Comments by
Previous | Page 4 of 10 | Next
Posted on September 9 at 1:06 p.m.Suggest removal
Zac writes, "In the decade since Sept. 11, there has been an increasing perception of a barbarous Muslim horde lurking in the Middle East, threatening to infiltrate and conquer Western society unless forcibly repelled. This is an impression encouraged by U.S. capitalists and politicians in order to disunite American and Arab workers."
Zac your assumption here seems really illogical. Do you really believe this is the reason? Couldn't there be other explanations for this?
^^^^^^^^^^^^^
"...our own would-be theocrat Rep. Sally Kern, introduced a bill that would have banned the introduction of Sharia Law in Oklahoma."
Whether you want to believe this, or not, Muslims consider Sharia law as a vital part of their religion and it is in direct conflict with many aspects of our Constitution. In the UK today there are many Sharia courts where women's rights are trampled on. When Muslim women are raped or physically abused in the UK and they go to these courts for a hearing their chances of getting justice (justice as most westerners understand the word) is slim.
Is this what YOU want for America? If you think it is so far-fetched then maybe you should research Sharia law and its encroachment in Europe.
^^^^^^^^^^^
"It is true that Islam is a belief system based on irrational claims. It is also true that the Quran is a sludge of chauvinism, violence, myth and quasi-history. However, the same is equally true of Christianity and the Bible. There is no basis for declaring that the doctrines of Islam are any more incompatible with civilized behavior than are those of Christianity."
This is simply false. And I won't go into all the reasons why, but have you ever heard Christ's line that goes, "Render unto Caesar that which is Caesar's and unto God that which is God's"? Essentially what Christ is saying is he has NO interest in secular power. This does not mean Christians have always followed this doctrine, but when they do not they are violating Christ's teachings. In sharp contrast to this Mohammed wanted it all, and got it all. He was the ruler, the judge, the moral policeman, etc...Mohammed had no boundaries and nothing was ever enough for him.
Your comparing Islam with Christianity shows your lack of understanding of just how different these tow religions are.
Posted on August 30 at 1:30 p.m.Suggest removal
It's remarkable that nobody connects the dots...
Mohammed, Islam's prophet, ruled as a ruthless theocratic despot. Meanwhile, most anywhere we find Islam we see some degree of Mohammed-like rule, i.e., repression, fear, a cruel theocracy, strong-man militaristic rule, iron-fisted intolerance.
Why can't people make the connection here. It's not as if the highly touted and poorly named "Arab Spring" was likely to work among a people who have no concept or affinity for individual rights and respect for others.
Why can't people understand that democracy and Islam are incompatible? This is not a judgement, criticism, or anything other than an honest observation of and understanding of Islam.
Posted on July 20 at 9:57 p.m.Suggest removal
I'm just curious. Is there a place where one can find the names of the Editorial Board?
Seems sort of strange that their names are not public.
Posted on July 19 at 1:12 p.m.Suggest removal
The law was passed days before Zogby released a new poll of six Arab countries that found Arabs viewed the Israeli occupation of Palestine as the greatest threat to peace in the Middle East. The second greatest threat was U.S. interference in the region."
Here goes the blame Israel game again. So Israel is occupying Palestine. Is that so? That's interesting. Could you give us historical factual information confirming this?
Israel was legally created. It is not an occupying power (like the Muslims are in Sudan). Israel occupied defensive positions after winning the Six Day War a legal action as defined under international law. If one studies the geography of the Golan Heights and the West Bank it becomes readily apparent why these areas are vital to Israel's defense, especially given the history of the Muslims in those regions in their actions, and words, against Israel.
...................
"The new law is appalling coming from a country often billed as the only democracy in the Middle East."
The way our esteemed )just kidding) Editorial Board phrases this the implication is that there are Muslim countries that are democratic in that region. Maybe the esteemed Editorial Board can name a few of these.
....................
"In passing this law, the Knesset has behaved illegally, immorally and outrageously."
Our Editorial Board: the judge, lawyer and jury all rolled into one! They don't need to give us an analysis of how or why this new law is illegal other than to quote an unnamed source. That's terrific! How fair and balanced our paper is, makes Fox News look like, well, fair and balanced.
......................
Of course this all begs the question: Why has the Editorial Board never written about the endless examples of Muslim countries committing grave acts against their own people, or their neighbors that make any Israeli action pale by comparison? When will our Editorial Board write an editorial against boycotting Israeli Universities but in support of a boycott of all Muslim universities for their biased, inflammatory and highly prejudicial actions?
Posted on May 4 at 10:52 a.m.Suggest removal
It's NEVER Islam's fault, or at least per Jared's twisted logic.
*************************
First blame America, then Israel, then colonialism, then imperialism, but never Islam.
Even though Muslims are creating problems in southern Thailand, Kashmir, India and Pakistan, against Christians in Malaysia and Indonesia, in Somalia, Sudan, Nigeria, against the Copts in Alexandria, Libya, Algeria, Iran, southern Russia, NW China, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia (a Muslim paradise of repression), Yemen, Syria, Lebanon (whoopee now Hezbollah has its own man as prime minister), Turkey (Iran's latest ally and backer), Iraq (good luck to the Christians in Mosul), it is never their fault. America done did it, or Israel, imperialism and colonialism.
Let's ignore the fact that Mohammed (in case you don't know him he is Islam's prophet) was a leader.
And this is how he led: Brutality, sadistically, with repression and fear, he enslaved women, men and children, he raped and pillaged his way to wealth, he ruled, judged and preached all at once.
Jesus said, "leave unto Caesar that which is Caesar's, and unto God..."
Well Mohammed's example says it all. It also explains why wherever we see Islam we see issues of repression, lack of freedoms, wars and violence.
But all this is besides the point. It's simply America's fault.
Posted on April 28 at 4:02 p.m.Suggest removal
Did Finkelstein mention this?
http://www.gulfwar1991.com/Gulf%20War...
Oh, why doesn't that surprise me. Must be there's no money in it for him.
Posted on April 28 at 9:14 a.m.Suggest removal
Goldstone has retraced his report criticizing Israel but the legendary anti-Semite, Norm Finkelstien, will never give in. This begs the question: How much does Finkelstein make a year lying about the Middle East? Does he travel first class? Of course he does! Norm's taken his lies to the bank.
Posted on November 10 at 9:26 p.m.Suggest removal
Page 1.
From the essay "Communism and Islam" in International Affairs, Vol. 30, No. 1 (Jan., 1954), pp. 1-12, here is Bernard Lewis on Islam's inherent authoritarianism:
I turn now from the accidental to the essential factors, to those deriving from the very nature of Islamic society, tradition, and thought. The first of these is the authoritarianism, perhaps we may even say the totalitarianism, of the Islamic political tradition...Many attempts have been made to show that Islam and democracy are identical -- attempts usually based on a misunderstanding of Islam or democracy or both...In point of fact, except for the early caliphate, when the anarchic individualism of tribal Arabia was still effective, the political history of Islam is one of almost unrelieved autocracy...[I]t was authoritarian, often arbitrary, sometimes tyrannical. There are no parliaments or representative assemblies of any kind, no councils or communes, no chambers of nobility or estates, no municipalities in the history of Islam; nothing but the sovereign power, to which the subject owed complete and unwavering obedience as a religious duty imposed by the Holy Law. In the great days of classical Islam this duty was only owed to the lawfully appointed caliph, as God's vicegerent on earth and head of the theocratic community, and then only for as long as he upheld the law; but with the decline of the caliphate and the growth of military dictatorship, Muslim jurists and theologians accommodated their teachings to the changed situation and extended the religious duty of obedience to any effective authority, however impious, however barbarous. For the last thousand years, the political thinking of Islam has been dominated by such maxims as "tyranny is better than anarchy" and "whose power is established, obedience to him is incumbent."
On