Muslim Honor Killing's in N.A!

[WIP]

And that, my friends, is why the Muslim fundamentalist efforts in such places as France(if ever there was a corrupting influence, France would be the place) and many other European nations has been so peaceful. No riots, rapes, or killings to speak of there.

Seriously, it's sobering to see WIP's attitude in this matter. How can one hold that view when the muslim violence in several European nations has been going on for years? But holders of this viewpoint ignore it hoping it will go away, like France did, and is now reaping the whirlwind.

Again, you are focusing solely on religion and disregarding the creation of ethnic ghettos in European cities, which is why we don't have the same Muslim riots here and in the United States.

The reason you don't get it is because you don't see the similarities you share in your approach to the world with the religious Muslims. Now, unlike a lot of people here who always fall between two opposing camps on this issue, I don't carry an attitude of having everything figured out, and I recognize that this issue of trying to figure out the forces within the Muslim Community, and what approach to take towards the Muslim religion and its followers is going to be very difficult, because acquiescing to aggressive demands of Muslim Community activists on issues like education and Sharia Law, strengthens the fundamentalists and undercuts the position of moderates who want a more secular approach that will reduce the iron grip that Muslim clerics have in Muslim nations and even in some Muslim communities in the West.

But, on the other hand, the approach you are advocating for - the "Clash of Civilizations" viewpoint that sees Islam as an intractable foe that can only be fought on the battlefield and should be outlawed in the West -- is like throwing gasoline on the fire, since the most hardline Muslims want to deal with a hostile community of Kuffars -- their greatest fear is that their young people are being seduced by Western culture and Western values( which they are!), and will be more moderate and neglectful in practicing their religion.

The moderates are also marginalized by the crusading approach, since they are left appearing as apologists for the enemies of Islam. Many moderate Muslim spokespeople have commented during recent years that the War in Iraq was the worse thing that could have happened to the Islamic reform movements, since the clerics can always point their finger at the infidel crusaders invading Muslim lands. They have felt stuck biding their time until George Bush was out of office, and have been hoping that the new administration ends the war and the appearance that the U.S. government is trying to colonize the MiddleEast in the interests of oil development. The best approach is to take the same one towards Christian extremists as with Muslim extremists.

[sharkman]

Again, you are focusing solely on religion and disregarding the creation of ethnic ghettos in European cities, which is why we don't have the same Muslim riots here and in the United States.

The reason you don't get it is because you don't see the similarities you share in your approach to the world with the religious Muslims. Now, unlike a lot of people here who always fall between two opposing camps on this issue, I don't carry an attitude of having everything figured out, and I recognize that this issue of trying to figure out the forces within the Muslim Community, and what approach to take towards the Muslim religion and its followers is going to be very difficult, because acquiescing to aggressive demands of Muslim Community activists on issues like education and Sharia Law, strengthens the fundamentalists and undercuts the position of moderates who want a more secular approach that will reduce the iron grip that Muslim clerics have in Muslim nations and even in some Muslim communities in the West.

But, on the other hand, the approach you are advocating for - the "Clash of Civilizations" viewpoint that sees Islam as an intractable foe that can only be fought on the battlefield and should be outlawed in the West -- is like throwing gasoline on the fire, since the most hardline Muslims want to deal with a hostile community of Kuffars -- their greatest fear is that their young people are being seduced by Western culture and Western values( which they are!), and will be more moderate and neglectful in practicing their religion.

The moderates are also marginalized by the crusading approach, since they are left appearing as apologists for the enemies of Islam. Many moderate Muslim spokespeople have commented during recent years that the War in Iraq was the worse thing that could have happened to the Islamic reform movements, since the clerics can always point their finger at the infidel crusaders invading Muslim lands. They have felt stuck biding their time until George Bush was out of office, and have been hoping that the new administration ends the war and the appearance that the U.S. government is trying to colonize the MiddleEast in the interests of oil development. The best approach is to take the same one towards Christian extremists as with Muslim extremists.

I would suspect that an alert reader can see several weaknesses in this argument, and some simple ploys to put me on the defensive. Sweeping France and most of Europe under the rug may help the argument, but it can not be done with integrity, however. There are lessons there that we ignore at our peril. Bringing in masses of a people that do not want to integrate into our society will only marginalize them in the end, and make them pliable for the militant version of the Muslim faith.

Calling opponents supporters of the "Clash of Civilizations" viewpoint and other such knee jerk phrases shows a lack of understanding of what we are dealing with here, even though George Bush was thrown in for good measure. Why would a people(Muslims) want to immigrate to a nation or nations whom they despise, like Canada and the United States? So they can live in peace and pursue their dreams, of course! Start businesses and hire Canadians to create successful enterprises with which to do good works as their faith permits, perhaps?

Sadly, no. They do not want to come here for any of the above for the most part. They want to spread their faith by numbers. Europeans did not want to become Muslim or live under Sharia law, so did Muslim leaders send emissaries or missionaries to convert people? No, they sent large numbers of immigrants over many years, to politically manipulate the outcomes of these countries. Now violent Muslim attacks occur regularly there and they can do little about it. They won't be able to do that with the US, since 9/11 kind of brought the issue home for them, but Canada is a different game for them.

Some people try to ignore the outcomes in Europe and ignore 9/11 like it never happened, but it was a new level of attack and hundreds of such attacks by militant Muslims followed, killing and maiming thousands in the name of Allah. The old approach offered by Clinton for 8 solid years brought us 9/11. WIP now echoes that old approach as if it is new but the only thing new about it is the new terror it will reign down on innocents the world over.

Edited March 17, 2009 by sharkman

[guyser]

Why would a people(Muslims) want to immigrate to a nation or nations whom they despise, like Canada and the United States? So they can live in peace and pursue their dreams, of course! Start businesses and hire Canadians to create successful enterprises with which to do good works as their faith permits, perhaps?

So, boiling that down, the Muslims come here to NorthAmerica but they despise us , but will live among the enemy for decades until critical mass is achieved?

YOu actually answered the correct way...so they can have a better life.

Sadly, no. They do not want to come here for any of the above for the most part. They want to spread their faith by numbers. Europeans did not want to become Muslim or live under Sharia law, so did Muslim leaders send emissaries or missionaries to convert people? No, they sent large numbers of immigrants over many years, to politically manipulate the outcomes of these countries.

10Million muslims sitting patiently is what you said.

Why that seems pretty high up on tinfoil hattery stuff.

Now violent Muslim attacks occur regularly there and they can do little about it. They won't be able to do that with the US, since 9/11 kind of brought the issue home for them, but Canada is a different game for them.

Hmm, France has what, about half the Muslims of USA , and yet, no riots to speak of in US.

So that tells me there must be another reason, perhaps the system or systems in France have agitated something, the perenial lousy wages, perhaps the racism rampant from the French themselves , not sure, but I would look into that before the tinfoil stuff

[sharkman]

Come on, think about it Guyser. They HATE the west. Hate it. Hate it for its decadent ways, sinful hedonism, lustful clothing and on and on and on. They don't WANT to live here. Think about it.

Therefore, why would they come here? Why did they go to France? Another sinful lustful hedonistic society that would harm their children, in their eyes. There is no good reason for them to go to a culture that they despise.

Why are you looking at France half-assed? You are smarter than that, I've seen it. France may or may not have half the Muslims, but you didn't bother to look at the other side of the equation. I'm not even going to give you a hint.

As for the 10 million muslims, you are going to have to flesh out what you are saying better than that, you don't mention where you get that number and where they are 'waiting.' The Muslim immigration may not have had an agenda at first, but it sure as hell does now.

[jbg]

Therefore, why would they come here? Why did they go to France? Another sinful lustful hedonistic society that would harm their children, in their eyes. There is no good reason for them to go to a culture that they despise.

For the social welfare benefits. Pakistan doesn't have much money for those. Nor does Algeria (who actually sends more to France).

[WIP]

I would suspect that an alert reader can see several weaknesses in this argument, and some simple ploys to put me on the defensive. Sweeping France and most of Europe under the rug may help the argument, but it can not be done with integrity, however. There are lessons there that we ignore at our peril. Bringing in masses of a people that do not want to integrate into our society will only marginalize them in the end, and make them pliable for the militant version of the Muslim faith.

France, and most other European nations brought in cheap labour from Africa, Turkey and the MiddleEast and had no interest in integrating them in the first place! In Germany, more than two million Turks were brought in during the 60's and 70's when the German economy was booming and they did not have enough workers. They were given special residency permits, but not citizenship. France took in Algerians and West Africans from their former colonies, and moved them into suburban ghettos -- so Muslim or not, it's a specious argument to blame the immigrants from not becoming woven into the fabric of European nations when the host countries did their best to keep them separate in the first place.

Calling opponents supporters of the "Clash of Civilizations" viewpoint and other such knee jerk phrases shows a lack of understanding of what we are dealing with here,

Oh! And what are we dealing with here exactly? Samuel Huntington coined that phrase for the book of the same name to describe what he considered would be the future conflicts after the end of the Cold War between groups of nations organized along cultural and religious grounds. And he saw Muslim and Western cultures as intractable enemies that cannot find common ground, therefore conflict and wars between Western and Muslim nations will be neverending.......and how does that differ from your position?

even though George Bush was thrown in for good measure. Why would a people(Muslims) want to immigrate to a nation or nations whom they despise, like Canada and the United States?

Do you have anything to back up that contention that Muslims are moving here because they despise us? First generation immigrants, regardless of where they are from usually feel caught between the new country and the homeland. When their children go to school here, and make lives for themselves here, they are the ones who see themselves as Canadians or Americans, and do not feel at home when visiting the birth country of their parents.

So they can live in peace and pursue their dreams, of course! Start businesses and hire Canadians to create successful enterprises with which to do good works as their faith permits, perhaps?

Have you actually ever talked to any Muslims? You seem to think that they have all come here as Al Qaeda sleeper cells!

Sadly, no. They do not want to come here for any of the above for the most part. They want to spread their faith by numbers. Europeans did not want to become Muslim or live under Sharia law, so did Muslim leaders send emissaries or missionaries to convert people? No, they sent large numbers of immigrants over many years, to politically manipulate the outcomes of these countries. Now violent Muslim attacks occur regularly there and they can do little about it. They won't be able to do that with the US, since 9/11 kind of brought the issue home for them, but Canada is a different game for them.

Okay, so they want to outbreed us, and commit terrorist attacks, so what do you suggest as a remedy, are you going to banish Muslims from this countriy or ban their religion? You voice your fears on a continuous loop, but I'm waiting to hear what your suggestions are for dealing with the problem.

Some people try to ignore the outcomes in Europe and ignore 9/11 like it never happened, but it was a new level of attack and hundreds of such attacks by militant Muslims followed, killing and maiming thousands in the name of Allah. The old approach offered by Clinton for 8 solid years brought us 9/11. WIP now echoes that old approach as if it is new but the only thing new about it is the new terror it will reign down on innocents the world over.

So this is your answer! More of the same! You're blaming Clinton for 9/11, and you have conveniently left out the fact that George Bush was in office for nine months and wasn't exactly doing anything about Al Qaeda or the warnings his administration was receiving about the threat of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil........although he was quick to seize 9/11 as an opportunity to invade Iraq, rather than spend the money improving security at home. If Bin Laden's strategy was to draw out a reactionary response and bleed America dry through excessive military spending, I would say he ended up as the big winner in the War on Terror, and George Bush made his victory possible!

[WIP]

Come on, think about it Guyser. They HATE the west. Hate it. Hate it for its decadent ways, sinful hedonism, lustful clothing and on and on and on. They don't WANT to live here. Think about it.

You don't realize it, but you're describing a lot of Christians as well.

[jbg]

France, and most other European nations brought in cheap labour from Africa, Turkey and the MiddleEast and had no interest in integrating them in the first place! In Germany, more than two million Turks were brought in during the 60's and 70's when the German economy was booming and they did not have enough workers. They were given special residency permits, but not citizenship. France took in Algerians and West Africans from their former colonies, and moved them into suburban ghettos -- so Muslim or not, it's a specious argument to blame the immigrants from not becoming woven into the fabric of European nations when the host countries did their best to keep them separate in the first place.

Good historical analysis. I actually remember they came to work jobs that Europeans considered beneath them.

Oh! And what are we dealing with here exactly? Samuel Huntington coined that phrase for the book of the same name to describe what he considered would be the future conflicts after the end of the Cold War between groups of nations organized along cultural and religious grounds. And he saw Muslim and Western cultures as intractable enemies that cannot find common ground, therefore conflict and wars between Western and Muslim nations will be neverending.......and how does that differ from your position?

I happen to agree with a lot of Mr. Huntington's work in this area. I think that during the days of the Silk Road, the Crusades, Torres and the approach to Vienna the intractability of the differences was illustrated. Now, the weapons are just more devastating. The overall opennness of Western society cannot be reconciled to the closed societies of the East. The Muslim societies are aggressive; the true Oriental ones less so (with some exceptions such as Imperial Japan).

Do you have anything to back up that contention that Muslims are moving here because they despise us? First generation immigrants, regardless of where they are from usually feel caught between the new country and the homeland.

I disagree with these contentions. In Europe, as you pointed out they were deliberately segregated, much as the Jews were (before being wiped out in the Holocaust). The Jews' reaction was less violent than the Muslims, but then again the Jews had the option to move to America during much of the period they were being segregated, an option not as open to European Muslims.

When their children go to school here, and make lives for themselves here, they are the ones who see themselves as Canadians or Americans, and do not feel at home when visiting the birth country of their parents.

I hope that's true in Canada. It is in America, apparently.

Have you actually ever talked to any Muslims? You seem to think that they have all come here as Al Qaeda sleeper cells!

I think there are some that come as sleeper cells but most have legitimate origins.

Okay, so they want to outbreed us, and commit terrorist attacks, so what do you suggest as a remedy, are you going to banish Muslims from this countriy or ban their religion? You voice your fears on a continuous loop, but I'm waiting to hear what your suggestions are for dealing with the problem.

If we limit social welfare benefits the "breeding" problem is ameliorated.

So this is your answer! More of the same! You're blaming Clinton for 9/11, and you have conveniently left out the fact that George Bush was in office for nine months and wasn't exactly doing anything about Al Qaeda or the warnings his administration was receiving about the threat of another terrorist attack on U.S. soil........although he was quick to seize 9/11 as an opportunity to invade Iraq, rather than spend the money improving security at home. If Bin Laden's strategy was to draw out a reactionary response and bleed America dry through excessive military spending, I would say he ended up as the big winner in the War on Terror, and George Bush made his victory possible!

I suspect strongly that the attacks were accelerated by Bush's taking office since there was likely a suspicion that Bush would move more actively against AQ and I think AQ was counting on a Gore victory. If Gore won, the U.S.'s reaction to 911 would have been similar to the reaction to the U.S.S. Cole and Kenya-Tanzania Embassy attacks of 1998, i.e. a lot of hand-wringing, and calls for "comprehensive Mid-East peace".

[sharkman]

You don't realize it, but you're describing a lot of Christians as well.

I don't know what kind of religious people you have rubbed shoulders with, but by that chip on your shoulder I wonder if it was a pretty bad experience for you.

I read your post and I'm not going to bother to answer it point for point, I see no benefit in repeating the same old post for post arguments that can go on for pages. However, to not blame the immigrants in France for their actions WRT riots, and a lengthy list of crimes reminds me of how we treat criminals in Canada who have stolen 20 cars. They get probation.

Do you have anything to back up that contention that Muslims are moving here because they despise us?

I can't believe you honestly think that is my opinion, your reading comprehension is above that. However, my point stands, and jbg partly answered it. I think you agree that they do hate western society with all of its decadent ways.

There is no point in talking about solutions with you(since you rightly point out I haven't offered any) when you are still in denial about the problem.

Edited March 18, 2009 by sharkman

[Oleg Bach]

I don't know what kind of religious people you have rubbed shoulders with, but by that chip on your shoulder I wonder if it was a pretty bad experience for you.

I read your post and I'm not going to bother to answer it point for point, I see no benefit in repeating the same old post for post arguments that can go on for pages. However, to not blame the immigrants in France for their actions WRT riots, and a lengthy list of crimes reminds me of how we treat criminals in Canada who have stolen 20 cars. They get probation.

I can't believe you honestly think that is my opinion, your reading comprehension is above that. However, my point stands, and jbg partly answered it. I think you agree that they do hate western society with all of its decadent ways.

There is no point in talking about solutions with you(since you rightly point out I haven't offered any) when you are still in denial about the problem.

There is a culture developing that believe they are of superiour mind and social status if they are atheistic -as if they have broken the bonds of religion and are free -- and believers are dellusional second class citizens - no one can prove there is not God - But the miracle of existance and thought do prove that there is an intelligent force running the whole thing.

[guyser]

Come on, think about it Guyser. They HATE the west. Hate it. Hate it for its decadent ways, sinful hedonism, lustful clothing and on and on and on. They don't WANT to live here. Think about it.

Nothing I have seen, anywhere in this country, suggest that any amount of the Muslims who have immigrated here have any contempt for westerners.

Some do, more than none, but less than a minority.

If they did hate it so much, why are more coming? Why have we not seen the unrest everyone speaks about ?

It is true that in time, generations lose the attachment to the old ways. It was said about the Italians and the Irish, who were subjected to lots of angst by earlier Canadians. And now? Nobosy worries about either, except for the wrought iron railings, those have to go.

Therefore, why would they come here? Why did they go to France? Another sinful lustful hedonistic society that would harm their children, in their eyes. There is no good reason for them to go to a culture that they despise.

You answered your own question . No one goes where they hate. I hate jazz and you wouldnt catch me anywhere near it. How is this any different?

I cannot speak for France, but would presume they went because they were getting out of a worse place. France has some different ways, and one of those is a attitude foisted on immigrants. Perhaps they had enough? I dont know.

Why are you looking at France half-assed? You are smarter than that, I've seen it. France may or may not have half the Muslims, but you didn't bother to look at the other side of the equation. I'm not even going to give you a hint.

I am afraid I do not know what you are asking.(in the latter part)

As for France half assed, I dont know enough to say with any authority, but the culture of France is such that they consider everyone elses culture inferior. That can upset people. Especially if the whole system in France conveys that thought.

As for the 10 million muslims, you are going to have to flesh out what you are saying better than that, you don't mention where you get that number and where they are 'waiting.' The Muslim immigration may not have had an agenda at first, but it sure as hell does now.

France has IIRC 5M Muslims, and USA has about 10M. Granted that the tot pops of each country is 61M and 300M respectively (meaning more % in France)

But to think that 10M people are lying in wait for the phone call to start something is ludicrous.

I would be interested to hear your ideas of the agenda Muslims have

If there were ever a group of people that USA needs to get a handle on it would be Mexicans. The amount of illegal and legal immigration there is causing them real problems, not just percieved problems.

[guyser]

The overall opennness of Western society cannot be reconciled to the closed societies of the East. The Muslim societies are aggressive; the true Oriental ones less so (with some exceptions such as Imperial Japan).

Not even with succesive generations enjoying wealth, freedom , baseball mom and apple pie?

I disagree with these contentions. In Europe, as you pointed out they were deliberately segregated, much as the Jews were (before being wiped out in the Holocaust). The Jews' reaction was less violent than the Muslims, but then again the Jews had the option to move to America during much of the period they were being segregated, an option not as open to European Muslims.

I may parade my ignorance on this one so....I will ask.

Did Jews have anything near the numbers in any one place to be as violent? Memory says they were scattered in numbers all over the place. If true that no mass was available, then nothing of import would be achieved by rioting. Right or wrong?

If Gore won, the U.S.'s reaction to 911 would have been similar to the reaction to the U.S.S. Cole and Kenya-Tanzania Embassy attacks of 1998, i.e. a lot of hand-wringing, and calls for "comprehensive Mid-East peace".

History may show that might have been the better approach. But we will never know. Could it be any worse than Bush' ideas? Bin Laden is still out there.

[jbg]

Not even with succesive generations enjoying wealth, freedom , baseball mom and apple pie?

How many Pakistanis move to Korea?

I may parade my ignorance on this one so....I will ask.

Did Jews have anything near the numbers in any one place to be as violent? Memory says they were scattered in numbers all over the place. If true that no mass was available, then nothing of import would be achieved by rioting. Right or wrong?

Thanks for asking and a question I'm happy to answer.

The answer is decidedly yes. Poland had about 7,000,000 just prior to the turn of the last century, for example. Remember, even before the Holocaust took 6,000,000, about 9,000,000 or more made it out to the U.S., Canada, Australia and South America. The Jews tend to cluster rather than fan out. Among other reasons, until Reform and Conservative Judaism loosened the rules and allowed women to "count" for purposes of organizing a service, a minimum of 10 males over the age of 13 were needed for most prayers. That alone dictated clustering. Further, the rulers of most unfree European monarchies shoved the Jews into ghettos of one kind or another.

History may show that might have been the better approach. But we will never know. Could it be any worse than Bush' ideas? Bin Laden is still out there.

But the U.S. hasn't been attacked since 911.Prior to 911 the U.S. was attacked:

1. 1993 W.T.C. attack;
   
2. Kenya Embassy attack of 1998;
   
3. Tanzania Embassy attack of 1998;
   
4. U.S.S. Cole, 2000
   

At least with Bush the attack didn't have a happy ending for the nuts.

Edited March 19, 2009 by jbg

[sharkman]

Nothing I have seen, anywhere in this country, suggest that any amount of the Muslims who have immigrated here have any contempt for westerners.

Some do, more than none, but less than a minority.

So I gather you've visited many mosques across the country? No? Neither have I. I have, however, heard the many pronouncements from Muslim leaders about Canada at different times, and it ain't pretty. I think they consider us Jew-lovers as well as gay-lovers and such.

If they did hate it so much, why are more coming? Why have we not seen the unrest everyone speaks about ?

It is true that in time, generations lose the attachment to the old ways. It was said about the Italians and the Irish, who were subjected to lots of angst by earlier Canadians. And now? Nobosy worries about either, except for the wrought iron railings, those have to go.

You answered your own question . No one goes where they hate. I hate jazz and you wouldnt catch me anywhere near it. How is this any different?

It's not that simple, historically immigration has not been a good way to grow a nation, I know the U.S. succeeded but there have been many failures. Humans are just too racist. We just can't expect the same result in Canada where our policies do not allow for a melting pot approach as in the U.S., we have a very different approach.

I don't know either why Muslims would want to live here, but we have at least a possibility with such a racist and violent religion, of trouble.

I cannot speak for France, but would presume they went because they were getting out of a worse place. France has some different ways, and one of those is a attitude foisted on immigrants. Perhaps they had enough? I dont know.

I am afraid I do not know what you are asking.(in the latter part)

As for France half assed, I dont know enough to say with any authority, but the culture of France is such that they consider everyone elses culture inferior. That can upset people. Especially if the whole system in France conveys that thought.

France has IIRC 5M Muslims, and USA has about 10M. Granted that the tot pops of each country is 61M and 300M respectively (meaning more % in France)

But to think that 10M people are lying in wait for the phone call to start something is ludicrous.

I would be interested to hear your ideas of the agenda Muslims have

If there were ever a group of people that USA needs to get a handle on it would be Mexicans. The amount of illegal and legal immigration there is causing them real problems, not just percieved problems.

Yes, 10 million laying in wait is ludicrous, and that is not what I was suggesting. It's funny, though, how people seem to ignore the European problems with Muslims. I may, however, have overstated the Muslims' agenda in France. But would you deny that they have an agenda these days?

My half-assed comment had to do with the fact that you were saying France had half of the numbers of Muslims that the US did, and not look at the population percentages, which puts the Muslim numbers in proper prospective. Which means that France has a much higher percentage of Muslims when compared to the US.

I agree with you about Mexico and I think the government has its head in the sand about the problem.

[guyser]

So I gather you've visited many mosques across the country? No? Neither have I. I have, however, heard the many pronouncements from Muslim leaders about Canada at different times, and it ain't pretty. I think they consider us Jew-lovers as well as gay-lovers and such.

Muslim leaders in Canada or outside of our borders? If inside ours, then by ratio ? Yes some do make poor pronouncments but in a country of 600,000 Msulims, one or two or even 10 is not that much (although 10 would make me want to hear and see them)

[WIP]

Good historical analysis. I actually remember they came to work jobs that Europeans considered beneath them.

I happen to agree with a lot of Mr. Huntington's work in this area. I think that during the days of the Silk Road, the Crusades, Torres and the approach to Vienna the intractability of the differences was illustrated. Now, the weapons are just more devastating. The overall opennness of Western society cannot be reconciled to the closed societies of the East. The Muslim societies are aggressive; the true Oriental ones less so (with some exceptions such as Imperial Japan).

The Clash of Civilizations motif assumes that all world cultural groups are homogeneous and unchanging. The Muslim World is divided along ethnic and nationalistic lines even where they belong to the same branch of Islam. Similar to the Dark Ages, when European countries still fought wars even though they all were part of the Roman Catholic Church. It's not always just about religion!

As for the religion, we wouldn't have the problems today with Islamic fundamentalism if the United States hadn't formed an alliance with Saudi Arabia back in the 1930's. Religion was losing its force in the Muslim World until the oil started flowing. It may have seemed like a good choice at the time, but many Arab and Muslim nations had communist insurgencies. The U.S. supported the Islamists and protected the Saudi and Gulf royal families as allies against Soviet-backed communists. Now it seems like letting the MiddleEast turn red would have been a better option!

I hope that's true in Canada. It is in America, apparently.

It has been true up until recent years, but now I find it unsettling that after 9/11, children from Muslim families started disappearing from the public schools - presumably being sent to new Islamic academies. With all the carping that goes on about public schools, the greatest benefit of them is putting kids from different backgrounds together in the same classrooms; so we could end up with the same problem of segregated Muslim enclaves as they have in England and France.

I suspect strongly that the attacks were accelerated by Bush's taking office since there was likely a suspicion that Bush would move more actively against AQ and I think AQ was counting on a Gore victory. If Gore won, the U.S.'s reaction to 911 would have been similar to the reaction to the U.S.S. Cole and Kenya-Tanzania Embassy attacks of 1998, i.e. a lot of hand-wringing, and calls for "comprehensive Mid-East peace".

Considering the trillions that Dubya sunk into a war effort that has depleted U.S. combat readiness, I would say that Gore couldn't have done any worse! Al Qaeda is still out there, the Taleban is poised to take over Afghanistan and most of Pakistan it seems; and Iran's position has been strengthened since the removal of Saddam.

[WIP]

I don't know what kind of religious people you have rubbed shoulders with, but by that chip on your shoulder I wonder if it was a pretty bad experience for you.

Everybody has their own experiences, but that's beside the point! Being on the outside gives me the perspective to see: the Religious Right's hostility towards science, attacks on abortion clinics, and continued support for a war promoted by deliberate lies, as evidence that it is a movement verging on fascism.

I can't believe you honestly think that is my opinion, your reading comprehension is above that. However, my point stands, and jbg partly answered it. I think you agree that they do hate western society with all of its decadent ways.

There is no point in talking about solutions with you(since you rightly point out I haven't offered any) when you are still in denial about the problem.

So what! So do a lot of Christian fundamentalists who demand teaching creationism instead of evolution, and threaten to kill doctors and staff at abortion clinics.

You build a case that Muslims are implacable enemies that cannot be dealt with by any peaceful means, so what are you offering as an alternative? You make a bogus charge that I'm denying there is a problem with Islam (have you read any of the comments I've posted right in this very thread?) because you know the alternative to negotiation is war, and it seems you are too gutless to come right out and say that you are advocating war, both within our countries against Islam and internationally against Muslim nations.

[sharkman]

That's real funny WIP, you sidestep an issue about your religious experience, saying that's beside the point, which is fine(Although your claim to be an outsider is dubious since you admit to having a religious chip on your shoulder). Then you throw in some leftwing claptrap about those who demand creationism be taught yada yada yada. Just what is your definition on being besides the point? You're not just making comments to try and get a rise out of me again, are you?

Then you accuse me of building a case that 'Muslims are implacable enemies that cannot be dealt with by any peaceful means'. Huh? I am not advocating war on the Muslim world. I haven't advocated anything except perhaps that Canada allow selective immigration instead of opening the floodgates.

Again, there is no use talking solutions with you when you are still in denial. A while ago I told you I had put you on ignore after you'd been following me around this forum. You're still on ignore, but I've been clicking on your comments to read them. I see no point in reading your comments anymore. Regards

[WIP]

That's real funny WIP, you sidestep an issue about your religious experience, saying that's beside the point, which is fine(Although your claim to be an outsider is dubious since you admit to having a religious chip on your shoulder).

I sidestepped nothing! You used that condescending dodge again to evade answering for the intolerance of your own fundamentalists. If you have no longterm memory capacity, that's your problem, because I've already discussed the religions I grew up with and experienced as an adult, with you on prior occasions. But my religious experiences does not answer my questions. Your continued implication that I just met the "wrong" kind of Christians is about as meaningful as "Islam means peace, and terrorism, female circumcision, and public stonings, are caused by culture, not religion." You try to play the same kind of gambit every time you evade answering why Christian fundamentalists are oppressive! I have identified myself as a secular humanist frequently -- what more do you need to know?

Then you throw in some leftwing claptrap about those who demand creationism be taught yada yada yada. Just what is your definition on being besides the point? You're not just making comments to try and get a rise out of me again, are you?

You know very well that fundamentalist Christianity promotes creationism out of an open hostility to scientific theories that don't fit with a God-made world that is 6,000 years old. Scientists and academics are presented as representatives of a godless, antichristian establishment, so they will immediately block out every story about dinosaurs or hominid fossils that occasionally crops up in the news, and take the advice of trusted religious authorities even on issues like stem cell research, global warming, gay rights, and drug policy.

What's worse, is that the "pro life" groups openly call doctors and nurses at abortion clinics "murderers!" It doesn't take a genius to realize that using such inflammatory, loaded language acts as an encouragement to every crackpot who starts making anonymous calls to clinics, finding out doctor's personal addresses and phone numbers, becoming stalkers and every so often moving on to the next level of becoming killers -- all because the message that abortion is murder at every stage and every Christian is obligated to do everything in their power to stop abortion, was drummed into their heads relentlessly on a continual basis.

And how many influential fundamentalist spokesmen like Falwell, Hagee and Robertson became active cheerleaders for rushing to war as they latched onto the Bush/Cheney agenda of invading Muslim countries using apocalyptic language from Revelation to instill a view that a endtime battle with the forces of Islam is inevitable, and part of Bible prophecy? Is that really much different than Shiite Islamists, who are waiting for their 12th Imam to crawl out of a hole somewhere and lead them to victory against the infidel armies that have invaded Muslim lands? It may be to someone who's in the tank with one side or the other, but those of us who see all religious apocalypticism as insane, there is no difference!

Then you accuse me of building a case that 'Muslims are implacable enemies that cannot be dealt with by any peaceful means'. Huh? I am not advocating war on the Muslim world. I haven't advocated anything except perhaps that Canada allow selective immigration instead of opening the floodgates.

Well thanks for at least making that clear! If you have mentioned that point before, it certainly hasn't accompanied many of your tirades about Muslims. Nevertheless, your solution is unworkable in a democratic state since specifically excluding immigrants because of their religion would be thrown out of court at the first court challenge.....any other ideas?

Again, there is no use talking solutions with you when you are still in denial. A while ago I told you I had put you on ignore after you'd been following me around this forum. You're still on ignore, but I've been clicking on your comments to read them. I see no point in reading your comments anymore. Regards

Get over yourself! Nobody follows you around or cares who you have and don't have on your ignore list! It's a feature I have never bothered using and apparently neither do most of the people using this forum.

If your comments stand out to me, it is only because of the fact that you are on opposite sides of every issue that I read.

[interiorboy]

You can't say that christians and muslims are the same when it comes to how they deal withthe secular part of society. Not even close. Christians, at least some of them may push their beliefs but then so do the secular segment of society.

The Muslims are completely different. Their religion preach jihad which includes killing nonbelievers, that is not so with christians

As for the religion, we wouldn't have the problems today with Islamic fundamentalism if the United States hadn't formed an alliance with Saudi Arabia back in the 1930's

this is completely not true. The Wahabis brought back the older(purer) form of islam to the area which then grew. It is technology that has allowed them to export their religion, air travel, phones, internet and then immigration. Oil was just the ticket for money they needed and which the western civilization supplied them with in exchange for the oil. This money was then used as a means to push Islam. A couple of videos for those who wish to see Islam as it really is, recorded in Greenline Mosque in England and three former terrorists talking to the US media.

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=110_1191101925

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=21d_1187662055

[Mr.Canada]

MUSLIM Honour Killing's are becoming alarmingly more and more common place in our society. I would have thought they would be happy to come to Canada but they are bringing their troubles with them. This doesn't bode well for Canada. I wonder how long it will be before Muslims start using dis-Honour killings to try and rid us of homosexuals? We must be ever vigilant against the threat of honour killings in all its forms.

[CANADIEN]

MUSLIM Honour Killing's are becoming alarmingly more and more common place in our society. I would have thought they would be happy to come to Canada but they are bringing their troubles with them. This doesn't bode well for Canada. I wonder how long it will be before Muslims start using dis-Honour killings to try and rid us of homosexuals? We must be ever vigilant against the threat of honour killings in all its forms.

Last time you tried that one, you could not back the claim up with anything substantial. I don't expect you to do it this time either.