Israeli soldier post pics of herself and Palestinian prisoners on where? FACEBOOK

[AOII Angel]

Drole....I love you. You know what you are talking about. Unfortunately, this Choconut lost the ability to apply logic to his arguments years ago, that's why he is able to believe this drivel!

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Chocoholic

I like a larger font so I don't have to sit on top of my laptop just to see... I break so many that way. lol

Learn to hit Ctrl+mouse scroll instead of the horror of font tags you use all over the place.

I was responding to a comment you made earlier; essentially, respect should be given to all prisoners. And in a perfect world that would happen – however, we don’t live in a perfect world. We could give Islamic prisoners the key to Emerald City, and the outcome won’t change - militant beheadings shall continue as justifiable. Islamic militants need rehab and education, not candy and flowers.

It means that you can't justify Israel (or the US or anyone) treating prisoners badly because other people are worse. If we're the "good guys" it is incumbent on us to follow the rules. The less we follow the rules the more justification "they" have not to. And even when they don't follow the rules, we do it because it is right.

Specifically prohibited by Islam, care to cite your source?

Source
Source
Source
Go ahead and read those, I'll be waiting.

Red herring. Specifically used by muslims in Gaza knowing the IDF wouldn’t shoot at children.

Right. It's a military thing, not a religious practice.

Yes and this archaic practice is still ONLY in use by those in Muslim countries or where Muslims are practicing Shaira Law - like the US and UK. Google honor killings.

So, those honor killings in India where women and men are killed for marrying outside of their caste are not actually happening?

Honor killings are against the law even in countries where they occur. It is not an issue of everything being hunky dory with the government it's a cultural issue involving local control and coverup of these crimes.

Punishments like this go back to the code of Hammurabi.

However, the important point for this discussion is that it is part of the culture of those countries, not part of Islam. Indonesia does not have a similar problem for example.

One mother is more than enough and imo, has no business having children. It’s child abuse. In this country that woman would lose her children and most likely prosecuted for child endangerment.

No shit sherlock. I'm not saying it's fun times, I'm saying it's neither common nor religious.

\They "don't have" armies?!? Did I read that correctly? Regardless, of what you think of their armies - they have armies. You should really take a trip... I bet you think that Palestinians are living in tents, with nothing; not even running water, right?

So, the Palestinians are on equal footing with the Israelis militarily? Yeah. Right.

More red herrings. One lone nut job vs. nut jobs from the fastest growing religion in the US (and worldwide) – exponentially increases the number of nut jobs. Period.

These are only "red herrings" in the sense that you brought the subject up and cannot defend it. Suicide bombers are no more representatives of Islam than the IRA are representatives of Catholicism.

when their respective governments embrace the doctrine, i.e., Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia, now you have an entire country of wahhabism acceptance/adherence. No religious freedom there.Once again, you fail to acknowledge that the bible doesn't make the laws of this country. Most acknowledge it as a moral code written two-thousand years ago. You certainly wouldn't walk into family court in this country argue one party committed adultry, file a motion for contempt and hope the court orders they be stoned to death. The difference being is that Islamic law is a comprehensive system covering the relationship with allah, family, money, society and country - given and governed by allah.

You're conflating two points here.
One is that not all Muslims, even those living in places like Saudi Arabia, follow the literalist interpretation of the Koran.
Two is that said literalist interpretation is very flawed for the same reasons literal interpretations of other religious texts are flawed. Particularly when the texts are twisted for political purposes.

You are treating Islamic law as a solid universal block that has no differing perspectives. This is no more true than the idea that there are just Christians and they all agree on everything. We've had countries run entirely on "Christian" rules in the past, and our own country still carries plenty of those biases with us today.

You’re kidding right? It’s evident to me you know nothing of Sharia Law and the oppressive nature of wahhabi – Saudi women cannot vote, be educated like their male counterparts, they can’t drive, they have to have a familial/guardian male with them at all times, they’ve covered from head to toe in njib and female children are married off. Women cannot chose who they'll marry. Saudi Arabia is globally ranked as 130th out of 136th counties in terms of human rights violations. If you don’t see that as strife against women – I don’t think we can continue this conversation. Please read on.

I rather specifically said that it was persecuting women. I'm quite aware of what SA is like. I'm also aware that this is not the only form of Sharia and that Sharia varies wildly based on who's administering it. Again you're treating 1 billion people as if they all think like one person.

Is that what you understood from my post?

You said:
"And while the Saudi Government condemned bin Laden, they never condemned his message - until that happens, expect the brutality to continue unabated."
So yes, I interpreted that to mean you think that if the Saudis condemn his message we'd see an end to "brutality" or something similar.

Ah, so you feel Islam is evil.

No, I'm starting to think you're a moron, though.

LOL! It was a video made by an Arab Christian!

And titled "Innocent Hamas & Evil Israel - Liberalism at Work"
Yeah, you're right it's totally neutral!

I’m not buying that nonsense.

Me neither, but some do.

I conflated no such thing. There are Mizrahim (Jews kicked out of Arab countries), Christian Arabs etc –

When you say "Muslim/Arab" it sure sounds like you do.

Yes, I generally glean that kind of information from “Stormfront” …

So stop assuming it's an Islamic thing.

LOL! Yes, because your contribution has such military strategic value… Just how large is your yard and where exactly is it.

I'm rather obviously referring to American money in general.

that’s how you interpreted my comments and that you’re not familiar with foreign aid in the ME – most clamor about how their tax dollars are given just to Israel, when they know nothing about the strings attached and the quid pro quo of these agreements and the congressional approval of said deals. Egypt has no strings attached, theirs is strictly economic aid. But I did hear that the US will start selling Egypt and the Saudis military weaponry, planes etc. It’s nice to know we still make something…

I really don't bitch about my money going to Israel as a rule. We send a lot of foreign aid to a lot of places. You raised the issue as a point in the discussion.

Park51 is entirely separate argument – one I don’t oppose due to the first amendment argument. But I’d hate to see some other nutjob blow that thing up and harm innocent NY’ers again, in the process.

No shit. Really? How generous of you.
Why would that even come into your mind when discussing it?

I'm somewhat amused by this remark. There's a certain idealistic naiviete to it. So you both maintain you both have won?

Why do you care what the other side says? This shouldn't be some geographic pissing match (even though it is all too often.) And we've already acknowledged they're crazy, so your best bet is to convince the non-crazy people about how crazy the extremists are.

If you compromise your values for the terrorists, you lose. That's how it works. Their goal is to inspire terror, right? If you start clamoring about how you don't know if you can trust Muslims now, you only prove their point about the West wanting to destroy them.

We keep thinking that if we bomb (or shoot, or whatever) them we'll change their minds or something and we don't realize that for every civilian we kill, and we cannot help but kill some, we create enemies of their whole families, friends, neighbors.

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Drole....I love you. You know what you are talking about. Unfortunately, this Choconut lost the ability to apply logic to his arguments years ago, that's why he is able to believe this drivel!

*sigh* Idiocy on these issues is just frustrating. This isn't us versus them.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Chocoholic

I don't think Israelis will behave like extremist militants, anymore than the US will

Ironic.

Originally Posted by Drolefille

And some Christian conservatives only support Israel because they want them to rebuild the Temple so Jesus can come again.

O so you've been talking to my parents?

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Ironic.


O so you've been talking to my parents?

Dood. Finding out about that aspect of the "Support Israel" lobby was an eye opener for me. I'm just like jaw dropped "REALLY? YOU REALLY THINK THAT?" about the whole thing.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Dood. Finding out about that aspect of the "Support Israel" lobby was an eye opener for me. I'm just like jaw dropped "REALLY? YOU REALLY THINK THAT?" about the whole thing.

My mother gets VERY angry when people don't blindly support Israel. It's to the point that she has threatened to forcibly remove people from her home.

[Chocoholic]

It means that you can't justify Israel (or the US or anyone) treating prisoners badly because other people are worse. If we're the "good guys" it is incumbent on us to follow the rules. The less we follow the rules the more justification "they" have not to. And even when they don't follow the rules, we do it because it is right.

We follow the rules, sans, a few recalcitrant acts by individual soldiers. “Because it is right” means nothing without education, leaders who teach tolerance and religious objectivity and prevent the manipulation of religion for political or other means or ends.

Source
Source
Source
Go ahead and read those, I'll be waiting.

You’re kidding right? About.com – now there’s a scholarly source, LOL! The Statesman, what is that, a Texas newspaper? Suite101.com, if you bothered to check the contributors’ credentials I’m sure you would have been embarrassed. I’m almost embarrassed for you… Do you like 'The Atlantic' http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs.../06/brooks.htm

I’ll say it again, until you educate these young Muslim men, they’ll remain susceptible and receptive to a spurious version of Islamic nationalism taught and based upon nonsense promised to them by the Taliban et al. Therefore, our actions will mean bupkis, without first teaching them religious tolerance and educating them beyond the current level. If not; nothing changes and the cycle continues. In the very least, we should expect this from their leaders.

Why would that even come into your mind when discussing it?

Because, just last week a kid viciously stabbed a Muslim cab driver in NYC for no reason other than he was Muslim. It’s obvious to me that nutjobs know no bounds or borders. And the only reason I brought it up is due to the contentious, emotional hot button that discussion has evoked – right up to Sen Harry Reid and the POTUS.

Why do you care what the other side says? This shouldn't be some geographic pissing match (even though it is all too often.) And we've already acknowledged they're crazy, so your best bet is to convince the non-crazy people about how crazy the extremists are.

Agreed, it shouldn’t be a pissing match. I wanted you to clarify your position, and now you’ve done so. Thanks.

If you compromise your values for the terrorists, you lose. That's how it works. Their goal is to inspire terror, right? If you start clamoring about how you don't know if you can trust Muslims now, you only prove their point about the West wanting to destroy them.

I understand, and I agree. However, that doesn’t mean you capitulate to demands for fear of reprisal and threats of discrimination. In this country, we have the principle of separation of church and state; therefore, we don’t place footbaths in our public universities, prayer rooms in our middle schools, allow drivers licenses’ with photos of burqa-covered women. Yet with each of these, CAIR threatened legal action.

We keep thinking that if we bomb (or shoot, or whatever) them we'll change their minds or something and we don't realize that for every civilian we kill, and we cannot help but kill some, we create enemies of their whole families, friends, neighbors.

Once again, we agree. And those families grow up, and new generations are born and they’re taught who their enemies are and the cycle continues.
BTW thanks for that font tip.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Chocoholic

[We follow the rules, sans, a few recalcitrant acts by individual soldiers. “Because it is right” means nothing without education, leaders who teach tolerance and religious objectivity and prevent the manipulation of religion for political or other means or ends.

No, "because it is right" means everything. You can't control what the other guy does in any situation, you can only be responsible for you.

You’re kidding right? About.com – now there’s a scholarly source,

The credentials of the author, which you could have seen had you bothered.

Huda is a Muslim educator and writer with nearly two decades of experience researching and writing about Islam on the Internet. An American woman of Irish/English descent, she has been a Muslim for the past 20 years.
Experience:

Huda is an educator, freelance writer and editor. She is the author of The Everything Understanding Islam Book, originally published in 2003, with a 2nd Edition in 2009. She currently teaches elementary school in the Middle East.
Education:

Huda holds a M.Ed. degree, and is fluent in both French and Arabic.

LOL! The Statesman, what is that, a Texas newspaper? Suite101.com, if you bothered to check the contributors’ credentials I’m sure you would have been embarrassed. I’m almost embarrassed for you…

The Suite101 author's credentials:

Lamyaa Hashim has lectured internationally on Islamic and Middle Eastern Socio-Economics and Palestinian issues for over 25 years. She served as the world news editor for Islamic Horizons magazine in the early nineties, and her journalism and poems have appeared in various publications around the world and translated into several languages. She reported live from the Middle East as a correspondent for the radio program Sout El-Arab Wel Aruba (Voice of the Arabs and Arabia), and is an avid human rights supporter.

One would think the alleged ties to Hamas, which are unproven, would actually make an article by her stating that suicide bombings are unacceptable more relevant, not less.

And the New Statesman is a British political magazine, the author is the senior political editor and worked for Channel 4. For someone so quick to toss away sources, you provided none that contradict. If you want scholarly sources you're on your own and hopefully you speak Arabic.

Do you like 'The Atlantic' [URL]http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2002/06/brooks.htm

I do. You'll note that it discusses suicide bombing as a Palenstinian cultural issue, not an Islamic issue.

I’ll say it again, until you educate these young Muslim men, they’ll remain susceptible and receptive to a spurious version of Islamic nationalism taught and based upon nonsense promised to them by the Taliban et al. Therefore, our actions will mean bupkis, without first teaching them religious tolerance and educating them beyond the current level. If not; nothing changes and the cycle continues. In the very least, we should expect this from their leaders.

Do stop acting as if they're country rubes. Highly educated people get taken in by lies and scams all the time. And it's not like you're volunteering to teach "them" (which, you know, don't because in your case it would be counterproductive).

I understand, and I agree. However, that doesn’t mean you capitulate to demands for fear of reprisal and threats of discrimination. In this country, we have the principle of separation of church and state; therefore, we don’t place footbaths in our public universities, prayer rooms in our middle schools, allow drivers licenses’ with photos of burqa-covered women. Yet with each of these, CAIR threatened legal action.

Suffice to say, in most parts of the country people only complain when it isn't their religion that's being allowed by the public school/space/university. Threatening legal action is nothing new.

BTW thanks for that font tip.

Now stop touching the font and color sections of the edit box. Stop. It's bad.

[Chocoholic]

Now stop touching the font and color sections of the edit box. Stop. It's bad.

I touched it once, to see how it worked, I haven't touched it since - I have no idea what "color sections" you're referring to, I only see black type and the light blue background.

For someone so quick to toss away sources, you provided none that contradict. If you want scholarly sources you're on your own and hopefully you speak Arabic.

Sorry, I couldn't get past About.com, went to Suite101's home page to see the contributors, left unimpressed and really went no further.

From my link:
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs.../06/brooks.htm
Before 1983 there were few suicide bombings. The Koran forbids the taking of one's own life, and this prohibition was still generally observed. But when the United States stationed Marines in Beirut, the leaders of the Islamic resistance movement Hizbollah began to discuss turning to this ultimate terrorist weapon. Religious authorities in Iran gave it their blessing, and a wave of suicide bombings began, starting with the attacks that killed about sixty U.S. embassy workers in April of 1983 and about 240 people in the Marine compound at the airport in October. The bombings proved so successful at driving the United States and, later, Israel out of Lebanon that most lingering religious concerns were set aside.

The tactic was introduced into Palestinian areas only gradually. In 1988 Fathi Shiqaqi, the founder of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, wrote a set of guidelines (aimed at countering religious objections to the truck bombings of the 1980s) for the use of explosives in individual bombings; nevertheless, he characterized operations calling for martyrdom as "exceptional." But by the mid-1990s the group Hamas was using suicide bombers as a way of derailing the Oslo peace process. The assassination of the master Palestinian bomb maker Yahya Ayyash, presumably by Israeli agents, in January of 1996, set off a series of suicide bombings in retaliation. Suicide bombings nonetheless remained relatively unusual until two years ago, after the Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat walked out of the peace conference at Camp David—a conference at which Israel's Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, had offered to return to the Palestinians parts of Jerusalem and almost all of the West Bank.

At that point the psychology shifted. We will not see peace soon, many Palestinians concluded, but when it eventually comes, we will get everything we want. We will endure, we will fight, and we will suffer for that final victory. From then on the struggle (at least from the Palestinian point of view) was no longer about negotiation and compromise—about who would get which piece of land, which road or river. The red passions of the bombers obliterated the grays of the peace process. Suicide bombing became the tactic of choice, even in circumstances where a terrorist could have planted a bomb and then escaped without injury. Martyrdom became not just a means but an end.

Do stop acting as if they're country rubes. Highly educated people get taken in by lies and scams all the time. And it's not like you're volunteering to teach "them" (which, you know, don't because in your case it would be counterproductive).

Most people are aware that there are tribes, where these "rubes" still practice in child marriages, are uneducated, live in abject poverty and this is what makes them receptive to the promises of the Taliban. It's their impoverished existence, with little or no opportunity for improvement which leaves them vulnerable.

Suffice to say, in most parts of the country people only complain when it isn't their religion that's being allowed by the public school/space/university. Threatening legal action is nothing new.

That's odd, most attended religious or private schools where their children would receive the education desired, not the other way around.

No threatening legal action is nothing new, but capitulating to CAIR by settling to their demands is. It appears to be the post 9/11 gift that keeps on giving...

I'm going back to Delphi, I like the format better.

[agzg]

This thread has become the new "how to get to heaven when you die" thread for me.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by agzg

This thread has become the new "how to get to heaven when you die" thread for me.

Popcorn fodder or "dear lord won't it die?"

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Popcorn fodder or "dear lord won't it die?"

Take a guess.

[SWTXBelle]

Drole, I'm disappointed. You didn't point out that his/her only slur about The Austin American Statesman was that it was in Texas. I guess the point was to trade on some stereotype about Texas, but from a rhetorical standpoint it was poor.

Of course, I'm from Texas, so automatically anything I say has no merit.


eta - and is it some pro-Israeli thing to not bother to read or research the writer of something you don't like? The newspaper for which I write had a gentlemen writing in to support the Israeli raid on the Gaza aid flotilla, and he actually wrote the he stopped reading an article he had been pointed to when it diverged from his opinion. Really? At that point you figure, why bother? He's obviously living in his own little world where his opinion is right because it is his opinion and anyone who disagrees or has an alternative viewpoint is obviously wrong because they don't agree with him. It's startling how often one runs across that.

[AGDee]

Bottom line: There are evil people in every walk of life. Teachers and doctors, black and white, Christian, Islam and Jewish, educated and uneducated, rich and poor, in every nation. There are also inherently good people in every walk of life. It is the duty of the good people to speak out against the evil. Not to stereotype whole groups who share characteristics with those evil people, but to speak against the individual evil people.

[AOII Angel]

Originally Posted by AGDee

Bottom line: There are evil people in every walk of life. Teachers and doctors, black and white, Christian, Islam and Jewish, educated and uneducated, rich and poor, in every nation. There are also inherently good people in every walk of life. It is the duty of the good people to speak out against the evil. Not to stereotype whole groups who share characteristics with those evil people, but to speak against the individual evil people.

AGDee, you are so right, but so few people are willing to take the time to get to know people of other cultures so that they can see that they aren't ALL evil. I'm so tired of all the rhetoric about Muslims. I could really scream if I hear another thing about the NY mosque, Sharia law, or anything else coming out of the mouth of someone who doesn't even know someone who practices the religion.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by SWTXBelle

Drole, I'm disappointed. You didn't point out that his/her only slur about The Austin American Statesman was that it was in Texas. I guess the point was to trade on some stereotype about Texas, but from a rhetorical standpoint it was poor.

Of course, I'm from Texas, so automatically anything I say has no merit.


eta - and is it some pro-Israeli thing to not bother to read or research the writer of something you don't like? The newspaper for which I write had a gentlemen writing in to support the Israeli raid on the Gaza aid flotilla, and he actually wrote the he stopped reading an article he had been pointed to when it diverged from his opinion. Really? At that point you figure, why bother? He's obviously living in his own little world where his opinion is right because it is his opinion and anyone who disagrees or has an alternative viewpoint is obviously wrong because they don't agree with him. It's startling how often one runs across that.

That's because I didn't know there was a TX paper called the Statesman The one I linked was a British political mag!

I don't think it's a pro-Israel thing as much as it is a "blind supporter" thing. There's been some recent research showing people tend to only go to sites and seek out news told from their preferred political perspective.

Originally Posted by AGDee

Bottom line: There are evil people in every walk of life. Teachers and doctors, black and white, Christian, Islam and Jewish, educated and uneducated, rich and poor, in every nation. There are also inherently good people in every walk of life. It is the duty of the good people to speak out against the evil. Not to stereotype whole groups who share characteristics with those evil people, but to speak against the individual evil people.

Yes. And manipulative evil people can twist any belief system - political, religious, philosophical - to justify their own actions and solicit support for their way of thinking.

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

AGDee, you are so right, but so few people are willing to take the time to get to know people of other cultures so that they can see that they aren't ALL evil. I'm so tired of all the rhetoric about Muslims. I could really scream if I hear another thing about the NY mosque, Sharia law, or anything else coming out of the mouth of someone who doesn't even know someone who practices the religion.

Word.

(Although to add, "My best friend is Muslim" is not a good enough reason to spout idiocy either.)