muslims " . I consider them as poor people, which are not allowed to have even their own land! They supousdly see that there is no support from the main hegemons of they world.. They lost their hope. They have no arms. ( when jews does. Tanks esp. to destroy arabs' shacks).What would u advice to do them, i wonder?

 

Originally posted by MJ:

 

"Additionally, the Palestinian side (along with some Arab countries) demonstrate great degree of unreasonableness in their attitude towards Israel by not recognizing the right of Israel to exist. "

 

What are the facts that proves Izrael's right to exist in arabs lands?

Originally posted by MJ:

 

"While some of the things that you say have merits, by expressing them through taking them to extremes your allegations lose credibility in the eyes of those, who might’ve been sympathetic to some of your thoughts."

 

yes.. not as smart as you are, my dear friend, but this topic is very sore for me, these things are very serious. We can never know what will be the next America;s target..(hmm.. maybe too extreme again.., yes? )

Originally posted by MJ:

 

"In general, in the past eight years, the US foreign policy has been most incompetent and incoherent. There are reasons to believe that things are changing to the better in that arena."

 

What makes u so optimistic in this afaire?

[MJ]

i see this topic is worth of attention... but why do u only state facts without touching their reasons? U say that America is even friendly to Arab states. Of course, they are friendly to Kuwait - because of their economical capital there- to Saudi - because that Saudi has almost the main role in the Arab World in religious and political sides...I don’t support Iraq's claims to have Kuwait, no way...

 

 

Dear Mayja,

 

 

Probably you are right. But Arabs are not Americans’ cousins, right? Isn’t it the case that beyond each type of interstate ‘friendship’ there is some reason?

 

But the main reason of the encounter of USA and Iraq is that of Sadam's wish to have the bomb and USA's resistance of that.

 

Probably so, again. But hasn’t Sadam demonstrated that he cannot be trusted with the possession of nuclear arsenals?

 

There is no place for democracy and human rights principles which America claims to support. They are only pretext...

 

Probably you are right to some degree, again. But isn’t it how the world spins around. Aren’t the Arab states the same way (only not on the grounds of Human Rights but other issues) with the rest of the world?

 

If you meant the recent bombings of Libya, I have already said that it was a shameful action by a shameful President. If it is about earlier bombings more than a decade ago, I don’t know all the facts. But I know that by the order of Kadaffi an American airplane was bombed, and hundreds of innocent people have died.

 

You want to say that we dont know facts when America's FBI commited crimes with purposes" of better future"? e.g. J.F. Kennedy’s assassination? But why everybody is silent about that? Cos somebody don’t allow to know that to the World.

 

You longed towards Ivan Susanin, again, don’t you? How do you know that? What evidence do you have? Why would it be FBI committing such assassination, and not the organized crime, for example? How much do you know about this assassination, which is considered to be the most mysterious one of the past century?

 

Sorry, dear Mayja, but I cannot give the Palestinians any advice, and they wouldn’t take it from me, anyway. But I have to say that I understand your frustration. I know that if the Palestinians had guided missiles of high precision, they would’ve used them, rather than the suicide bombing. And then, they might’ve shined perhaps under a better light. But unfortunately, the world is not a fairs place, and the life is as a rule unfair. But in any case, the current tactics of Palestinians doesn’t lead to victory, anyway. Maybe they have to take an example from Gandhi? I don’t know. But the fact is that even the Israeli hardliners (such as Sharon) understand and declare that the Palestinian independence is immanent. It is a matter of time. But I have a question to you. If Palestinians are given the independence, and acquire the necessary sovereignty to acquire modern arms, what would be their attitude towards Israel? Would they be ready to peacefully coexist with the Israelits?

 

The fact is that the state of Israel has been created based on the consent of the Palestinian side in 1948. It is a different issue that Israel has expended its borders since. But I don’t know all the facts and the accurate chronology of the events. Maybe you can help us to learn them? But I do think that Israel has a legitimate right to exist on whatever territories, and it has a legitimate right for security. As an extra note I have to remind you, too, that the last three US administrations have brought enormous pressure on Israel to make substantial concessions to the Arab world.

 

I understand your sore, but nevertheless it doesn’t help to cure neither Palestine’s problems, nor inspires optimism to the Israelites. Therefore, it takes the relations of the two sides to another level of violence and growing hatred and antagonism. What do you expect to gain from it for Palestine, for example, or for yourself, personally?

 

I am more optimistic about the new American foreign policy because this administration’s foreign policy team is most competent, first of all, and it has a vision of minimal interference in the affairs of other countries. This wing of the American political thought claims that America is not the police of the world, and should not be, unless American vital interests are at jeopardy. This is a very reasonable vision, I would say.

 

And where do you think the next American target may be? Not Vilnuse, I presume?