God, a Nothing Special Author

Create a topic and discuss! No subject is off limits, but moderators have the right to remove asshat posts. What's an asshat post? Selling stuff, trolling, harassing--the usual stuff you don't want to see either. Happy posting!
Post Reply
User avatar
Moonwood the Hare
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:59 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by Moonwood the Hare » Sun Dec 01, 2019 4:25 pm

searchengineguy wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 8:42 pm
Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 7:56 pm
I asked what you meant by moderate, whether this meant taking a centrist, neoliberal position where you advocate a liberal ideology on rights but also advocate the primacy of markets, limits on government spending and the privitisation of essential services like fuel, postage and transport.
No, I was speaking as someone that doesn't take on board extreme left or right wing views. I don't think moderates have any ideologies or platforms.
As I said previously the centre in politics has shifted to the right in the last few years so that moderate social democratic ideas like nationalising transport come to be seen as far left and so called centrists or moderates are often fiscally right wing. If you think your position has no ideological platform that almost certainly means your own ideology is hidden from you and just seems so obvious you see any differences from it as extremism.

User avatar
Moonwood the Hare
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:59 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by Moonwood the Hare » Sun Dec 01, 2019 5:39 pm

searchengineguy wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 9:16 pm
I still think shaming terrorists is a powerful tactic, rather than rewarding them in the afterlife or by financial benefits given to their families (yes, it happens). I also see your point about not attacking their families. See:
https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2017/07/ ... istianity/
It's a great article on the whole, though with some weaknesses, and says much of what I have tried to say to you in the past. I think shame is a very limited tactic. I think the article is right in seeing perpetrators or terrorism as having profound inner divisions so they can be both taking and affirming an action and yet ashamed of it. This is an exagerated version of a common human characteristic. However enagaging with and strengthening the shame means pitching one part of a person against another and shame is often not a strong enough part to carry that weight; shame is an essentially social charachteristic (much more so than guilt) so it will carry little force either for the solo attacker on the attacker strongly identified with a group, and these are precisely the conditions in which attacks are carried out. They may feel shame when speaking to someone outside the group but that person will have limited impact at other times. In so far as they do shame can be a tactic but there needs to be interpersonal engagement with all aspects of the self and ultimately with the person's moral centre which is far more effective when acting out of commitment rather than shame alone. But there also needs to be a shift towards a counter ideology. The article mentions shame but actually talks about inclusion rather than shame as a tactic, and I concur on that, but ultimatley it is not about pulling the person from one group to another but developing a personal moral compass.

Where I think the article flounders is when it tries to pass responsibility for change almost entirely to Muslim leaders, and does not see any need for changing attitudes towards Mulsims in the mainstream culture. For example when Muslims do criticise terrorist acts it often goes unreported in the mainstream media so people are unaware of the scale of Muslim condemnation of acts of terrorism. We also need to look at western policy in the Islamic world. Jeremy Corbyn mentioned recently that at the time of the second gulf war he said this attack on Iraq would lead to an increase in terror attacks on the UK and he was right.
Corbyn wrote:Sixteen years ago, I warned against the invasion and occupation of Iraq. I said it would set off a spiral of conflict, hate, misery and desperation that will fuel the wars, the conflict, the terrorism and the misery of future generations. It did, and we are still living with the consequences today.

The war on terror has manifestly failed. Britain’s repeated military interventions in North Africa, the Middle East and South Asia have exacerbated, rather than resolved the problems.
More Muslim leaders refuse funeral prayers for London attackers

Statement from imams and others to deter extremists says: ‘You’re not welcome in our community either in life or in death’

Harriet Sherwood Religion correspondent


Scores more imams and Muslim religious leaders have said they will not perform funeral prayers for the perpetrators of the London Bridge attack, bringing the number of signatories to a statement to more than 200.

The grassroots, cross-denominational initiative from imams, teachers, chaplains and other religious figures is intended to send a strong message to extremists considering acts of terror in the name of Islam.

“We decided we needed to make a public statement, to send a strong message – effectively, you’re not welcome in our community either in life or in death,” said Qari Asim, imam at the Makkah mosque in Leeds.

“This decision was not taken lightly. One of the last things you offer to the deceased is to seek forgiveness for them from God. By not performing the funeral prayer, we are not asking for forgiveness.

“The gravity of the crime is such that we feel it should be clear to young people that we cannot offer the prayer, though it is up to God to judge [the attackers]

Yunus Dudhwala, the head of chaplaincy at St Bartholomew’s hospital in central London, said it was unprecedented for so many imams and religious leaders to unite around such a statement. “Down on the ground, we have the ear of the community, and people know these killers have nothing to do with Islam,” he said.

“It is written as one of the rules [of Islam] that funeral prayers should be performed. In cases where people have perpetrated heinous crimes against humanity, there are precedents were religious leaders decline to say prayers. But it is rare.”

The imams’ statement did not rule out funeral services being held for the perpetrators, he added. “The families could do a private funeral. But these people don’t deserve our prayers.”

The statement was intended to deter extremists who believe that acts of jihad will be rewarded in the hereafter, said Rehanah Sadiq, an Islamic teacher. “We want to make it clear this is not the case. If these people know that imams and teachers are not going to pray or ask forgiveness for them, they might question what they are about to do.”

She added that it was an Islamic duty to care for the families of the attackers. “The families should not be ostracised – that would be sinful or wrong from an Islamic perspective. Every individual is accountable for his or her deeds. No one else is responsible. This must be incredibly painful for the families.”

Asim said the attackers were “not martyrs but criminals. These so-called jihadists are not fighting a holy war.” Jihad means struggle, which could be personal, social or political, he added.

“Jihad is a religious term misused by terrorists and misunderstood by the wider public. Terrorists are using the term to destroy our values in society.”
I am glad to see this happening. But the key point for me is that this is an initiative from within a minority group not people external to that group trying to inculcate shame on its external terms.
Last edited by Moonwood the Hare on Sun Dec 01, 2019 6:23 pm, edited 2 times in total.

User avatar
Moonwood the Hare
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:59 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by Moonwood the Hare » Sun Dec 01, 2019 5:46 pm

searchengineguy wrote:
Sat Nov 30, 2019 10:20 pm
This article is poignant regarding the current London bridge attacks. How do they allow terrorists like this enter into early release arrangements?
see this https://www.thecanary.co/uk/analysis/20 ... he-future/ and this https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50615928

searchengineguy
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:26 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by searchengineguy » Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:29 pm

Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 5:39 pm
I am glad to see this happening. But the key point for me is that this is an initiative from within a minority group not people external to that group trying to inculcate shame on its external terms.
I don't know why you have a problem with that, when they are not short of using shame in their indoctrination tactics.
“One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad.”
Aleister Crowley

User avatar
Moonwood the Hare
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:59 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by Moonwood the Hare » Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:19 pm

searchengineguy wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:29 pm
Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Sun Dec 01, 2019 5:39 pm
I am glad to see this happening. But the key point for me is that this is an initiative from within a minority group not people external to that group trying to inculcate shame on its external terms.
I don't know why you have a problem with that, when they are not short of using shame in their indoctrination tactics.
The hegemony of western culture is dominated by powerful white business men. Universal values tend to be subsumed under the needs of the military industrial complex. Frankie Boyle found a great illustration of this when he said Hilary Clinton is against female genital mutilation except when its done by a bomb from 50 thousand feet. In other words she may be a feminist but only on the terms set by elite male domination. Muslim culture is of course male centred as well but there are also Muslim women, and women are in many ways at the heart of families. In attacking the families of terrorists from outside you are carrying in the external values of the western hegemony, you are asking Muslims and especially Muslim women to be ashamed of being Muslim and in effect to submit to you and your values. This is not only patronising but almost certain to backfire at the point where people feel as deep an identification with their culture as you do with yours.

However the article is talking about using values from within Muslim culture to counter the narrative of the extremists. This is not patronising and if done by people who understand and can work from within that culture it can be effective. However it can become ineffective if a person with only a superficial knowledge of Islam attempts it. For example when Tony Blair took on Al Qaeda he did no by quoting verses from the Koran which a Wahabist would regard as abrogated, a serious error. So Islam is best engaged from within Islam.

searchengineguy
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:26 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by searchengineguy » Wed Dec 04, 2019 1:13 am

Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:19 pm
In attacking the families of terrorists from outside you are carrying in the external values of the western hegemony, you are asking Muslims and especially Muslim women to be ashamed of being Muslim and in effect to submit to you and your values. This is not only patronising but almost certain to backfire at the point where people feel as deep an identification with their culture as you do with yours.
No, I wasn't saying to attack the families of terrorists or asking Muslims to be ashamed of being Muslim and in effect to submit to me and my values.

I don't know where you got that from, perhaps that is your own false preconception, even though I have just said that "I also see your point about not attacking their families." Shaming terrorists and highlighting their shameful acts should be high on the agenda of all Islamic leaders that sincerely want to make changes.

Christian leaders should have done the same thing in Nazi Germany during World War 11 instead of saluting him and the Pope sending him birthday greetings.
NaziPriestsSaluteHitler.jpg
NaziPriestsSaluteHitler.jpg (33.82 KiB) Viewed 129 times
“One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad.”
Aleister Crowley

User avatar
Moonwood the Hare
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:59 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by Moonwood the Hare » Wed Dec 04, 2019 5:20 pm

searchengineguy wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 1:13 am
Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:19 pm
In attacking the families of terrorists from outside you are carrying in the external values of the western hegemony, you are asking Muslims and especially Muslim women to be ashamed of being Muslim and in effect to submit to you and your values. This is not only patronising but almost certain to backfire at the point where people feel as deep an identification with their culture as you do with yours.
No, I wasn't saying to attack the families of terrorists or asking Muslims to be ashamed of being Muslim and in effect to submit to me and my values.

I don't know where you got that from, perhaps that is your own false preconception, even though I have just said that "I also see your point about not attacking their families."
I get it because when I said
'You once advocated shaming the family members of terrorists which is a vicious attack on the liberal idea of individual responsibility.
you replied
Yep, I still reckon labelling terrorists that target innocent people inside their own mosques as cowards is a great idea.

If you have now changed your mind, great. If the government, as an outside agency, or even worse some kind of private non-Muslim group, were to do this then they would be shaming families. It would, whether you intended that to be the case or not, mean that an outside agency was setting up standards, in effect its own, that Muslims as a group were held to have fallen short of. You talked about targeting mosques, you have not suggested any non-Muslim targets; you have not suggested, for example, shaming those associated with soldiers who commit human rights violations in the name of your own country and culture.
Shaming terrorists and highlighting their shameful acts should be high on the agenda of all Islamic leaders that sincerely want to make changes.
It is very easy for a member of an elite majority to tell leaders of a minority what they ought to be doing. When are you going to start shaming your friends and your government for their shameful acts?
Christian leaders should have done the same thing in Nazi Germany during World War 11 instead of saluting him and the Pope sending him birthday greetings.
This is historically naïve. You are assuming, with hindsight, that everyone always knew how bad the Nazi's were. You are forgetting that fascism was a new ideology that many people supported and most others went along with. There were individuals who opposed Nazism, some of whom were Christians. For example you might want to look at the activities of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and his friend in the UK George Bell. But the ones who did oppose Nazism tended to be the ones who were more politically aware. Would you come into that class? I see no signs you would. You have said nothing against the times when your own government has supported totalitarianism or its current drift towards more totalitarian forms of control.

searchengineguy
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:26 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by searchengineguy » Fri Dec 06, 2019 8:12 pm

searchengineguy wrote:
Wed Dec 04, 2019 1:13 am
I don't know where you got that from, perhaps that is your own false preconception, even though I have just said that "I also see your point about not attacking their families."
Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:19 pm
I get it because when I said 'You once advocated shaming the family members of terrorists which is a vicious attack on the liberal idea of individual responsibility. you replied 'Yep, I still reckon labelling terrorists that target innocent people inside their own mosques as cowards is a great idea.'
Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:19 pm
If you have now changed your mind, great. If the government, as an outside agency, or even worse some kind of private non-Muslim group, were to do this then they would be shaming families. It would, whether you intended that to be the case or not, mean that an outside agency was setting up standards, in effect its own, that Muslims as a group were held to have fallen short of.
It's the non-actions of the Muslim leaders that I have a problem with, not the families or them as a group.
You talked about targeting mosques, you have not suggested any non-Muslim targets; you have not suggested, for example, shaming those associated with soldiers who commit human rights violations in the name of your own country and culture.
This is you setting up a false equivalence.

When has our government done nothing to condemn terrorist activities of it's soldiers or refused to shut down hate speech by their leaders?
Shaming terrorists and highlighting their shameful acts should be high on the agenda of all Islamic leaders that sincerely want to make changes.
Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:19 pm
It is very easy for a member of an elite majority to tell leaders of a minority what they ought to be doing. When are you going to start shaming your friends and your government for their shameful acts?
I would have no problems with that. If my friends and my government also had strange ideas about imaginary beings I would not try and rectify that by having discussions over tea about my own imaginary beings like you have been doing.
Christian leaders should have done the same thing in Nazi Germany during World War 11 instead of saluting him and the Pope sending him birthday greetings.
Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:19 pm
This is historically naïve. You are assuming, with hindsight, that everyone always knew how bad the Nazi's were. You are forgetting that fascism was a new ideology that many people supported and most others went along with. There were individuals who opposed Nazism, some of whom were Christians. For example you might want to look at the activities of Dietrich Bonhoeffer and his friend in the UK George Bell. But the ones who did oppose Nazism tended to be the ones who were more politically aware. Would you come into that class? I see no signs you would. You have said nothing against the times when your own government has supported totalitarianism or its current drift towards more totalitarian forms of control.
I'm being naïve? When do you think that those photos above were taken? It's well known that large numbers of Christian leaders including the pope supported Hitler and Nazism years after they took power and did fuck all to stop them.
“One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad.”
Aleister Crowley

User avatar
Moonwood the Hare
Posts: 410
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2018 4:59 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by Moonwood the Hare » Sat Dec 07, 2019 6:23 pm

searchengineguy wrote:
Fri Dec 06, 2019 8:12 pm

Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Tue Dec 03, 2019 9:19 pm
If you have now changed your mind, great. If the government, as an outside agency, or even worse some kind of private non-Muslim group, were to do this then they would be shaming families. It would, whether you intended that to be the case or not, mean that an outside agency was setting up standards, in effect its own, that Muslims as a group were held to have fallen short of.
It's the non-actions of the Muslim leaders that I have a problem with, not the families or them as a group.
You talked about targeting mosques, you have not suggested any non-Muslim targets; you have not suggested, for example, shaming those associated with soldiers who commit human rights violations in the name of your own country and culture.
This is you setting up a false equivalence.

When has our government done nothing to condemn terrorist activities of it's soldiers or refused to shut down hate speech by their leaders?
The implication is clear. You believe this is a false equivalence because you think Muslim leaders have been inactive and done nothing in response to terrorism. That is a whopping lie. I have pointed this out to you over and over again and after having given you the facts last time we discussed this I found that you had completely forgotten them this time round, and sugested you search this for yourself in the hope that this would hep you to remember. But even after you yourself have produced evidence of Muslim leaders doing something, in not allowing funeral rights, you still persist in the claim that nothing has been done. Of course this action of refusing funeral rights is one among many and there is only one explanation for your refusal to acknowledge this: you are a bigot. You are so bigotted that even when you know the facts you still demand to be given them again every time. So lets look at few easy to search for facts:
from here:
https://ing.org/global-condemnations-of-isis-isil/
Arab and Muslim leaders condemn ‘vile terrorist attack’ in Nice

Muslim leaders: ‘We will not allow the extremists to define us’

Muslim Americans rush to condemn Orlando massacre

Atlanta Muslim leaders on Orlando shooter: ‘He’s not us; we’re not him’

Muslims In NYC Remember The Lives Lost In Orlando

USA Ahmadiyya Muslim Community Condemns the Senseless Night Club Shooting in Orlando

Bay Area Muslims Condemn Orlando Shooter, Show Solidarity With Victims

We Strongly Condemn the Heinous Attack on Innocent People in Orlando

ING and Affiliates Stand in Solidarity with LGBTQ Communities Against Hate

Tennessee Muslims appalled by Florida shootings, condemn targeted violence and hate

American Muslims Send A Powerful Message Of Solidarity To Orlando Victims

ICNA FL joins community to denounce the Orlando killings

Here’s Your List Of Muslim Leaders Around The World That Condemned The Massacre In Orlando

Muslim leaders are condemning the Orlando mass shooting

US Muslims condemn Orlando shooting

Orlando gay nightclub shooting: Muslim leader tells Isis ‘You do not speak for us. You are an aberration’

7 Times Muslims Denounced Terror

Belgian Muslims condemn attacks, donate blood

Tunisians formed human barricade to protect beach terror victims: reports

Muslim Leaders Wage Theological Battle, Stoking ISIS’ Anger

Fatwas, rulings and authoritative statements against terrorism in Islam

45 Examples of Muslim Outrage About Charlie Hebdo Attack That Fox News Missed

You wouldn’t know it from the press but moderate Muslims do denounce terrorism.

Hours After San Bernardino Shooting, Muslim Community Condemns Attack

American Muslim Organizations Condemn San Bernardino Shooting

Muslim leaders condemn San Bernardino shootings, say communities fear anti-Muslim backlash

San Diego Muslim Leaders Condemn San Bernardino Violence

St. Louis-area Muslim groups ‘strongly condemn’ San Bernardino violence

Muslim Leaders Condemn ‘Revolting’ San Bernardino Massacre

How 70,000 Muslim Clerics Are Standing Up To Terrorism

Muslim Americans denounce ISIS terror campaign; urge Americans to stand in solidarity and peace with them

Indian Muslim Leaders Condemn ISIS: 1.5M Muslims Sign Fatwa Against Islamic State, Al Qaeda And Taliban

How Muslim Groups, Scholars Have Been Fighting ISIS

World’s Largest Islamic Organization Tells ISIS To Get Lost

British Muslims are literally paying to condemn Isis. So everyone can stop going on about it now

Thousands of Muslim clerics issue fatwa against evil Islamic State and other terror groups

Muslims around the world condemn terrorism after the Paris attacks

Muslims Around The World Condemn Paris Attacks Claimed By ISIS

Muslims Hate ISIS Most of All

#NotInMyName: Muslims condemn attacks in Paris

ISNA Condemns Terrorist Attacks in Paris

Arab states condemn ‘terrorist’ Paris attacks

Iran’s Hassan Rouhani calls Paris attacks “crimes against humanity”

Indonesian President Joko Widodo condemns Paris attacks

Muslims Speak Out Against ISIS Following Paris Terror Attacks

Muslims Around the World Speak Out Against Terrorist Attacks in Paris

Paris Attacks are Despicable, Our Prayers are with the Victims

Muslim groups strongly condemn terror attacks in Paris

Muslims Globally Are Condemning Islamophobia By Tweeting Support For Paris With “I Am A Muslim”

Muslim Council of Britain Launches Campaign to Highlight Muslim Condemnation of Terrorism Everywhere

Paris terror: Muslim leaders around the world condemn ‘heinous’ attacks

Muslims rally outside White House condemning ISIS, terrorism

Dearborn rally protests ISIS

Muslims Worldwide Denounce ISIS Terrorism

Religious Scholars Use Social Media To Counter ISIS Interpretation Of Koran

U.S. Muslims ask why their religion’s condemnation of violence often goes unheard

Islamic scholar says ISIS perverts Islam

Islamic State ignores Prophet’s example

Local Muslims condemn terrorist acts

British Muslims vent anger at death of aid worker

Kosovo is fully behind American’s fight against ISIS

Somali American fights militant Islamist recruiters in U.S. heartland

U.S. Trying to Counter ISIS Efforts to Lure Alienated Young Muslims

Is All Morality Gone? Condeming ISIS and Beyond, In A World of Suffering

Milwaukee’s Muslim Community Trying to Combat ISIS Influence

#MuslimApologies Highlights The Absurdity Of Blaming An Entire Religion For Actions Of Few

ISIS is the antithesis of Hajj, the holy pilgrimage

This Cleric Thinks ISIS Can Be Defeated With More Religion

Why the Islamic State Is Not Really Islamic

Prominent Muslim Sheik Issues Fatwa Against ISIS Violence

Is ISIS Islamic? Is it a state?

#MakingAStand: British Muslim women launch anti-ISIS culture drive

German Muslims Turn Out In Force For Nationwide Protest Against Islamic State

Open letter to IS leader al-Baghdadi from 100+ global Muslim scholars

The Key to Defeating ISIS Is Islam

US Muslim leaders denounce ISIS, pledge to dissuade youth from joining

Australian Grand Mufti tells young Muslims to avoid ‘Sheik YouTube’

#NotInMyName: Young British Muslims stand up to ISIS online

Faithline Protestants Reframing Our View of Religious Terrorism

American Muslim Organizations Condemn ISIS Terrorism

Interfaith speakers stress tolerance, decry Islamic State violence

Local Muslims Organize Interfaith Discussion on ISIS, Islam

San Francisco Interfaith Council and Religious Leaders Speak Out Against ISIS Religious Persecution

Cambridge mosque calls ISIS barbaric, uncivilized

German Muslims invite all faiths to day of prayer against Islamic State

Saudi Arabia’s top clerics speak out against Islamist militancy

ISIS Is Not Just Un-Islamic, It Is Anti-Islamic

Rebranding the ‘Islamic State’

Don’t blame religion for rise of ISIS

Muslims are speaking out but no one is listening

‘Violent and terrible’: UK Muslim leaders condemn ISIS

Muslim Leaders In Alabama Defy Stereotypes With Strong Message to ISIS Over Murder Of Steven Sotloff

ISIS Execution of American Journalist Underscores Need to Combat Extremism

Muslim Leaders Have Roundly Denounced Islamic State, But The Media Won’t Tell You That

Isis terror threat: Leading British Muslims issue fatwa condemning terror group

Islamic State is our top enemy: Saudi mufti

World’s top Muslim leaders condemn attacks on Iraqi Christians

Ayatollah Ali Sistani, Iraq’s Highest-Ranking Shia Cleric, Issues Fatwa For Shias To Fight ISIS

Islam’s theology of life is stronger than ISIS’ cult of death
From here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_at ... opposition
Quoting the conclusion of the article "Why are there no condemnations from Muslim sources against terrorists?" Ontario Consultants on Religious Tolerance
A common complaint among non-Muslims is that Muslim religious authorities do not condemn terrorist attacks. The complaints often surface in letters to the editors of newspapers, on phone-in radio shows, in Internet mailing lists, forums, etc. A leader of an evangelical Christian para-church group, broadcasting over Sirius Family Net radio, stated that he had done a thorough search on the Internet for a Muslim statement condemning terrorism, without finding a single item.

Actually, there are lots of fatwas and other statements issued which condemn attacks on innocent civilians. Unfortunately, they are largely ignored by newspapers, television news, radio news and other media outlets.
From here: https://www.scmp.com/comment/insight-op ... -listening.
Despite an avalanche of condemnation from Islamic countries, leaders and scholars after nearly every terrorist attack, the entire Muslim world continues to be the scapegoat for the actions of individuals and groups that commit morally repugnant acts in the name of Islam.
In 2014, more than 120 Muslim scholars issued an open letter to Islamic State, meticulously deconstructing the group’s theology. It was not the first time that their ideology has been challenged. Multiple fatwa have been issued against extremism and yet, every time IS, al-Qaeda or any of their ilk commit an act of violence in the name of Islam, a tragically familiar refrain arises: where is the condemnation from the Muslim world?
Last November, 19-year old Heraa Hashmi, a University of Colorado student, decided to put the entire notion to the test. Using Google spreadsheets, she compiled a “712-page list of Muslims condemning things with sources”, which she tweeted. The list included everything from acts of domestic violence to 9/11. “I wanted to show people how weak the argument that Muslims don’t care about terrorism is,” she explained. Within a few weeks, her spreadsheet was turned into an interactive website, muslimscondemn.com.
I could go on and on. But you will never listren and you will never hear. If I talk with you in a couple of weeks time you will still be saying Muslim leaders do not condemn terrorism and will have forgotten all this.
I would have no problems with that. If my friends and my government also had strange ideas about imaginary beings I would not try and rectify that by having discussions over tea about my own imaginary beings like you have been doing.
This is a very childish comment and certainly not worthy of response.
I'm being naïve? When do you think that those photos above were taken? It's well known that large numbers of Christian leaders including the pope supported Hitler and Nazism years after they took power and did fuck all to stop them.
You have misunderstood me. When I said you were being historically naive I was not saying you had your facts wrong. You did, but the problem is much more profound than that. You are making an error common to ignorant polemicists in that you are reading the past as if we already knew then what we know know and thought then how we think now.

Almost everyone in Nazi Germany did the salute. There are very few exceptions. There is a well known story regarding Dietrich Bonhoeffer:
On June 17, 1940 (the day France surrendered to Germany), Dietrich Bonhoeffer was with his close friend Eberhard Bethge “in the Baltic village of Memel. They were relaxing in an “open-air café when suddenly a special announcement came over the loudspeaker that France had surrendered. Bethge wrote:

The people around the tables could hardly contain themselves; they jumped up, and some even climbed on the chairs. With outstretched arms, they sang “Deutschland, Deutschland uber alles” and the Horse Wessel song. We stood up, too Bonhoeffer raised his arm in the regulation Hitler salute, while I stood there dazed. “Raise your arm! Are you crazy?” he whispered to me, and later: “We shall have to run risks for very different things now, but not for that salute!”
So it should be obvious to anyone with a smattering of historical knowledge that a picture of someone doing a Nazi salute in Nazi Germany cannot be taken as proof that they supported the Nazi's. Unless you are going to tell me Bonhoeffer was really a Nazi sympathiser.

So what are the facts and more specifically what did Christopher Hitchens, who you are obviously referencing, get wrong? Fortunately our old friend Tim O'Neil has done us some sterling work on this: https://historyforatheists.com/2019/05/ ... lers-pope/
On the photograph you have shown O'Neil comments:
This is the context in which we see bishops giving Nazi salutes and attending Nazi rallies in the photos above. Catholic prelates, especially in the early to mid 1930s, were instructed to accept the Nazi regime as the legitimate German government. So clergy did give the Nazi salute at official ceremonies, as did other dignitaries and public servants, whether they were Party members and supporters or not. The two bishops pictured with Goebbels above were Bishop Franz Rudolf Bornewasser of Trier and Bishop Ludwig Sebastian of Speyer. Far from being Nazi supporters, both were outspoken critics of the regime. Bishop Bornewasser condemned Nazi policies both publicly and in private protests to Hitler himself and accounts of the physical attacks on him by Nazi thugs were later used as evidence in the Nuremberg Trials. Bishop Sebastian’s defence of clergy arrested by the Nazis prompted attacks on him in the Nazi press, which in turn provoked such outrage from the Catholic population of Speyer that the local Nazi Gauleiter, Joseph Bürckel, (also seen in the photo with Goebbels) ordered a Nazi rally in the city for the day of a planned mass protest by Catholics. He bussed in thousands of Nazi Party members and stormtroopers to take over the streets and prevent any demonstration in support of the bishop. Anti-Catholic polemicists who use the photo of the two bishops to illustrate any supposed Catholic support of the Nazis are, as usual, twisting history.
He goes on:
There were some enthusiastic pro-Nazi clergy, but their numbers were tiny. Kevin P. Spicer’s analysis in his book Hitler’s Priests: Catholic Clergy and National Socialism concludes that of around 42,000 priests in Germany and Austria, only 138 or 0.5% were Nazis. Others, including some leading prelates, were not supporters but were sufficiently nationalist to find the policy of outward political neutrality more comfortable than most. Cardinal Adolf Bertram, who had influenced the Vatican’s positions on the Concordat and the Centre Party, was clearly one of these. It was he who ordered the annual birthday good wishes to Hitler that so outraged Hitchens. What Hitchens does not bother to note is that it had also outraged many of Bertram’s fellow senior clergy at the time. Bishop Konrad von Preysing was so vehemently opposed to the gesture that he wrote angrily to Bertram about the “fundamental divergence of our views over the church-political situation”, and had to be talked out of resigning his see by the Pope. But the Vatican could not avoid a public confrontation between Bertram and von Preysing at the German Catholic Bishops Conference the following year, where von Preysing attacked Bertram’s approach so vehemently in his opening address that Bertram dissolved the Conference to prevent any further public conflict. Hitchens, of course, holds up Bertram’s actions and says nothing about von Preysing, who went on to openly attack the Nazis and work covertly with the German Resistance. Polemics usually consist of telling only part of the story – objective historical analysis does not work like that.
He says later regarding the pope who you say supported Hitler and Nazism:
Via Müller and a network of German Jesuits, Pius was directly involved in no less than three plots to kill Hitler. The first faded out in 1939-40 when the German officers involved lost their nerve. The second failed when explosives in Hitler’s plane failed to go off in 1943. And the third was the von Stauffenberg plot, where a bomb wounded Hitler but failed to kill him in 1944. But as early as 1939 Pius had made the decision not only to help the Resistance overthrow the Nazis, but also decided that Hitler met the theological justifications for actual tyrannicide – he decided to assist the German Resistance even if they acted to assassinate Hitler. Some of his aides, including his secretary and adviser Robert Leiber, were shocked but Leiber’s own notes from the time record that when asked what kind of government the German plotters should work toward, Pius answered emphatically “Any government without Hitler”. So much for “Hitler’s Pope”.

searchengineguy
Posts: 166
Joined: Fri Oct 18, 2019 9:26 pm

Re: God, a Nothing Special Author

Post by searchengineguy » Sun Dec 08, 2019 9:12 am

Moonwood the Hare wrote:
Sat Dec 07, 2019 6:23 pm
The implication is clear. You believe this is a false equivalence because you think Muslim leaders have been inactive and done nothing in response to terrorism. That is a whopping lie. I have pointed this out to you over and over again and after having given you the facts last time we discussed this I found that you had completely forgotten them this time round, and sugested you search this for yourself in the hope that this would hep you to remember. But even after you yourself have produced evidence of Muslim leaders doing something, in not allowing funeral rights, you still persist in the claim that nothing has been done. Of course this action of refusing funeral rights is one among many and there is only one explanation for your refusal to acknowledge this: you are a bigot. You are so bigotted that even when you know the facts you still demand to be given them again every time. So lets look at few easy to search for facts:
You are straw manning me yet again! I don't think that ALL Islamic leaders don't condemn Isis. I wrote, "It's the non-actions of the Muslim leaders that I have a problem with, not the families or them as a group." Let's talk about the non-action of Islamic leaders in Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Syria, Afghanistan, Tunisia, Libya, and Algeria. Do they also condemn terrorists?
I would have no problems with that. If my friends and my government also had strange ideas about imaginary beings I would not try and rectify that by having discussions over tea about my own imaginary beings like you have been doing.
This is a very childish comment and certainly not worthy of response.
You say that because you are embarrassed about being caught out doing exactly what I have accused you of doing. Spinning woo to fellow woo believers.
I'm being naïve? When do you think that those photos above were taken? It's well known that large numbers of Christian leaders including the pope supported Hitler and Nazism years after they took power and did fuck all to stop them.
You have misunderstood me. When I said you were being historically naive I was not saying you had your facts wrong. You did, but the problem is much more profound than that. You are making an error common to ignorant polemicists in that you are reading the past as if we already knew then what we know know and thought then how we think now.
Nazism had been around about a decade before that photo was taken in 1935, just 4 years short of the start of WW11. Those Catholic priests knew very well about the European antisemitism and Nazi's scientific racism/eugenics. Yet they paid homage to it instead of condemning it for what it was.
So what are the facts and more specifically what did Christopher Hitchens, who you are obviously referencing, get wrong? Fortunately our old friend Tim O'Neil has done us some sterling work on this:
That wannabe historian is no friend of mine and has numerous blunders under his belt as you should know by now. Why don't you reference a qualified historian like Susan Zuccotti ?
Susan Sessions Zuccotti (born November 14, 1940) is an American historian, specializing in studies of the Holocaust. She holds a PhD in Modern European History from Columbia University. She has won a National Jewish Book Award for Holocaust Studies,[1] and the Premio Acqui Storia – Primo Lavoro for Italians and the Holocaust (1987). She also received a National Jewish Book Award for Jewish-Christian Relations, and the Sybil Halpern Milton Memorial Prize of the German Studies Association in 2002 for Under His Very Windows (2000). She was married to real estate developer John Zuccotti until his death in 2015.[2]

Zuccotti has taught courses on Holocaust history at Barnard College and Trinity College.[3]

Work on Vatican's Role in the Holocaust
Zuccotti argues in "Under His Very Windows" that Pope Pius XII knew of the mass murder of Jews during the Holocaust and could have done more to stop it.
So much for “Hitler’s Pope”.
So much for your uninformed, unqualified buffoon who is too scared to debate or write a book.
“One would go mad if one took the Bible seriously; but to take it seriously one must be already mad.”
Aleister Crowley

Post Reply