Ustwo

I never heard either of these quotes until yesterday, and I stumbled upon them accidentally. I've long held the same opinion of Islam, and even then Churchill knew what I came to believe that it is only our technological superiority which has kept Islam at bay since their expansion into Spain and Eastern Europe was halted.

Now these are two men whos lives I hold in high regard. Its been long my personal belief that Churchill is the most important man, to Western Civilization, of the 20th century. I think their opinions are worth listening to.

The very interesting thing about both these quotes is that Israel did not exist yet. I'd like you all to think about it. Israel is the focus of this conflict apparently, yet, long before Israel was born out of the ashes of WWII, two of the greatest leaders of their time had the above thoughts on Islam.

So for those of you who think this is all about Israel and not part of a bigger clash of cultures, where did these men go wrong in their assessment?

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Sun Tzu

It doesnt even have to be an Israel issue. I'll play Devil's advocate here because you know someone has to.

The linage of Hagar? Well thats an interesting story in itself. Infact I think that story which was written by a human is the base for many of the problems we see today. God gives Abraham's wife permission to allow him to sleep with her handmaiden, turns around and years later allows her to get pregnant. This leaves 2 offspring each with a different mother. God in his infinate wisdom states the Hebrew child will be ruler supreme and the Egyptian and his offspring will be the ass of man. People actually took that as reality.

It certainly pays if you lucky enough to be born Hebrew right. Im suprised it took as long as it did for an Arab to write their own mythology. The irony of all of this is these "stories" shape politics in this day and age.

In the times Ive been to the Holy Land I met many Palestinians who were Christians.

Ive read some of the Koran and the Old Testament is every bit as violent. I prefer Homer to the both of them.

Thanks for the quotes I had never read them either.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

djtestudo

The problem with quotes like these is that they are nothing more then unintended hypocrisy.

I'm sure they believe what they said, but if you were to remind them that Yahweh "gave" Palestine to the Hebrews, and both assisted and looked the other way as they exterminated the other tribes in the area, and then fought with and killed each other, Messers Adams and Churchill would act as though nothing was wrong.

They speak what they were taught. I don't blame them for it, but I also don't take it as truth, any more then Theodore Roosevelt's beliefs in Anglo-Saxon dominance.

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

Ustwo

I see so Winston Chruchill, savior of Briton, was taught to hate muslims and was only parroting what he was taught in Sunday school? I have a hard time believing that. Perhaps Adams, as his was of an age before, perhaps, but Chruchill? No way, his words were not based on religious belief but of observation.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

djtestudo

Because it's impossible that a guy who grew up in the late 1800s might end up with racist or anti-ethnic beliefs?

Just because he was a great leader and saved his country doesn't make his statements automatically any more correct.

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

Ustwo

I see, so if you think there is a problem with Islam, you must be a racist.

Boy that argument is getting old here.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

djtestudo

No, but I do think that in many cases even intellegent people are willing to take things as face value and belief instead of showing a willingness to research what they don't understand.

They might believe what they say, but that doesn't make it right, any more then (spare me the Godwin's Law comments) Hitler's beliefs about the Jews were right.

Personally, I would put them in the same side of "misinformed" although with obvious differences in the consequences of the comments.

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

Paradise Lost

Believing what somewhat says just because they are 'important figure' is just an appeal to authority. Sometimes it is a good thing to appeal to, but more often than not the belief a person holds shouldn't be accepted anymore than the average person's belief until it holds up against scrutiny. I believe that's all djtestudo was trying to do here.

__________________
"Marino could do it."

djtestudo

Exactly. Thanks

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

inkriminator

This shows the man was ignorant in this regard. Slavery of women? not by a long shot.

again, ignorance prevails. the claim that he 'degraded the condition of the female sex' is so ignorant that it ashamed me that you believe it in this day and age. Adams and Churchhill were of a different era, I wonder if either of them had ever even see a muslim not in a manuscript.
again, patently false.

Israel was born out of the ashes of WWII? What do you mean by that? And the topic of Palestine HAS been used by many muslims leaders to try and give themselves a broad support. It is unfortunate that a noble cause has been confused in many minds by such acts.

UsTwo, I would like to know exactly what resonated with you in those quotes. You mentioned the technological superiority, and I agree with you, but think that the necessary factors for stopping the Muslims should be broadened to include such things as temporary unity under the banner of the pope, cultural differences...many many other reasons, but tech. is definitely an important factor

Seaver

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I remember reading in my Islamic History class that it is the Muslims who claim themselves to be decended from Ishmael (from Hagar).

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

Ustwo

I agree its not slavery in the typical definition. The Islamic ideal for women seems to be based on the paranoid fear of infidelity/cuckolding. Women are not allowed to be with men who are not relatives until they are married and after they are married the only exception is the husband. Its a social chastity belt. The independence of women is limited as well, they are always reliant on their male relatives and therefore always 'under guard'. This can be seen for example in Saudi Arabia where women are not allowed to drive. To make it even more clear, as a doctor you are not allowed to work on a woman of child bearing age as a male. I know this from the Saudi Arabian women we had in my dental program, as well as my female department head who spent time over there. No other major cultures are as paranoid about their genetic inheritance on the planet today. From my readings of the Koran (its easier to spell with a K) I don't think this level of paranoia is justified. Yes women are very much second hand citizens, but they are in the old Testament as well, and I view this is merely a cultural quirk using Islam to justify it. Interestingly the idea that faithful Muslims (males) will be attended by virgins of unparalleled beauty in the afterlife is throughout the Koran, to the point I think there was something of an obsession with sex at the time of its writing. This plus the obsessive cloistering of breeding age women makes me wonder what the culture was like prior to Islam among the common people.

You know this had not struck me prior to writing this but Mohammed was a crafty guy. He set up a system which guaranteed warriors had a motive for conquest, and a very basic, instinctive motive. Let me explain....

1. 'Casual' sex was made difficult among young men (and women but thats not an issue).
2. The Koran specifically allows for captured slave girls.
3. The Koran states multiple, multiple, multiple times that faithful Muslims will find unspoiled women awaiting them in heaven.
4. Polygamy means that men at the lower rungs on the social ladder may have no wife at all.
5. You MUST fight non-believers, you must never trust them, and if they are stronger than you, you wait until you can beat them. Any horror you inflict upon them is Allah's will.
6. To retreat from non-believers is sinful. Fight and die!

This is really an amazingly simple but effective system. War and conquest is what leads to you being able to have sex, either with captured slave girls, or virgins in heaven. I'm glad I decided to respond to this as I had not seen the genius of the original design until now. Its the exploitation of instinct and religious fervor, and explains how the early Islamic invasions were so successful.


I have, women are second class citizens in Islamic nations. They are treated very well, like favored pets, but still no where near a mans equal.

History and the Koran disagree with you here. Interestingly, while the old testament is very violent, it does not as a rule preach violent expansion but was more the taking of the 'promised land' and maintaining it. The Koran is open ended in its goals and views the whole world as its promised land for the taking.

What nobel cause? As for what I mean by that, it was the modern state of Israel which was born out of the ashes of WWII. The historic state of Israel was invaded so many times that claims to the land are rather hard to sort out at this point. The Jews would be the oldest remaining group who has a claim.

Islam has become a retrograde force. The reason the Arab world is so far behind technologically is Islam. It holds such a grip on the people that they can not advance socially beyond a 5th century mentality and technology is a danger to the status quo, for example Saudi Arabia has internet filters that would make the Chinese blush. I could go in depth on this, I have before, but most Arab scholars feel the same way. Christianity was the same way, but we did shake it off so to speak (and this was eluded to by Churchill). Our cultural traditions and the framework of Christianity was such that we were able to do so, I don't think Islam gives you any wiggle room to do so without completely rejecting it. Its not even allowed to have an non-Islamic state in the Koran. Western gay rights, womens right, even democracy would all be sinful and worthy of destruction as non-believers. This little factoid has me more worried about the concept of Iraqi democracy than any other factor.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

jorgelito

Seaver, I second. Sons of Ishmael versus sons of Isaac, all descendants of Abraham is a central tenet to the Islamic and Judaic mythology.

Again, people, Islam/Muslims are not a race, there are plenty of white muslims etc..... the "if you have a problem with Islam you must be racist" is really getting tiring and entirely incorrect.

I think Churchill had a unique experience during the WWI era. I believe he was Lord of the Admiralty or something like that and he was also incharge of the Palestinian Mandate. He definitely would have had first hand experience in that whole debacle. In fact, that experience almost ruined his career. The British handling of the Middle East around that time was ..... pretty much a failure (my opinion). I like Churchill too, but his quotes/writings are just his opnion on things.

I would guess that John Quincy Adams got his views either with the dealings of a young USA with the Barbary Coast, Tripoli etc or maybe he read extensively about the history of that area (which almost certainly would have been biased).

UsTwo, have you read Clash of Civilizations? I like that one (puts on flame-proof suit). I found it to be very interesting. I should probably read it again though for the anticipated riot that;s about to ensue.

I have many Muslim friends and have just recently been there. From my observation, the most "free" muslims were in Israel. Free to worship and live as they please. The Paelstinians were pretty "liberal" too but then again, many of them are Christian. Then there were the Arabs druze (non-Muslim Arabs) that were pretty modern. By far the most shocking were the Saudis. When I was in Egypt, man, the way they treated "their" women.....scary stuff.

In my opinion, Israel is just a red herring/straw man that the oppressive regimes use to keep their subjects off their own back. I got the distinct sense that Saudi etc are more afraid of their own people than anything. Conflict or blame of Israel is the perfect excuse for these regimes to hold onto power and their oppressive practices. Maybe later I will share a story of my experience in an Egyptian barbershop (discussing Mubarek and George Bush while having a blade to my face - a shave).

Thanks for listening.

Sun Tzu

Yes thats right. I reread my post to make sure I didnt accidently put Issac. That is a high point in my disagreement with the Bible especially the Old Testament. Surely a being of infinate wisdom would have seen the trouble of setting a situation up like this. Almost as if God could stir up some shit and watch all the little humans scramble. The Odyssey is another great story. Zeus shaped lives for a time. The Sun circled the Earth for a time. This story of God intentionally creating a rift and further stating the Arabs will be the ass of man still seems to be dictating policy to this day. Or at least being used a very lame excuse.

__________________
To confine our attention to terrestrial matters would be to limit the human spirit.- Stephen Hawking

Seaver

Actually that quote pre-dates the Mandates. That quote was at the same time in which Lawrence of Arabia was stirring up the Arabs to fight against the Ottomans in a revolt. He realized how quickly the average Muslim answered the call for Jihad, and realized the possible impacts of it later on.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

jorgelito

Ah, I did not see the bottom of the quote. 1899, close but no cigar.

hiredgun

In what way is a thread doing nothing but condemning an entire faith a suitable contribution to discussion of politics? What is the political content here?

I don't know whether to be angry or dejected.

I am being completely serious when I say that I am personally, and deeply, offended by your views on this matter. Does it not bother you that you are indicting millions of Muslims who are also loyal Americans and share many of your values?

Are you completely incapable of believing that which anyone who bothers to spend time with the world's Muslims knows: that the vast majority of us love peace and hate bloodshed; we love our families and mourn our lost loved ones; we spend our lives working hard to provide for our children.

The average Muslim does not sneak off to make bombs after dropping his kids off at daycare. The average Muslim does not willingly strap a bomb around his son's waist for the glory of God. The average Muslim doesn't rejoice when he hears that a bus was blown to bits in Tel Aviv. The average Muslim is not a monster.

What is your inexplicable attraction to the idea of an inevitable clash? By what right do you claim to define Islam in contradiction to the beliefs of the vast majority of its adherents?

(http://www.islamfortoday.com/terrorism.htm)

The assessments of the two men whom you quote are utterly wrong. That they are men who otherwise have my respect does not change this fact.

Well, it seems I managed to assassinate the thread.

I guess you're unwilling to look the object of your bigotry in the face.

Mojo_PeiPei

As I grow and adapt to the current climate I find myself perplexed at the current situation. Let me speak from personal perspective if I may.

Hiredgun, I find your sentiments sincere, and I praise your feelings. I wish I could find them uniform amongst your religion. Saying that I hope does not come off as ignorant or offensive. Obviously a lot of the portrayal does have a lot to do with the selective nature of the media and the world at large. But yet I do not find things so simple.

Take the world at large, in this context the Muslim/Islamic world. Look at the spread of Sharian law throughout the muslim world. I see no good coming from the likes of African Islamic nations, Sudan, Egypt, Libya, Somalia, Nigeria. The Middle East, Syria, Lebanon, The House of Saud, Iran, all very problematic. The Balkans? Georgia? The far East? Pakistan? Kashmir? Even in the South East area, Indonesia is marred with problems.

Some here might equate the problem as extremism, hopefully that's what it is. The Islamic world is and has been facing a major problem for a long time. I have no problem saying that it is something innate to the nature of the religion.

I'm sure my having said that will no doubt stir the inference of Christian culpability in the world history, do me a favor and piss off if you try and play that card, it in no way addresses the real issues posed to this current world climate that Islam poses.

We don't find ourselves having problems with historically "christian nations", nations that are no doubt by and large free and democratic.

No doubt we are at a turning point in the grand scheme of world history. Europe is faced with a major problem concerning it's citizenry. To be honest my google skills are not "l33t", so I have a hard time referencing this. However, within this century I have seen figures that have pointed to an Islamic take over of Western Europe. Within generations a strong part of the population will be muslim, here is an example for a reference at this time. http://pewforum.org/docs/index.php?DocID=60 , http://www.afa.org/magazine/July2005/0705europe.asp

I know links aren't appreciated, but I don't feel like adding that much information to my post. Don't blame this on laziness, for me it's a matter of relevance.

This poses problems as Islam is by and large becoming increasingly militant in the world? Is it just extremists? Where are the rest of you? Are you afraid to speak up?

Perhaps the worst part is reasonable muslims by and large only exist in the "west". But a big problem is the growth of Extremism the world round, and sadly it is no longer being limited to the Middle East; it is growing in the west.

Maybe instead of labeling anybody who sees this growing trend and problem in Islam as a bigot, the issue actually gets addressed. Call me ignorant, but if you think there is no clash of civilizations, I must ask of you what world do you live in, and if you would be so kind could you please point me to the rainbow bunny sunshine.

/endrant
I hope this makes a lick of sense.

__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.

hiredgun

Let me start this way: your post, Mojo, unlike the OP, is not offensive.

That's not at all true. Several of the people I quoted earlier are among the highest political and religious leaders of the (non-Western) Muslim world. Qaradawi in particular is one of the biggest names in Islamic jurisprudence right now.

A great many of us speak up.

http://www.isna.net/index.php?id=35&backPID=1&tt_news=4
http://www.unc.edu/~kurzman/terror.htm
http://www.al-islam.org/dilp_statement.html
http://www.freemuslims.org/
http://www.m-a-t.org/
http://www.rayhawk.com/classics/matusa/faq.html
http://www.cair-net.org/crisiscenter/html/cair_ad.html
http://www.islam-democracy.org/terrorism_statement.asp
http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/news/news.php?article=1062
http://www.oic-oci.org/english/fm/11...eclaration.htm
http://www.themodernreligion.com/terror/wtc-heresy.html
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/1690624.stm
http://www.livingislam.org/k/dcmm_e.html
http://www.themodernreligion.com/ter...-imamzaid.html
http://www.newsmax.com/archives/arti...7/195606.shtml
http://www.muhajabah.com/9-11_poem.htm
http://www.islamdenouncesterrorism.c..._of_islam.html
http://www.islamfortoday.com/adi03.htm
http://beirutspring.blogspot.com/200...uld-arabs.html
http://islam.about.com/cs/currenteve...icide_bomb.htm
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...toryId=4775588
http://www.borrull.org/c/noticia.php?id=34219
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...A9648C8DED.htm
http://www.islamfortoday.com/akbar04.htm
http://www.voanews.com/english/archi...TOKEN=71832657

I would agree that we need to do more. But to say that the Muslim majority is silent is entirely baseless.

Ustwo

I think you can figure it out. When the body counts across the globe in the name of Islam continue to rise, its a political issue. I find it interesting that world leaders have seen this coming for some time.

Not really. If they share my values then they are not of the dangerous fundamentalist mind set that is taking over Islam in the Islamic world. I'm having lunch with a Muslim who shares my values today, I think we will be talking mostly about the Bears.

People are people before they have religion. Your religion is being used as an excuse for some horrific things, and not just isolated incidents but nation wide in cases. Most people want to live in peace, this includes bombing victims.

I argue the average Muslim has sympathy for the ones who do. Maybe not the average Muslim in the US, but the average Muslim in the Islamic world. If they didn't you wouldn't see rich Muslims giving money to the suicide bombers families in such a public manner. You wouldn't see these murderers glorified on TV.

Its not an attraction, its a prediction. I'm not sure it IS a majority who fit the 'Religion of Peace' role, but even if it were say only 10%, that is 179 million for the Jihad. I think its higher.


From the bottom of that website....

Islam For Today has only three photos like this...



And sadly umpteen like this...



Looks like that website has a better idea of the problem then you do. Its not people like me, its people like the last photo. Its a problem within Islam.

I have seen nothing to prove them wrong. Just you stating a majority are peaceful.

Not at all, it was a needed view.

Let me distill what you said here. You said a majority of Muslims are peaceful and I was wrong and gave a list of websites. We have riots in Europe as we speak in Sweden by Muslim youths, the French police want armored cars to patrol Muslim neighborhoods, we have rich Muslims giving money to the families of suicide bombers and a death cult in Palestine, we have 10% of all BRITISH Muslims stating they would not report a terror attack if they knew of one (just think what that would be in say Damascus), we have almost every major hot spot in the world revolving around Islamic separatist or terror groups, and I'm suppose to embrace the religion of peace and think of these murderers are just aberrations of a peaceful religion?

If Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance you should be offended, but not by me or those like me, but by the millions of Muslims who are 'extremists' and causing such suffering in the world. I can only react to what I see happening, and I see genocides, I see the glorification of murder, I see intolerance, and I see an on going war that has only stopped to take a breather.

I'm glad SOME Muslims are speaking out against terrorism, I'm glad SOME think they need to be expunged from the religion, but they are downed out by the bombs of the fanatics, the calls for the destruction of Israel, the seemingly weekly riots in Europe, the genocides of Africa, the persecution of Christians in Indonesia, the bombing in Bali, the guerilla war in the Philippines, the siege of a Russian school, 'honor' killings daily, just to many specific horrors to even mention. I'd love, just once, to see a protest against an act of terrorism of the same level and furor as a protest against a Danish cartoonist, hell I'd like to see more than a handful of people, just once. Instead I'm told a majority are peaceful, and maybe they are, but they are turning a blind eye and seem only worried about what people like I think about their religion, and not worry about what millions are doing in their religions name.

__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

hiredgun

I agree that a change needs to take place. I take every opportunity to exhort my coreligionists to help me make this change.

The reason we worry about the kind of things you're saying is because they're counter-productive. Instead of driving a wedge between peaceful Muslims and fanatical ones, and instead of focusing on the violence itself, these ideas conflate all of us, lumping us into a single category and blaming terrorism on some problem inherent in the religion itself.

When you quote that "the essence of his doctrine was violence and lust" and then nod approvingly, you're saying that Islam as a faith is incompatible with modern, liberal values. So you basically invalidate me as a person, along with implying that all the efforts of all moderate Muslims to help steer us back on the right course are futile and superfluous, because Islam itself is evil and must be defeated. The spread of these views makes our job that much more difficult.

I feel that there are two contradictory strains of thought in your posts, one of which I can reconcile with, and the other which I cannot. On the one hand you recognize that non-fundamentalist Muslims exist (you say you're having lunch with one of them) and that the fundamentalist mindset is the problem. You recognize that Islam is being used as 'an excuse' for various reprehensible acts, which seems to be an acknowledgement that Islam itself is not by its nature the problem, that alternative formulations exist and should be supported by Muslims.

Then there's another strain which seems to argue that Islam is evil at its very root. You pull excerpts from the Quran in an effort to prove that the doctrine itself was always corrupt. You pull out these quotes from Churchill and Adams that are really nothing but broad, unfair generalizations. You seem to think that there's no hope, that moderates are nothing but insignificant statistical outliers who (and here's the really offensive part) don't authentically represent their faith. (This is distinct from whether or not we represent it statistically, although on that matter you and I also disagree.)

Edit: Also, I apologize for the 'bigot' comment. It came out in frustration and serves no useful purpose.

host

hiredgun, If God would grace me with one tenth of your eloquence, patience, and respectfullness, I would indeed feel blessed by Him!

dlish

thats probably the shortest post ive ever read coming from Host.

i entertained the idea of posting to this thread earlier in the piece, but saw it futile in the face of ustwos blatant bigotry. ustwos narrow views on islam and selective arguments, and even more selective examples of muslims sadly make an open and honest line of communication impossible.

ive got to side with hiredgun here as the voice of reason.

__________________
An injustice anywhere, is an injustice everywhere

I always sign my facebook comments with ()()===========(}. Does that make me gay?
- Filthy

Moskie

I felt I also had to chrip up here in support of hiredgun. Your post was excellent, gun, and it really represents the level-headedness that will be neccessary, in the long run, to get this world through whatever conflicts are going on against and within the Islamic faith.

I often get the impression that Ustwo's solution is to eradicate Islam, when the real goal should be make sure that views similar to hiredgun's are propagated throughout the Muslim community and up to the religous and political leaders of Islam.

__________________
Greetings and salutations.

highthief

Hows does Churchill feel about the Jews?

http://library.flawlesslogic.com/ish.htm

Some people like Jews and some do not; but no thoughtful man can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world.

And it may well be that this same astounding race may at the present time be in the actual process of producing another system of morals and philosophy, as malevolent as Christianity was benevolent, which, if not arrested would shatter irretrievably all that Christianity has rendered possible. It would almost seem as if the gospel of Christ and the gospel of Antichrist were destined to originate among the same people; and that this mystic and mysterious race had been chosen for the supreme manifestations, both of the divine and the diabolical.

The National Russian Jews, in spite of the disabilities under which they have suffered, have managed to play an honourable and successful part in the national life even of Russia. As bankers and industrialists they have strenuously promoted the development of Russia's economic resources, and they were foremost in the creation of those remarkable organisations, the Russian Co-operative Societies. In politics their support has been given, for the most part, to liberal and progressive movements, and they have been among the staunchest upholders of friendship with France and Great Britain.

International Jews

In violent opposition to all this sphere of Jewish effort rise the schemes of the International Jews. The adherents of this sinister confederacy are mostly men reared up among the unhappy populations of countries where Jews are persecuted on account of their race. Most, if not all, of them have forsaken the faith of their forefathers, and divorced from their minds all spiritual hopes of the next world. This movement among the Jews is not new. From the days of Spartacus-Weishaupt to those of Karl Marx, and down to Trotsky (Russia), Bela Kun (Hungary), Rosa Luxembourg (Germany), and Emma Goldman (United States), this world-wide conspiracy for the overthrow of civilisation and for the reconstitution of society on the basis of arrested development, of envious malevolence, and impossible equality, has been steadily growing. It played, as a modern writer, Mrs. Webster, has so ably shown, a definitely recognisable part in the tragedy of the French Revolution. It has been the mainspring of every subversive movement during the Nineteenth Century; and now at last this band of extraordinary personalities from the underworld of the great cities of Europe and America have gripped the Russian people by the hair of their heads and have become practically the undisputed masters of that enormous empire.

There is no need to exaggerate the part played in the creation of Bolshevism and the actual bringing about of the Russian Revolution by these international and for the most part atheistical Jews. It is certainly a very great one; it probably outweighs all others. With the notable exception of Lenin, the majority of the leading figures are Jews. Moreover, the principal inspiration and driving power comes from the Jewish leaders. Thus Tchitcherin, a pure Russian, is eclipsed by his nominal subordinate Litvinoff, and the influence of Russians like Bukharin or Lunacharski cannot be compared with the power of Trotsky, or of Zinovieff, the Dictator of the Red Citadel (Petrograd), or of Krassin or Radek -- all Jews. In the Soviet institutions the predominance of Jews is even more astonishing. And the prominent, if not indeed the principal, part in the system of terrorism applied by the Extraordinary Commissions for Combating Counter-Revolution has been taken by Jews, and in some notable cases by Jewesses.

Terrorist Jews

The same evil prominence was obtained by Jews in the brief period of terror during which Bela Kun ruled in Hungary. The same phenomenon has been presented in Germany (especially in Bavaria), so far as this madness has been allowed to prey upon the temporary prostration of the German people. Although in all these countries there are many non-Jews every whit as bad as the worst of the Jewish revolutionaries, the part played by the latter in proportion to their numbers in the population is astonishing.

Protector of the Jews

Needless to say, the most intense passions of revenge have been excited in the breasts of the Russian people. Wherever General Denikin's authority could reach, protection was always accorded to the Jewish population, and strenuous efforts were made by his officers to prevent reprisals and to punish those guilty of them. So much was this the case that the Petlurist propaganda against General Denikin denounced him as the Protector of the Jews. The Misses Healy, nieces of Mr. Tim Healy, relating their personal experiences in Kieff, have declared that to their knowledge on more than one occasion officers who committed offences against Jews were reduced to the ranks and sent out of the city to the front. But the hordes of brigands by whom the whole vast expanse of the Russian Empire is becoming infested do not hesitate to gratify their lust for blood and for revenge at the expense of the innocent Jewish population whenever an opportunity occurs. The brigand Makhno, the hordes of Petlura and of Gregorieff, who signalised their every success by the most brutal massacres, everywhere found among the half-stupefied, half-infuriated population an eager response to anti-Semitism in its worst and foulest forms. The fact that in many cases Jewish interests and Jewish places of worship are excepted by the Bolsheviks from their universal hostility has tended more and more to associate the Jewish race in Russia with the villainies which are now being perpetrated.

A Home for the Jews

Zionism offers the third sphere to the political conceptions of the Jewish race. In violent contrast to international communism.
Zionism has already become a factor in the political convulsions of Russia, as a powerful competing influence in Bolshevik circles with the international communistic system. Nothing could be more significant than the fury with which Trotsky has attacked the Zionists generally, and Dr. Weissmann in particular. The cruel penetration of his mind leaves him in no doubt that his schemes of a world-wide communistic State under Jewish domination are directly thwarted and hindered by this new ideal, which directs the energies and the hopes of Jews in every land towards a simpler, a truer, and a far more attainable goal. The struggle which is now beginning between the Zionist and Bolshevik Jews is little less than a struggle for the soul of the Jewish people.

Also,

http://www.jewishpost.com/jewishpost/jpn201b.html

__________________
Si vis pacem parabellum.

roachboy

before john quincy thought as he did, john adams (his father) signed the treaty of tripoli (in 1797)
here's my favorite part:

http://www.stephenjaygould.org/ctrl/treaty_tripoli.html

things since got pretty thoroughly messed up.
in alot of ways, don't you think?

__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite

Ch'i

Yep, Ustwo, those quotes sure are a riot!



...

filtherton

Just remember that his words were not based on religious belief but of observation.

ASU2003

That is 90% of it. The only thing I would add is...imagine you are living as a poor Muslim in the early days of Islam after it has become wide spread. In order to stay in power, you will have to use force and fear tactics on the general population to keep them in line. Public stoning, beheadings, hands chopped off, and banishment out to the desert were pretty strong incentives to stay in line.

dc_dux

UStwo and ASU....have you read or studied the Koran?

I havent, so maybe you can put your references and commentary from the Koran in context.

I'm not a biblical scholar either, but I could cherrry pick quotes from the Old and New Testament that would suggest a similar message to what you ascribe to Islam.

If you havent read the Koran and dont want to take the time, I would at least suggest reading a statement from Jordan's King Abdullah:

We are aware of the dangers and challenges the Islamic Nation is facing today at this difficult juncture of its course. Evils threaten its identity, incite disunity, tarnish its religion and assail its tenets; they attack fiercely the very message of Islam. Some who attack Islam imagine it is their enemy. But it is not their enemy. Others, who claim to belong to Islam, have done gruesome and criminal acts in its name. The message that is under attack is the message of tolerance, revealed by the Almighty to His prophet Muhammad, God's prayers and salutations be upon him, and carried after him by his orthodox successors and household members: a message of brotherhood and humanity; forming a righteous religion that embraces the entire sphere of human life, upholding what is good and forbidding what is wrong, accepting of others, and honouring all human beings.

http://www.kingabdullah.jo/main2.php...d=464?_hmka1=1

You will find many references to the Koran, not in full contex either, but at least from someone whom I would suggest is more authoritative on the Koran than either of you.

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire

ASU2003

I don't have a problem with the people following the religion. For hundreds of years, it was used to create a stable society and not let crime get out of control. The police force in 800AD is very different from what we have today, and the religion helped to reduce crime.

My post had very little to do with the Koran, just that you had to follow it or got sent out to the desert. There are other penalties for crimes laid out by the Koran if I remember correctly.

Seaver

I have. While it's not a message of conquor and obliterate, it definately lends itself well. There are messages to conquor and force others to submit (and humiliate them). Even messages that do not explicitley state to conquor have been interpretted for over a thousand years as so. There is a quote which says, "Seek out knowledge, even in China." So you say, "what does that have to do with it?" Well the Muslims went and did that, and conquored all the way over there. That is why there is a very significant population of muslims in western China today.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

filtherton

Doesn't the Koran say that you must crush your enemies, see them driven before you, and hear the lamentations of their women? Or is that the bible?

Seaver

I do believe that was Arnold in Conan the Barbarian...

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

djtestudo

I don't know if that's true or not, but you owe me a dry pair of underwear.

__________________
"Final thought: I just rented Michael Moore's Bowling for Columbine. Frankly, it was the worst sports movie I've ever seen."
--Peter Schmuck, The (Baltimore) Sun

dlish

for those of you who seem to think that by merely reading the Quran and literally interpreting it is as easy as ABC, then you got something else coming. even though you can read it and comprehend its meaning, its not for anyone to lift unbased judgements from. there are rules and sciences dedicated to this art which takes many years to master.

even the most knowledgeable of scholars and commentators in the muslim world on the Quran and islamic texts do not call their own interpretations of the Quran as fact since man is not free from error. they accept their efforts in trying to interpret the Quran as merely that, an effort based on the various sciences of jurispedence based on authentic sources. however, it is their humble opinion.

one such scholar who would be unknown to most here, but is known by virtually every muslim is Ibn Kathir. his works consists of thousands of pages of commentary on the quran. works have been made to interpret his works, works have been done to interpret theirs and so on and so forth. so for someone to just read the Quran and interpret it literally for themselves for their ownself indulgence or to knitpick, then they are doing themselves an injustice.

should your really want to know the Quran, then do yourself a favour and pick up the Quran. Then ask a muslim on their take on what it means, look at it from a muslim viewpoint as well as a non muslim viewpoint. read books from both sides ofthe story, because any text can be interoreted to mean just about anything you want it to depending on what you REALLY want to believe. i'm sure mr churchill had his beliefs skewed by his times and his lack of knowledge of islam, its sciences and its laws.

those that read the Quran literally and knitpick are doing nothing better than binladen himself who's literal intretation of the Quran is skewed in the other direction.

__________________
An injustice anywhere, is an injustice everywhere

I always sign my facebook comments with ()()===========(}. Does that make me gay?
- Filthy

Seaver

Thanks for implying that I dont know much about the Quran. In fact Middle Eastern Studies is my major, and Islamic History is my specialization. I've spoken with Sheiks, muslim professors, and more than my share of Talims. I know the various schools of law and interpretations, and Kathir is not the one you should research for he is not predominant in the regions in which terrorism origionates. If you want to look up religous interpreters, Hanafi or Maliki are predominant.

While there will be undoubtably one or two people point out the difference between Islamic Law and Interpretation, they are all-encompassing. And unfortunately for that, only those Sheiks or Imams who study said law can create fatwas (or decrees) so they are extremely influcenced. Neither of these schools have come out strongly against terrorism, in fact more of their Imams in the regions openly support it.

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

hiredgun

You're sort of talking about two very different scales there. Ibn Kathir is an individual scholar whose Tafsir of the quran is extremely influential. Hanafi and Maliki are the names of two entire schools of thought. The two categories are not incompatible, i.e. no one is an 'adherent' of Ibn Kathir in the sense that one might follow one of the schools, while an avowed Hanafi or Maliki is not unlikely to read and accept the interpretation of Ibn Kathir.

Seaver

What I was saying is the Imams/Sheiks of the Hanafi/Maliki schools of thought/law stay primarily within the interpretations held by their school. With VERY few of these teachers speaking out against the use of terrorism, and the majority openly supporting it, it says a lot against the notion that it's only a few violent people within the society. If the leaders of the religion openly support it why are we to assume the population do not?

__________________
"Smite the rocks with the rod of knowledge, and fountains of unstinted wealth will gush forth." - Ashbel Smith as he laid the first cornerstone of the University of Texas

dc_dux

Perhaps for the same reason that although the Pope and most priests believe there shoud be civil laws prohibiting abortion, most Catholics dont (at least in the US)?

__________________
"The perfect is the enemy of the good."
~ Voltaire