30 replies to this topic

[Yamato]

The media ignores the preexisting mass-scale anger that's seething across the region, not just at the US for our puppet dictators, bombs, bribes, and "democracy" but at their own oppressive regimes.   When peoples' backs are up against the wall, when they're being oppressed by their masters from above, they're much more likely to fall back on their personal values and beliefs, if only for the help and solidarity they find non-family-members within a community that religions provide.   It's having a value in common and coming together as one in solidarity around it.  There's nothing extreme about it. Religion on all sides of this conflict is purely incidental and if their religions weren't there, they'd rally around something else they have in common with one another that can unify them.  They'd find some other difference they have with the other group and throw mud over it.

Boiling policies and their problems down to "religious fanatics" on either side is exactly what the media would prefer us to believe.  Buying that line makes us all blind.  Israelis, for one, aren't religious fanatics.  They're not even that religious as a group.  They're nationalists who live like nationalists and act like nationalists no matter how many times they try to wrap a religion up in their nationalism to invoke our guilty conscience about things we should be congratulated for ending not goaded and guilt tripped for causing.   Zionists might as well be atheist or agnostic or Christian.   You don't have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, just ask Joe "I am a Zionist" Biden.

The people suddenly so angry (for the very first time ever!) about a video they never even saw hadn't been "extremists" either, though they already had plenty of reasons to be the "extremists" despite how off the media's radar they must remain.   The blowback from our policies is always buried deliberately by the mainstream media so that we never hear from the common, ordinary everyday person on the street in the Middle East about how our neck-rubbing with their rulers effects their lives for the worse, even though we write thousands of words speaking for them as if they're one homogenous stereotype.   And when they do speak out, when we do reach out and speak to these beautiful people, that's the "propaganda" according to the Zionists.  

It's a moral and intellectual cop-out to focus on some singular characteristic that others have that just so happens to be different from our own, a convenient little change of subject that becomes the default excuse to ignore the unacceptable conditions these people have put up with for far too long.  

It's the same ages-old rallying cry.   It's the same for all people.   "Who are we?  Are we the hapless pawns of the ______?  No!  We are _______."   Even when the words in the blanks happen to be West/Muslims or Israelis/Palestinians.

Edited by Yamato, 05 October 2012 - 11:54 PM.

[Br Cornelius]

Yamato, on 05 October 2012 - 11:43 PM, said:

The media ignores the preexisting mass-scale anger that's seething across the region, not just at the US for our puppet dictators, bombs, bribes, and "democracy" but at their own oppressive regimes.   When peoples' backs are up against the wall, when they're being oppressed by their masters from above, they're much more likely to fall back on their personal values and beliefs, if only for the help and solidarity they find non-family-members within a community that religions provide.   It's having a value in common and coming together as one in solidarity around it.  There's nothing extreme about it. Religion on all sides of this conflict is purely incidental and if their religions weren't there, they'd rally around something else they have in common with one another that can unify them.  They'd find some other difference they have with the other group and throw mud over it.

Boiling policies and their problems down to "religious fanatics" on either side is exactly what the media would prefer us to believe.  Buying that line makes us all blind.  Israelis, for one, aren't religious fanatics.  They're not even that religious as a group.  They're nationalists who live like nationalists and act like nationalists no matter how many times they try to wrap a religion up in their nationalism to invoke our guilty conscience about things we should be congratulated for ending not goaded and guilt tripped for causing.   Zionists might as well be atheist or agnostic or Christian.   You don't have to be a Jew to be a Zionist, just ask Joe "I am a Zionist" Biden.

The people suddenly so angry (for the very first time ever!) about a video they never even saw hadn't been "extremists" either, though they already had plenty of reasons to be the "extremists" despite how off the media's radar they must remain.   The blowback from our policies is always buried deliberately by the mainstream media so that we never hear from the common, ordinary everyday person on the street in the Middle East about how our neck-rubbing with their rulers effects their lives for the worse, even though we write thousands of words speaking for them as if they're one homogenous stereotype.   And when they do speak out, when we do reach out and speak to these beautiful people, that's the "propaganda" according to the Zionists.  

It's a moral and intellectual cop-out to focus on some singular characteristic that others have that just so happens to be different from our own, a convenient little change of subject that becomes the default excuse to ignore the unacceptable conditions these people have put up with for far too long.  

It's the same ages-old rallying cry.   It's the same for all people.   "Who are we?  Are we the hapless pawns of the ______?  No!  We are _______."   Even when the words in the blanks happen to be West/Muslims or Israelis/Palestinians.

Though you make perfectly good points, to deny the malign influence of religious fanatics is disingenuous. People like "and then" would not be rabid zionists without religious fanaticism. Iran has a strong influence of apocalyptic fanaticism at the highest levels of Government.  To deny the religious influence within the Taliban and Hamas is to deny reality. These people maybe bolstered by short sighted foreign interventions - but their innate brutality to others not of their faith is entirely derived from the religious aspects of their beliefs.

The overwhelmingly negative aspect to all this is that these people do not see the death of millions as anything but inevitable and something to look forward to. That is a dangerous addition to an already dangerous demographic.

Br Cornelius

[and then]

Br Cornelius, on 06 October 2012 - 05:54 AM, said:

Though you make perfectly good points, to deny the malign influence of religious fanatics is disingenuous. People like "and then" would not be rabid zionists without religious fanaticism. Iran has a strong influence of apocalyptic fanaticism at the highest levels of Government.  To deny the religious influence within the Taliban and Hamas is to deny reality. These people maybe bolstered by short sighted foreign interventions - but their innate brutality to others not of their faith is entirely derived from the religious aspects of their beliefs.

The overwhelmingly negative aspect to all this is that these people do not see the death of millions as anything but inevitable and something to look forward to. That is a dangerous addition to an already dangerous demographic.

Br Cornelius

My faith harms not a soul in this world, brutha.  To lump me in with the Taliban and Hamas is insulting and witless on your part.  But I don't doubt your sincerity and that is the pitiable thing, imo.  You cannot make a distinction between even behaviors which are obviously vastly different.  I feel badly for you and I hope time will open your eyes.

[Br Cornelius]

and then, on 06 October 2012 - 06:53 AM, said:

My faith harms not a soul in this world, brutha.  To lump me in with the Taliban and Hamas is insulting and witless on your part.  But I don't doubt your sincerity and that is the pitiable thing, imo.  You cannot make a distinction between even behaviors which are obviously vastly different.  I feel badly for you and I hope time will open your eyes.

I talk of the acceptance of violence in the name of religion - you have made your position on that abundantly clear on numerous occasions. You are not innocent.

Br Cornelius

[and then]

Br Cornelius, on 06 October 2012 - 07:04 AM, said:

I talk of the acceptance of violence in the name of religion - you have made your position on that abundantly clear on numerous occasions. You are not innocent.

Br Cornelius

Should we begin calling YOU St. Cornelius,then?

[Br Cornelius]

and then, on 06 October 2012 - 07:54 AM, said:

Should we begin calling YOU St. Cornelius,then?

No - just a sane individual of modest means. I think I share a lot in common with your idol Jesus actually. He was a nice peaceful loving man to

Br Cornelius

[and then]

Br Cornelius, on 06 October 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

No - just a sane individual of modest means. I think I share a lot in common with your idol Jesus actually. He was a nice peaceful loving man to

Br Cornelius

Except for the money changers in His temple.  Don't be fooled into thinking the Lamb is the one returning though.

[Br Cornelius]

and then, on 06 October 2012 - 09:56 AM, said:

Except for the money changers in His temple.  Don't be fooled into thinking the Lamb is the one returning though.

More that we have in common then

And that is where you betray the fact that you are not a Christian in Jesus' image - but rather you model yourself of the Romanised Pagan church of St.Paul.  
This is the problem I have with most christians - Jesus just wouldn't recognize his message in his followers beliefs and actions. The only exception I can point to as a body, is that of the Quakers.

Jesus never claimed to be returning to rain fire and brimstone on none believers, to my certain knowledge - that was a much later addition to the cannon.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 06 October 2012 - 11:00 AM.

[and then]

Br Cornelius, on 06 October 2012 - 10:55 AM, said:

More that we have in common then

And that is where you betray the fact that you are not are Christan in Jesus' image - but rather you model yourself of the Romanised Pagan church of St.Paul.  

Jesus never claimed to be returning to rain fire and brimstone on none believers to my certain knowledge - that was a much later addition to the cannon.

Br Cornelius

You reject the messages of Paul?   Really?  Do you not consider the new testament to be God inspired?

[Br Cornelius]

and then, on 06 October 2012 - 10:58 AM, said:

You reject the messages of Paul?   Really?  Do you not consider the new testament to be God inspired?

The only part of Christianity I respect is the actual words of Jesus - and I think even these have been heavily doctored in the New Testament. So the answer would be - definitely not.

Paul is where christianity went terribly wrong.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 06 October 2012 - 11:11 AM.

[questionmark]

Br Cornelius, on 06 October 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

The only part of Christianity I respect is the actual words of Jesus - and I think even these have been heavily doctored in the New Testament. So the answer would be - definitely not.

Paul is where christianity went terribly wrong.

Br Cornelius

Well, looks like according to the Testament of St. Thomas Peter had his fingers in it too...

[and then]

Br Cornelius, on 06 October 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

The only part of Christianity I respect is the actual words of Jesus - and I think even these have been heavily doctored in the New Testament. So the answer would be - definitely not.

Paul is where christianity went terribly wrong.

Br Cornelius

That's interesting.  I have never thought of the Holy scriptures as being some sort of cafeteria plan where one could pick and choose what to believe.  That explains much about your opinions on issues, I guess.  No offense intended btw, just seems odd to me.

[Br Cornelius]

and then, on 06 October 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:

That's interesting.  I have never thought of the Holy scriptures as being some sort of cafeteria plan where one could pick and choose what to believe.  That explains much about your opinions on issues, I guess.  No offense intended btw, just seems odd to me.

The choice of the Gospels and other books that went into the New Testament were made over the first 300yrs after Christ, by groups of Bishops who decided what would be politically best for the developing church. Do you actually believe that their debates were directly inspired by God. I personally think your a comedian if you do.

Br Cornelius

Edited by Br Cornelius, 06 October 2012 - 07:15 PM.

[Professor T]

and then, on 06 October 2012 - 06:43 PM, said:

That's interesting.  I have never thought of the Holy scriptures as being some sort of cafeteria plan where one could pick and choose what to believe.  That explains much about your opinions on issues, I guess.  No offense intended btw, just seems odd to me.

Interesting too and throws here, a tad off topic, but interesting nun-the less.
imo holy scriptures ARE something one can pick and choose from. To be told what to believe defeats the idea free will.

[and then]

Professor T, on 06 October 2012 - 10:54 PM, said:

Interesting too and throws here, a tad off topic, but interesting nun-the less.
imo holy scriptures ARE something one can pick and choose from. To be told what to believe defeats the idea free will.

Being told about a way to live that is for a person's benefit isn't the same as being forced into anything.  It's simply a choice that has to be made or rejected.  But the instructions (I've always thought) come as a package deal.  Christ came to fulfill the law so trying to keep the ordinances of the OT is not something Christians have to do.  But the Law is for all time...i.e. the Ten.....  If one does not believe the good news of Christ that was relayed to His disciple Paul, then he cannot be said to be a Christian in the fullest sense.  Christ's words were for all times but were specifically meant for the Jew first, then the Gentile.  Paul's message was for everyone but especially for Christ's church...mostly Gentiles.