Blasphemous Racist Hate Tirades at the ZEN ZONE

[zengrifter]

From our friends at the marvelous Iranian news - PRESS TV.

Previously when I posted something critical of Israel, some of the comments about Islam and Muslims reflected some of the most racist anti-semetic (in the true sense) intolerant hate rant that can be found within the ZZ archive. zg

------------------


From freedom of speech to blasphemy

Wed, 30 Jan 2008 22:15:41
By Bita Ghaffari, Press TV

There is a border between freedom of expression and blasphemy - a border that should never be crossed.

Attempts to confuse the concept of free speech with one that is inciting, provocative, or offensive has a long history.

Attacking Islam and striving to portray it as a religion harboring violence and extremism is not a new phenomenon. However, there have been renewed attempts to distort the image of Islam through profane utterances or writings concerning Muslim sacred entities in recent times.

Certain naïve political figures resort to sacrilege as a means of working their way up the ladder of political success. Austria's Susanne Winter is one such figure.

Her blasphemous remarks regarding the Prophet of Islam Muhammad (PBUH) and the assertion that Islam should be 'thrown back where it came from, beyond the Mediterranean Sea' only expose her prejudiced and ignorant mindset. Can that be considered an instance of extremism?

MORE- http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id...tionid=3510303

[aslan]

I don't know much about Islam or the Koran, but I do suspect that average Muslims prefer peace to war. Radicals within their religion may have distorted the causal observer's view, but even the casual observer, if he reflected but a moment, should realize that there are many more peaceable Muslims than warmongering radical ones---maybe a hundred or more to one. Somehow the notion has entered the Western mind that Muslims (in the sense of "all Muslims") have a world plan for domination and are just sitting back waiting their opportunity to pounce like a ravenous beast. Even I at times am caught dumbfounded at why the average Muslim in this country does not stand up and renounce the actions and verbage of Muslim radicals. The truth is I have seen some Muslims on TV shows do just that. I suspect their is something in the Muslim culture that holds the average Muslim back from demonstrating their love for peace, although it is difficult for the Western mind to understand their reticence. Is it fear of reprisal? Is it a sense of protecting their own members, even those who are wayward and menacing? Is it a cultural shyness of some sort? Is it that they feel only their leaders should speak, not every lowly Muslim? And if so, where are the leaders? Are they the mostly radical ones? As you can see, I am belaboring this issue out of ignorance of what the true situation is. I do hope that Muslims on the Forum or those who understand the Muslim mind will step forward and give us insight into this peculiar (to me) phenomenon. Until then I will try to keep in mind that the vast majority of Muslims, while they do not stand up against radical Islam, do not stand up for it either. Until I can come to understand it better myself, I do hope and pray that average Muslims do not follow radical leaders down a bloody path with the West out of some distorted sense of loyalty, obedience or duty. Also, I hope that you in the know can explain the constant warring between different Muslim factions. It appears from the ouside like a culture that is always at war even within its own confines. You do not need to remind me that the same can be said about the West as well. I say all these things in hopes of furthering understanding between two diverse cultures that could help us learn to live peacefully side by side without fear or distrust.

[ihate17]

Originally Posted by aslan

I don't know much about Islam or the Koran, but I do suspect that average Muslims prefer peace to war. Radicals within their religion may have distorted the causal observer's view, but even the casual observer, if he reflected but a moment, should realize that there are many more peaceable Muslims than warmongering radical ones---maybe a hundred or more to one. Somehow the notion has entered the Western mind that Muslims (in the sense of "all Muslims") have a world plan for domination and are just sitting back waiting their opportunity to pounce like a ravenous beast. Even I at times am caught dumbfounded at why the average Muslim in this country does not stand up and renounce the actions and verbage of Muslim radicals. The truth is I have seen some Muslims on TV shows do just that. I suspect their is something in the Muslim culture that holds the average Muslim back from demonstrating their love for peace, although it is difficult for the Western mind to understand their reticence. Is it fear of reprisal? Is it a sense of protecting their own members, even those who are wayward and menacing? Is it a cultural shyness of some sort? Is it that they feel only their leaders should speak, not every lowly Muslim? And if so, where are the leaders? Are they the mostly radical ones? As you can see, I am belaboring this issue out of ignorance of what the true situation is. I do hope that Muslims on the Forum or those who understand the Muslim mind will step forward and give us insight into this peculiar (to me) phenomenon. Until then I will try to keep in mind that the vast majority of Muslims, while they do not stand up against radical Islam, do not stand up for it either. Until I can come to understand it better myself, I do hope and pray that average Muslims do not follow radical leaders down a bloody path with the West out of some distorted sense of loyalty, obedience or duty. Also, I hope that you in the know can explain the constant warring between different Muslim factions. It appears from the ouside like a culture that is always at war even within its own confines. You do not need to remind me that the same can be said about the West as well. I say all these things in hopes of furthering understanding between two diverse cultures that could help us learn to live peacefully side by side without fear or distrust.

Aslan
How often have wishes of the average person been shoved so deep underground by fanatical groups that the average person has no voice, no power at all and one day he just gets caught up on one side or the other.

The vast majority of people in this world, of any religion or nationality, just really want to survive, improve things for their familiesl, live in peace and die of old age with loved ones nearby. There is no lobby, no political party and few if any politicians backing this today.
The average German before and during Hitler's rise to power may have had some anti-semitic background but they were not fanatics bent on world domination and the elimination or slavery of certain non German peoples.

Today in the mess we call Africa, where colonial goverments drew lines on a map and put tribes with hundreds of years of problems with each other in the same country, the average person was not bent on genocide but many of them have gotten caught up in the mob.

Use the same thoughts for the old Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Iraq and other places, the fanatic is dominating many parts of the Muslim world while the average person keeps himself silent.

Could it happen in the U.S.? I think yes, and I see two possibilities. Right wing Christian fanatics imposing their will on the population someday.
Also, more and more government scares based on terrorism to the point where the average person might see his neighbor just taken away and never heard from again.
Actually our freedoms have been quickly eroding under the Bush administration and if we head into a severe economic downturn you might start thinking about Weimar Germany. The Christian right, combined with a freedom grabing government might just put the blame for everything on recent immigrants for stealing jobs and putting stress on the welfare system to the point where they may be forced to leave or put into "camps".

The one good thing we have going for us is just how much diversity we actually do have. There are so many large minority groups and that makes it harder to single out individual groups.

ihate17

[aslan]

Originally Posted by ihate17

Aslan
How often have wishes of the average person been shoved so deep underground by fanatical groups that the average person has no voice, no power at all and one day he just gets caught up on one side or the other.

The vast majority of people in this world, of any religion or nationality, just really want to survive, improve things for their familiesl, live in peace and die of old age with loved ones nearby. There is no lobby, no political party and few if any politicians backing this today.
The average German before and during Hitler's rise to power may have had some anti-semitic background but they were not fanatics bent on world domination and the elimination or slavery of certain non German peoples.

Today in the mess we call Africa, where colonial goverments drew lines on a map and put tribes with hundreds of years of problems with each other in the same country, the average person was not bent on genocide but many of them have gotten caught up in the mob.

Use the same thoughts for the old Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Iraq and other places, the fanatic is dominating many parts of the Muslim world while the average person keeps himself silent.

Could it happen in the U.S.? I think yes, and I see two possibilities. Right wing Christian fanatics imposing their will on the population someday.
Also, more and more government scares based on terrorism to the point where the average person might see his neighbor just taken away and never heard from again.
Actually our freedoms have been quickly eroding under the Bush administration and if we head into a severe economic downturn you might start thinking about Weimar Germany. The Christian right, combined with a freedom grabing government might just put the blame for everything on recent immigrants for stealing jobs and putting stress on the welfare system to the point where they may be forced to leave or put into "camps".

The one good thing we have going for us is just how much diversity we actually do have. There are so many large minority groups and that makes it harder to single out individual groups.

ihate17

Well spoken. And, yes, I do believe it can, and might, happen here. And if I had lived in Germany back in the day, I would probably have been silent. I hope I would have been part of the underground fighting for what was right; I doubt that I would have been one of the courageous who stood up publicly, spoke the truth, and was executed for it (although I hope I would).

[Automatic Monkey]

Originally Posted by ihate17

Aslan
How often have wishes of the average person been shoved so deep underground by fanatical groups that the average person has no voice, no power at all and one day he just gets caught up on one side or the other.

The vast majority of people in this world, of any religion or nationality, just really want to survive, improve things for their familiesl, live in peace and die of old age with loved ones nearby. There is no lobby, no political party and few if any politicians backing this today.
The average German before and during Hitler's rise to power may have had some anti-semitic background but they were not fanatics bent on world domination and the elimination or slavery of certain non German peoples.

Today in the mess we call Africa, where colonial goverments drew lines on a map and put tribes with hundreds of years of problems with each other in the same country, the average person was not bent on genocide but many of them have gotten caught up in the mob.

Use the same thoughts for the old Soviet Union, Yugoslavia, Iraq and other places, the fanatic is dominating many parts of the Muslim world while the average person keeps himself silent.

Could it happen in the U.S.? I think yes, and I see two possibilities. Right wing Christian fanatics imposing their will on the population someday.
Also, more and more government scares based on terrorism to the point where the average person might see his neighbor just taken away and never heard from again.
Actually our freedoms have been quickly eroding under the Bush administration and if we head into a severe economic downturn you might start thinking about Weimar Germany. The Christian right, combined with a freedom grabing government might just put the blame for everything on recent immigrants for stealing jobs and putting stress on the welfare system to the point where they may be forced to leave or put into "camps".

The one good thing we have going for us is just how much diversity we actually do have. There are so many large minority groups and that makes it harder to single out individual groups.

ihate17

Part of me would like very much to believe that a Muslim wants the same things I want, to live in peace and freedom, but I know that would be a delusion.

East is East and West is West, and these things that we consider non-optional parts of a free society-

• Freedom of religion
• Secular government
• Freedom of speech and press
• Rule of law as opposed to rule of men
• The constitutional republic

-are Western ideas that are considered follies and heresies in Eastern culture. Asking Muslim societies to tolerate these is akin to asking Chinese to give up Confucian ethics or asking Amerinds to give up shamanism. It'll never happen, and we have no right to expect it to happen. Confucianism and shamanism are no threat to anyone by their nature, but expansionism, mandatory conversion or submission, and integration of religion with government are inextricable parts of Islamic society, and fully incompatible with Western society.

Being we are no longer able to separate East from West with physical and economic distance, we are left with a choice: allow the aggressive Islamic world to subjugate us, or fight back and either force Islam to change its ways for its own survival, or destroy it.

[aslan]

Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey

Part of me would like very much to believe that a Muslim wants the same things I want, to live in peace and freedom, but I know that would be a delusion.

East is East and West is West, and these things that we consider non-optional parts of a free society-

• Freedom of religion
• Secular government
• Freedom of speech and press
• Rule of law as opposed to rule of men
• The constitutional republic

-are Western ideas that are considered follies and heresies in Eastern culture. Asking Muslim societies to tolerate these is akin to asking Chinese to give up Confucian ethics or asking Amerinds to give up shamanism. It'll never happen, and we have no right to expect it to happen. Confucianism and shamanism are no threat to anyone by their nature, but expansionism, mandatory conversion or submission, and integration of religion with government are inextricable parts of Islamic society, and fully incompatible with Western society.

Being we are no longer able to separate East from West with physical and economic distance, we are left with a choice: allow the aggressive Islamic world to subjugate us, or fight back and either force Islam to change its ways for its own survival, or destroy it.

Auto

These are commonly held Western beliefs, but since Ottoman, where has the expansionism been? And are we talking about Muslims as individuals or Muslims who are under a state government that is dominated by radicals? I know plenty of Muslims and none have ever tried to convert me, none have tried to subjugate me. I believe you are talking about Muslim states that are led by radicals, not the people individually.

Now what about Muslims who live in America. I do suppose if they were the majority , they would try to get their religion to dominate. Christians have been doing that in America since it began, and they find it hard to tolerate outsiders. We see these issues everyday. Many Americans argue that this is a Christian nation. Christian nation? I thought it was designed to be a secular nation that tolerated all points of view so long as they were not destructive. Muslims would have a long way to go to make Islam our state religion because of all the obstacles we have created to prevent such from hapening, but if they were the majority, our system would allow a constitutional amendment to change even a basic principle I suppose. Of course by then we would already be a Muslim state by and large. Yes, they want the whole world to be Muslim, and yes, Christians want the whole world to be Christian. Believe me if there were 200,000,000 million Catholics in this country, we would be having more religios provessions down our streets, more celebrations of Catholic saints and events, more politics that were pushing for legislating Catholic morality, more toeration for Christian expression in political and secular situations, etc. ...well, you get the idea. The same would go for any sect if they had the numbers to back them up.

I'm just not afraid of Muslims taking over America simply by living here. It's going to take an awful lot of them to pull it off. Meanwhile there is a lot of competition for majority here. It's much more likely that we will be a Spanish dominated society before we become a Muslim one. Maybe Spanish immigration, legal and illegal, is our salvation. After all, they do share our Western roots and much of its culture, plus they have enriched it with the native cultures of Central and South America. America is still an experiment. Let's see where it takes us. I do believe we can all work it out in the long haul. And the competition is perhaps a good thing. Maybe the best ideas of all the cultures that collide here will make America an even better place to live than it already is.

[aslan]

Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey

Part of me would like very much to believe that a Muslim wants the same things I want, to live in peace and freedom, but I know that would be a delusion.

East is East and West is West, and these things that we consider non-optional parts of a free society-

• Freedom of religion
• Secular government
• Freedom of speech and press
• Rule of law as opposed to rule of men
• The constitutional republic

-are Western ideas that are considered follies and heresies in Eastern culture. Asking Muslim societies to tolerate these is akin to asking Chinese to give up Confucian ethics or asking Amerinds to give up shamanism. It'll never happen, and we have no right to expect it to happen. Confucianism and shamanism are no threat to anyone by their nature, but expansionism, mandatory conversion or submission, and integration of religion with government are inextricable parts of Islamic society, and fully incompatible with Western society.

Being we are no longer able to separate East from West with physical and economic distance, we are left with a choice: allow the aggressive Islamic world to subjugate us, or fight back and either force Islam to change its ways for its own survival, or destroy it.

Auto

These are commonly held Western beliefs, but since Ottoman, where has the expansionism been? And are we talking about Muslims as individuals or Muslims who are under a state government that is dominated by radicals? I know plenty of Muslims and none have ever tried to convert me, none have tried to subjugate me. I believe you are talking about Muslim states that are led by radicals, not the people individually.

Now what about Muslims who live in America. I do suppose if they were the majority , they would try to get their religion to dominate. Christians have been doing that in America since it began, and they find it hard to tolerate outsiders. We see these issues everyday. Many Americans argue that this is a Christian nation. Christian nation? I thought it was designed to be a secular nation that tolerated all points of view so long as they were not destructive. Muslims would have a long way to go to make Islam our state religion because of all the obstacles we have created to prevent such from hapening, but if they were the majority, our system would allow a constitutional amendment to change even a basic principle I suppose. Of course by then we would already be a Muslim state by and large. Yes, they want the whole world to be Muslim, and yes, Christians want the whole world to be Christian. Believe me if there were 200,000,000 million Catholics in this country, we would be having more religios provessions down our streets, more celebrations of Catholic saints and events, more politics that were pushing for legislating Catholic morality, more toeration for Christian expression in political and secular situations, etc. ...well, you get the idea. The same would go for any sect if they had the numbers to back them up.

I'm just not afraid of Muslims taking over America simply by living here. It's going to take an awful lot of them to pull it off. Meanwhile there is a lot of competition for majority here. It's much more likely that we will be a Spanish dominated society before we become a Muslim one. Maybe Spanish immigration, legal and illegal, is our salvation. After all, they do share our Western roots and much of its culture, plus they have enriched it with the native cultures of Central and South America. America is still an experiment. Let's see where it takes us. I do believe we can all work it out in the long haul. And the competition is perhaps a good thing. Maybe the best ideas of all the cultures that collide here will make America an even better place to live than it already is.

[moo321]

I think we all may be mis-characterizing Muslims. I have studied Islam a little, and I know that for most of its history, we were the aggressors. I think a lot of the problems today stem from US foreign policy, and from anti-semitism on the part of Muslims. If the US got out of the Middle East, and the Arab countries left Israel alone, I don't think there would be a conflict on the scale we see today.

[Automatic Monkey]

Originally Posted by moo321

I think we all may be mis-characterizing Muslims. I have studied Islam a little, and I know that for most of its history, we were the aggressors. I think a lot of the problems today stem from US foreign policy, and from anti-semitism on the part of Muslims. If the US got out of the Middle East, and the Arab countries left Israel alone, I don't think there would be a conflict on the scale we see today.

If the Arabs left Israel (and other friendly nations) alone, there would be no need for US military involvement in the Middle East.

When we had troops in Lebanon (at the request of the Lebanese government), it was to protect civilians from religion-based massacres and prevent missile attacks on Israel. That's not aggressive. When we invaded Iraq in 1991, it was in response to Iraq's annexation of our friend Kuwait. That's not aggressive. We have forces in Saudi Arabia at the request of the Saudi government, to protect it against al-Qaeda. Not aggressive. We invaded Iraq in 2002 to enforce the provisions of the armistice signed with Iraq in 1991, which they were blatantly violating. Somewhat aggressive, but only aggressive enforcement of a treaty. We remain there at the request of the now-democratically elected Iraqi government, which begs us to stay and protect them against aggressive terrorists. How is that aggressive?

The US has never been an aggressor in the Middle East, or anywhere beyond our own continent. There's no need for it and it would have no benefit for us.

Aslan- re: Islamic expansionism: Islam hasn't been overtly expansionist for a while because it has been unable to, but it has been covertly expanding and is ready to switch to overt. There are sections of many Western cities where sharia law is de facto observed. Places where a woman walking with her head uncovered is in physical danger. We are starting to see it in the US, where Muslim cab drivers refuse to carry passengers who have alcohol (and get away with it) and Muslim supermarket clerks refuse to ring up customers' pork (and get away with it.) These things have a way of becoming enshrined in law and at the rate we are going, in a few years it will be illegal to dismiss such a clerk. Accommodating Islamofascist beliefs will soon be considered part of civil rights in the US, unless we start fighting back.

[zengrifter]

Originally Posted by Automatic Monkey

Islamofascist

"Islamofacist!" (versus Christo-Jihadist!)

Btw, who was the original aggressor? Wasn't the Christian Crusades? zg