The Koran -- Serious business.

[Faris]

oh it started already, neo and someone, debating on an issue..

"its true!" "its false!" "its true!" "its false!"

for another 10 pages, then it dies out.

[ZarakiKujata]

YouTube - An Atheist Meets God

brilliant haha.

his videos are so funni.

[Neosutra]

Neo, assuming you're being sincere - why did you have to ASK me whether I was an American?

That's what I'm upset about. Not that you consistently miss my posts even though I've been replying to you for the past couple of pages.

And you are straw manning to make your arguments.

I'm not going to 'counter' your factual observations (about the significance of the Religious Right in the US for example or that Islamic terrorism exists) - because I happen to agree with them. I have focused on your ASSERTIONS.

And those assertions are evidenced by the inanely idiotic thread you made after I spoke of 'moderate' Muslims.

You then proceeded to make a thread about police doing whatever to whoever because of Islam and said 'where are the moderates!?' or something to that effect.

So that's moderate to you I assume?

This is JUST what people were saying about Kuya.

He made a thread with a loaded title and a loaded opening statement.

A lot of truth but how he presented it was propagandistic.

This is not semantics. Look up what that word means. (<- this is semantics now)

This is about your rhetoric. How you're presenting your argument. Because within your argument you list bad things religion does - but then you compare a Muslim to an alcoholic AFTER I ask - rhetorically - whether a Muslim is a Muslim if he denounces terrorism.

Something doesnt become propaganda just because you are arguing one side of the issue. Spend less time getting upset that I am generalizing religious people and actually defend your points.

You havent really addressed my point that the religious moderates do just as much harm as the extremist.

[Elvis]

Something doesnt become propaganda just because you are arguing one side of the issue. Spend less time getting upset that I am generalizing religious people and actually defend your points.

You havent really addressed my point that the religious moderates do just as much harm as the extremist.

I have defended my points. You don't even know what your own argument is - I think you've flipped flopped a couple times across this thread and the one you made yourself.

My argument has always been that Islamic fundamentalism exists. I do not blame Islam exclusively because the majority of Muslims do not carry out terrorism and oppose terrorism (based on the book I cited in response to Zakaria(sp) a few pages back).

I have said already that I accept some of your factual observations but reject your conclusions based on those facts.

Your argument is narrow and *typical* of these kinds of debates. I've demonstrated the parallel between your dishonest rhetoric and that which Kuya implemented in his 'America tortures blah blah' thread. (Even though Kuya is much more understandable since he did not conflate American foreign policy with the whole of the abstraction known as 'America'.)

And once again, look up the definition of the word propaganda.

Propaganda can be based on a truth. The distinction is intellectual dishonesty.

Like for example a pro-Lifer waving a picture of an aborted fetus while shouting bloody murder outside an abortion clinic is appealing to emotion. Propaganda is a logical fallacy.

The point is sincerity, language, framing. However, there could be lots of truth in the substance.

And you never proved that 'moderate' Muslims were not really 'moderate'.

You're like a little kid Neo. One huge generalization after another. And then you say the burden of proof is on me? I guess I could play this stupid game and suggest you read the book I referenced.

But this is just common sense. You apply unrealistic standards to Muslims (everywhere).

[Neosutra]

Please give me more than "you're argument is wrong".

Which part of my declaration that moderate religious folks cause just as much harm (or more) than extremist is incorrect? And how exactly am I "not knowing my own point" when I have stated that EXACT point 7 times in the last 2 pages.

And if you want to go down the insult path, we can dance. But I think you want to keep it civil.

I DO GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THE CRAZY EXTREMIST (capitalizing because you aren't quite smart enough to catch this point yet). It isnt the clinic bombers that scare me, it is the guys that vote Bush because "god told them too".

Now answer my question. Do you not believe that the moderates do more harm via political and social influence than the extremist do? How much damage is done to America by convincing half of them that evolution is a lie? That the world is 5000 years old? That gays are "evil"?

Posting "you just don't get it neo" isn't winning the argument for you, it is just showing your own frustration.

[Correction]

And if you want to go down the insult path, we can dance. But I think you want to keep it civil.

I DO GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THE CRAZY EXTREMIST (capitalizing because you aren't quite smart enough to catch this point yet).

Classic Neo, keep it real.

[Neosutra]

Hey, he started with the insults here. Nothing wrong with a light jab back. That one wasnt even that bad >.>.

[Elvis]

Please give me more than "you're argument is wrong".

Which part of my declaration that moderate religious folks cause just as much harm (or more) than extremist is incorrect? And how exactly am I "not knowing my own point" when I have stated that EXACT point 7 times in the last 2 pages.

And if you want to go down the insult path, we can dance. But I think you want to keep it civil.

I DO GIVE A FUCK ABOUT THE CRAZY EXTREMIST (capitalizing because you aren't quite smart enough to catch this point yet). It isnt the clinic bombers that scare me, it is the guys that vote Bush because "god told them too".

Now answer my question. Do you not believe that the moderates do more harm via political and social influence than the extremist do? How much damage is done to America by convincing half of them that evolution is a lie? That the world is 5000 years old? That gays are "evil"?

Posting "you just don't get it neo" isn't winning the argument for you, it is just showing your own frustration.

This is the book I mentioned BTW:

Amazon.com: Who Speaks For Islam?: What a Billion Muslims Really Think (9781595620170): John L. Esposito, Dalia Mogahed: Books

Let me preface my comments by saying this - I am not being facetious when I call you a 'kid'. You do argue like one.

Let's just go over the things you've said in this thread thus far. I'll just stop it at page 4 (I think or maybe it's 5).

Did you really just get upset that news like this was publisized because it would cause a bad reaction on the already bad perception of muslims Elvis? How about stop doing retarded mass murder/violent actions and end the bad publicity yourself?

No mention of moderate Muslims being more dangerous than extremists. 2nd time you assume I'm was Muslim. The first time was in a similar thread that turned into a discussion about Islam (original topic was about African Christians burning people alive for thinking they were witches).

You see where you challenge me to "stop doing retarded mass murder/violent actions" to fix supposedly "my" image as a Muslim? Real civil and non-insulting, Neo. A) I'm not a Muslim which you'll find out later but then forget. B) Even if I was a Muslim I do not have to stand trial for what an extremist has done. All Muslims are NOT THE SAME. Oh wait, you don't believe that though.

Here's something you said (directed at Leif) in the 'America tortures kid' thread:

Man, what the fuck is wrong with you.

I'm in those convoys and I can say this shit is fucked up. This doesnt represent the country I fight for, it doesnt make me or my troops safer, and people like you need to drink a large glass of clorox.

Yea. So if I called you a child torturer because you're an American soldier and torture has become institutionalized in the American army (as per what we now know through by and large independent media and also personal testimonies from Winter Soldier Iraq and SgtPayne here) - how would you feel? This is assuming I was a Muslim in the first place.

You also go on to say that the torture does not represent America. Because America is more than just it's FOREIGN POLICY, right?

And I agree. The United States was FOUNDED on Enlightenment values that have left a legacy of freedom and liberty (in the non-'hummer driving'-'Gatorade drinking', 'American Gladiator watching', 'Xbox Live-level intellect', douchebag-'Team America' kind of way) in this country.

However, these values existed right from the get-go alongside terrible atrocities and injustices. We had slavery. We're here because the Native American's are on reservations and shitty ones at that. We discriminated against Blacks. We didn't give women the right to vote.

When we originally said 'All men Created equal' blah blah - we meant all WHITE landowning men.

These things changed over time. Our democracy has changed over time.

This is what Kuya exudes in his posts BTW. I have never once seen him imply that America - as a whole, the good stuff too - was overall 'bad'. I never got that impression from him. And if he is challenged to make the distinction he will.

My original reply to you:

Spoiler: show

You misunderstood my post.

First off, I am not upset with the subject matter of the thread. I am not upset this story is publicized.

I am upset with how it is presented. This is about relativeness. How the crimes of one faith (this includes people OF a faith committing crimes, if their faith defines them - and we saw this in a profound way with the Catholic priests and pedophilia) are covered as opposed to another.

My entire post was about perceptions. I went into great detail about this point. I gave examples about my own POV bias and referenced the political blog I admire the most taking an ideological 'breather' as it were.

I was not responding to the thread 'itself'. I was responding to Bingbong AND Seppuku.

Bingbong - because he asked about a source for the murder of a Muslim-looking man, post-9/11.

Seppuku (I did not specify I was responding to him tho) - because he said 'why doesn't Kuya post in these kind of threads'.

And that is my point. 'These' kind of threads are discussed here more often than let's say - pedophilia in the Orthodox Jewish community (superficial statement). I think Christians get it worse than Muslims but it's a different context.

You have a serious problem with reading comprehension if you think I'm upset with the CONTENT of the news article or the fact that it is news.

I'm specifically talking about the blog-like nature of certain political discussions in the General forum.

I stick to ONE thread when I post about Israel-Palestine.

Why? Because I know it would piss people off who get pissed off easy on the Internets if I physically made a new thread about each fucked up thing Israel does to the Palestinians.

I mean, I spelled this out CLEARLY in my post, Neo. I said that the physical perception of this forum section CAN give a person a propagandistic view of a particular topic if that topic is EVERYWHERE to be seen.

It's the same grievance people had against Kuya for his criticisms of American foreign policy. It wasn't that the content was disagreeable (although some were dissenting on the content, like Leif and guitarman I think) - it was the way the news item was presented.

EDIT from the future me:
---
Example of someone agreeing with Kuya's opinions but not his framing/rhetoric:

I actually agree with most of what he says, I just don't see the point of starting a propaganda campaign on a gaming forum.

---

Now, compare the way Kuya opened up discussion on that subject to the way this topic has been opened up. People have been much more facetious. I don't think Kuya was even trying to be funny - he was just using loaded language (even though I agree w/ his conclusions).

Again, I am not upset that this is news.

Pointing out other fanatics and radicals doesnt change the fact that Islamic extremists are a growing group of crazies over there, and I would be ashamed to be a Muslim these days. Take responsibility for your religion and start standing up to these people.

No mention of moderate Muslims being more dangerous than extremists. 3rd time you assumed I was Muslim.

My original reply to you:

Spoiler: show

Islam is not a monolith.

Muslims in Indonesia are not all the same. Muslims in Indonesia versus Saudia Arabia are not all the same.

Blah blah blah.

You're very narrow-minded. There are different sects in Islam. There are non-religious factors that influence how people interpret Islam. Geopolitics/etc.

Why should a Muslim living in America, obeying the law, and blah blah feel ASHAMED to be a Muslim because a religious fanatic did something fanatical?

Only a weak-minded person - who lets middle-school level intellectualism get to them - would assume that they have to be on trial for what Osama bin Laden has done.

You can be critical of your faith. You can be critical of others within your faith.

You do not have to be ashamed.

Here was your 'rebuttal':

Ah yes, back to the "its not the religion that is to blame, it is the people!". Nothing in Islam is actually influencing any of this, people are just "misinterpreting" the literature.

Pure straw man. You do this over and over again throughout the thread and I bring it up. When I do - you protest though. Like I said, you don't even know what you've been saying.

'Misinterpreting' implies that there is one true meaning or a threshold for what could be considered an 'acceptable' meaning. What I have said is:

You're very narrow-minded. There are different sects in Islam. There are non-religious factors that influence how people interpret Islam. Geopolitics/etc.

Why should a Muslim living in America, obeying the law, and blah blah feel ASHAMED to be a Muslim because a religious fanatic did something fanatical?

I never said there was one true meaning and that the extremists misunderstood it.

I said they are religious extremists. This implies that ISLAM IS TO BLAME AS WELL. And it is - I never ONCE said anywhere on this forum that Islam is a 'religion of peace' or perfectly innocent.

As I said - you straw manned my argument (repeatedly).

I never really grouped them all together, I just wanted to make sure you werent claiming these continued extremist acts were only regional/tribal influences and not at least partially to blame on Islam itself.

Really? Read the above quotes from yourself. You often imply they are all the same. In some cases you are more explicit. And you almost always employ a straw man/gross generalization/appeal to sympathy or disgust to conflate the fringe w/ the majority (in this case the 'moderates' - which you imply you understand).

And I never said tribal/regional blah was the sole cause of Islamic terrorism.

The "moderate majority" doesnt seem too moderate either, at least the middle eastern ones (which make up a large percentage of the sect).

This is your 'moderate Muslims are not moderate' argument in all it's glory.

No substantiated argument. Just pure gross generalization. It's hysterical actually. You pass yourself off as some kind of expert Islamic scholar who knows the Arab and Islamic world well.

The 'moderates' are not really 'moderates'? This is a literal slippery slope.

See, the 'moderates' aren't actually 'moderaaawhoooooooaaaaaaa...JIHAD MOTHERFUCKER!!!11'

Since when did Pakistan get invaded by US?

And this shit has been going on since the beginning of your religion. You cant tell me that it doesnt encourage these actions in anyone without a reasonable education (and even sometimes with the education).

The above post was in response to my comments on the Iraq War. I went on about essentially blowback. I tried to humanize the civilian population of Iraq (the example I was using) by saying that people over there who carry out terrorism might just want revenge against us for what 'we' did to 'them'.

This is just human nature in some cases. I never said or implied that Islam was innocent. (Time and time again I reiterate this point.)

When I posted that comment I was going to reference a lyric from Immortal Technique about 9/11 and the Iraq War. He is in the Truther camp and all that. I don't get into that stuff but the song lyric stuck with me because I thought it was true. You don't have to agree with his politics to acknowledge the validity of what he is saying either:

They say the rebels in Iraq still fight for Saddam
But that's bullshit, I'll show you why it's totally wrong
Cuz if another country invaded the hood tonight
It'd be warfare through Harlem, and Washington Heights
I wouldn't be fightin' for Bush or White America's dream
I'd be fightin' for my people's survival and self-esteem
I wouldn't fight for racist churches from the south, my nigga
I'd be fightin' to keep the occupation out, my nigga
You ever clock someone who talk shit, or look at you wrong?
Imagine if they shot at you, and was rapin' your moms

People can disagree w/ his language when he says 'White America' and yada yada but the basic point is that WE are humanized. We can have empathy with one another. We know each other. And we know that if people are pissed enough in this country to shoot up a school or a club over anything ranging from petty drama to psychological issues - then it's highly probable that we'd be very violent under a brutal military occupation.

Think of the Iraqis who get shot up 'accidentally' (I put it in quotes because technically it IS accidental, but I also think people are just bat-shit nervous PLUS war just dehumanizes 'the other') because of some miscommunication at a checkpoint.

That happened to an Iraqi women. She was walking towards a solder. He told her to stop - I believe she did - but she's deaf. She began to go for her papers or something and he shot her in the stomach. Fucked up her kidneys and blah blah. Not sure what happened to her but that stuff happens a lot and it's all documented.

The testimonies from Winter Soldier exhibited similar accounts.

My basic point overall was to humanize the Iraq people. To show that they too can get fucking pissed off when one of their own dies. And that many may want to fight us out of anger and revenge.

There were people who enlisted because of 9/11. Young people are often idealistic and they are still forming their opinions about the world - so it's likely that the views we have when we're young will change over time as we physically amass more information?

I think that's obvious.

Now what was your reply again? I didn't go into as much detail as I did just now but the thrust of my argument was intact in the original post.

And this shit has been going on since the beginning of your religion. You cant tell me that it doesnt encourage these actions in anyone without a reasonable education (and even sometimes with the education).

My original post that I paraphrased above before quoting Neo again:

Spoiler: show

Let's step back a second. One example. Very superficial but you decide if I'm off-base here.

Iraq was not Islamic in the Saudi Arabia style of Islam. Iraq - like many countries in the ME - could have become a first-world country one day. It sure as hell had the resources. Saddam was a secular dictator. He was no religious fanatic.

Terrorism increased exponentially after the war.

The population wants us out of there. They despise us.

Now do they NEED religion to tell them to despise us? Or are they similar to us in that they'd react to a foreign occupation/invasion w/ antagonism?

Do you think our country with it's own religious blah blah and gun ownership and jingoism and history would be peaceful?

Do you think 15 year old kids wouldn't get their hands on weapons and fire them off at the occupying army?

We apply unrealistic standards to others. Religion is a very EASY way to attack an entire people.

Via Islam, the Arabs are just one monolithic blob. They are all the same. They 'aren't really moderate'. They hate irrationally. They have no legitimate grievances. Anything they do is because they're all under mind control.

That's the impression I'm getting from you. I'm sure I'm inaccurate because what I said above is a straw man - HOWEVER, you believe it's all Islam. You believe all Muslims should be "ashamed" by the actions of a minority of Muslims - extremists.

You cannot even fathom what WE would do if the tables were turned.

Again, where do I excuse Islam? I simply try humanize 'the other'.

That's it for now. You are a goldmine Neo. I have not insulted you but I have been flippant in my dismissal of your arguments.

But it's not superficial - it's because I have actually read your posts. And there is not much going on there.

I'll deal with your question on 'moderate' Muslims later. You ask me to answer your question on 'moderate Muslims' as if I have been avoiding you; as if you have asked me this question time and time again and I refuse (hence the tone of your comment indicated by the 'Now, answer me this blah blah blah') - which is quite revealing of you sincerity since 5 pages into this thread you didn't know what you were even saying.

[ZarakiKujata]

Honestly afraid to drop back into this discussion now that I'm done w/ class work/classes.

[Neosutra]

To be clear, when I stated "Stop doing these actions and end the bad publicity yourself", I wasnt directing that towards you (you had already stated you were atheist/hindu on the previous page), I was more directing it towards the muslim community.

And yes, one of the reasons I get upset with us torturing is because it DOES represent my actions as a whole when MY government (or my religion in the other case) does it. When my government tortures people, it is just as bad as me doing it, and I am just as guilty for letting it happen.

You just seem to be really desperate to shift them blame to only the radicals. The moderates are just as bad or worse. The "moderates" in America were the ones arguing that torture was "ok" as long as it defended our freedoms. It wasnt the extremists that bound and gagged and tortured those people, it was the moderates just "doing their job".

[Elvis]

To be clear, when I stated "Stop doing these actions and end the bad publicity yourself", I wasnt directing that towards you (you had already stated you were atheist/hindu on the previous page), I was more directing it towards the muslim community.

No, you!

Neo, do yourself a favor and read the first 4 pages of this thread over again. Specifically read YOUR comments.

You made these three comments (2 on page 3 and 1 on page 4) before I had to explain my background (for a second time overall):

1 )

Did you really just get upset that news like this was publisized because it would cause a bad reaction on the already bad perception of muslims Elvis? How about stop doing retarded mass murder/violent actions and end the bad publicity yourself?

2 )

Pointing out other fanatics and radicals doesnt change the fact that Islamic extremists are a growing group of crazies over there, and I would be ashamed to be a Muslim these days. Take responsibility for your religion and start standing up to these people.

3 )

Since when did Pakistan get invaded by US?

And this shit has been going on since the beginning of your religion. You cant tell me that it doesnt encourage these actions in anyone without a reasonable education (and even sometimes with the education).

#3 was followed by my explanation.

I wasnt directing that towards you.

I do not know what you're thinking so I will base my views on the things you say - which will encompass an observation of your tone/rhetoric and the context of your comments.

And yes, one of the reasons I get upset with us torturing is because it DOES represent my actions as a whole when MY government (or my religion in the other case) does it. When my government tortures people, it is just as bad as me doing it, and I am just as guilty for letting it happen.

Except the point is that those people do not represent you personally. And you said as much. The meaning was clear. Now you're saying (revised meaning) their behavior reflects on you essentially - I agree.

They may wear an American uniform - and thus are ambassadors of our country and a representation of a part of us - the State primarily IMO.

The President represents me - institutionally. However he does not represent my point of view/my morality/etc.

Similarly those soldiers do not represent your morality and your politics.

And that was the context of what *I* was saying about Muslims who disprove of extremist Muslims.

I said that you can be CRITICAL OF YOUR RELIGION and not 'ashamed'. You can be critical of the extremists but not have to stand on trial for them - AND THAT is the exact wording I would use:

"...stand on trial for them"

This is not a discussion. This is YOU, Neo, putting the Islamic world on trial and whoever happens to either BE Muslim (Firas) or defends the opposing view (myself). That explains your rhetoric because the phrase I'm talking about is ALL about tone and context.

You just seem to be really desperate to shift them blame to only the radicals. The moderates are just as bad or worse. The "moderates" in America were the ones arguing that torture was "ok" as long as it defended our freedoms.

Your 'moderate' Muslim argument was like a sentence long, Neo. Who are you kidding? You neither defined who is a 'moderate' Muslim nor why they are 'not really' 'moderate'. You're drowning in your own shallowness (see what I did thar?).

This discussion has been about the extremists. Somewhere along the line you switched gears to conflate the extremists w/ the moderates. You did this while saying you weren't generalizing ALL Muslims.

My latest rebuttal (before this one) still stands. You have no focused argument - and you keep slippery sloping/straw manning.

[Neosutra]

Yes, they DO represent me personally when they commit these acts. Man up and take responsibility.

I as a member of a group take responsibility for the actions of that group (not always the case, but as a country/religion/soldier, yes). And we are SPECIFICALLY talking about the negative effects of the "moderates", whom do a LOT more damage than the extremist.

I just pointed out the extremist because they are easy targets and typically even the moderate theists go "ya that is a bit crazy". But in reality, they are just the sharp edges to the long sword that is the true weapon of religious oppression.

And please, define a moderate muslim for me.

[Elvis]

Yes, they DO represent me personally when they commit these acts. Man up and take responsibility.

I as a member of a group take responsibility for the actions of that group (not always the case, but as a country/religion/soldier, yes). And we are SPECIFICALLY talking about the negative effects of the "moderates", whom do a LOT more damage than the extremist.

I just pointed out the extremist because they are easy targets and typically even the moderate theists go "ya that is a bit crazy". But in reality, they are just the sharp edges to the long sword that is the true weapon of religious oppression.

And please, define a moderate muslim for me.

Then why did you say to Leif:

Man, what the fuck is wrong with you.

I'm in those convoys and I can say this shit is fucked up. This doesnt represent the country I fight for, it doesnt make me or my troops safer, and people like you need to drink a large glass of clorox.

Oh wait, then you say:

I as a member of a group take responsibility for the actions of that group (not always the case, but as a country/religion/soldier, yes).

This is called weasel-wording or flip-flopping.

The things you do - that I do not agree with morally or politically - do NOT represent MY morals or politics.

They may REFLECT upon me. Meaning I may take the heat for it - but that does not mean I have to answer for it.

Furthermore, if someone in my 'group' commits a crime I should report them - but I do not have to go to jail with them. I didn't commit the crime.

Muslims who obey the law and are civil and respectful of others do not have to STAND TRIAL for extremist Muslims - and like I said, THAT phrase ("stand trial") is how you're framing this entire discussion.

No, peaceful Muslims do not have to 'answer' for what the extremists have done. You can flip flop endlessly but your original comments betray your recent ones.

The burden of proof is on you Neo. You're the one making grand sweeping generalizations when you say 'moderate Muslims' aren't really 'moderate'.

I don't have to answer you. You have to SUPPORT your own argument. But you can't - because it's based on zilch.

[Neosutra]

No, it is called me stating that I didn't believe those actions represented the country I was fighting for. It was however the way we presented ourselves. There is a difference between stating our nation "stands" for certain actions, and stating our nation is responsible for actions that violate those principles.

And there is no burden of proof. I just want your definition of a "moderate" muslim. I didnt say no muslim was a moderate you dumbass, I said that moderates were just as bad.

[Elvis]

No, it is called me stating that I didn't believe those actions represented the country I was fighting for. It was however the way we presented ourselves. There is a difference between stating our nation "stands" for certain actions, and stating our nation is responsible for actions that violate those principles.

Hallelujah! You're finally explaining yourself honestly and not simply trying to 'win' the debate.

Like I said on page 3 or 4 (in between you calling me a Muslim) - the distinction is that a Muslim can be critical of their religion and of those who are committing terrorism WITHOUT being ashamed. That's humanly possible. I am not ashamed to be an American when I think of our unconditional support for the continued colonization of what remains of Historic Palestine. I have no control over that. I understand that a President's options are limited by the institutional pressures set forth by the various forces in our community that have the most political capital (like the military industrial complex).

I don't feel ashamed because I have my own vision of what 'America' means. To me, America is not simply our foreign policy. I had no say in any of that. However, I understand that my President is MY PRESIDENT - this is an INSTITUTIONAL distinction. Not MORAL or POLITICAL. I did not vote for Bush. I voted for Obama however - but even then, he's not going to represent my political views. He has to deal with the various lobbies and vested interest and blah blah that limit what HE himself can do as an individual.

I do not approve of these policies.

HOWEVER - as I said 2 posts ago, the actions of your 'group' can reflect upon you. That does not imply I am guilty alongside the people who pulled the trigger so to speak. It just means that they were ambassadors for the entity known as 'America'. And obviously they were ILLEGITIMATE ambassadors unless you accepted their behavior.

It was however the way we presented ourselves. There is a difference between stating our nation "stands" for certain actions, and stating our nation is responsible for actions that violate those principles.

I agree 110%.

The United States stands for something better than torture.

And Islam stands for something better than flying planes into a building - oh wait...

The "moderate majority" doesnt seem too moderate either, at least the middle eastern ones (which make up a large percentage of the sect).

So who makes up a religion? Moderates and extremists? What else is there? I mean what is a moderate Muslim?

Since you're our resident self-appointed expert on Islam, why don't YOU - the person who put forth that gem I quoted - explain yourself?

And there is no burden of proof. I just want your definition of a "moderate" muslim. I didnt say no muslim was a moderate you dumbass, I said that moderates were just as bad.

OH SNAP! "Dumbass" - so simple, so creative. I guess you weren't kidding when you said you'd unleash your rapist wit!

And if you want to go down the insult path, we can dance.

Sorry, Brah. Forgot yous da law.

[Neosutra]

Please get mad at me for calling you a dumbass when you followed up with insults yourself in the last 2 pages.

Perhaps I need to say what I mean in size 8 font like you do, because I dont think people will understand if I dont.

And still waiting, what is a moderate Muslim? Please enlighten me? Since I was apparently saying there are no moderates..

[Elvis]

Please get mad at me for calling you a dumbass when you followed up with insults yourself in the last 2 pages.

Perhaps I need to say what I mean in size 8 font like you do, because I dont think people will understand if I dont.

And still waiting, what is a moderate Muslim? Please enlighten me? Since I was apparently saying there are no moderates..

Excerpt from Wiki on 'burden of proof' (you say 'there is no burden of proof' - do you know understand that I didn't have to use a fancy concept like 'burden of proof' to drive the point home that YOU made an allegation and thus YOU have to substantiate it?)

The burden of proof is often associated with the Latin maxim semper necessitas probandi incumbit ei qui agit, the best translation of which seems to be: "the necessity of proof always lies with the person who lays charges."

I'm not angry you called me a dumbass Neo. I just think it's funny that you finally did so - after page after page of your nonsense, you finally encapsulated your intellectual prowess in one fell swoop:

I didnt say no muslim was a moderate you dumbass

That's right you said that 'moderate Muslims' aren't really 'moderate' -> soooooo what are they Neo, resident Islamic scholar?

P.S. :

I type stuff in huge font and bold so that you'll read it this time and not ask me if I'm a Muslim again when we eventually get to page 25.

[Neosutra]

Hi, I said the moderates were just as bad, hence the moderates do more harm than the extremist.

Do you need me to put that in size 8 font for you?

Or can your Muslim brain not fathom it?

[Elvis]

Hi, I said the moderates were just as bad, hence the moderates do more harm than the extremist.

Do you need me to put that in size 8 font for you?

Or can your Muslim brain not fathom it?

Bullshit.

This is what you said:

The "moderate majority" doesnt seem too moderate either, at least the middle eastern ones (which make up a large percentage of the sect).

Here is the statement where you are anchoring your NEW argument that 'moderates' are "just as bad" :

Which country is "our country"? Assuming you are also in the US: What would you consider regular violence? Beating of gays, abortion clinic bombings, KKK, etc?

And I am more concerned with the massive political pressure from right wing groups to curve scientific research in this coungry (stem cell research, evolution, big bang cosmology). Are you really oblivious to the VERY active efforts of such organizations as the "discovery institute" and other quack areas? Does it not offend you that our schools have to go to court to determine wether they have to teach god in the classroom right next to evolution? Does it not offend you that breakthroughs in medicine/physics are limited by funding being cut by religious conservatives?

We dont have as many religious terrorist in this country, but they religious right do just as much harm via influencing policy and lobbying against progress that scares them.

ORLY?

You never once articulated in this thread that what concerned you was the moderates becoming 'just as bad'.

You were talking about the 'right-wing' in our country (Islamista....WHOOPS! I mean America) who worry you more because they can influence lobbying and blah blah. Their power is that they are still extreme but do not carry out OVERT acts of extremism - THUS, attracting attention to themselves and THUS, becoming marginalized/put to a stop/etc.

I like that concept and it's something I agree w/ factually. That there are EXTREME elements in our society who are simply civil and polite. I consider the organized Zionist communities in the United States to be extremists.

But what did you end up doing, Neo?

You weasal worded the definition you laid out for 'moderate'.

First you defined it as right-wing. Then you dropped the right-wing and simply referred to it as 'moderates' becoming 'extremists' - when in fact your ORIGINAL meaning was that there were no moderates at all.

That's the slippery slope I was talking about.

You simply changed the wording on the next page (after the quote above) to this:

You don't have to spend half your points arguing that I am straw manning. Instead, point out where I am straw manning and counter the evidence.

I never called all religious people extremist. I stated specifically that the moderates are just as dangerous and that I feel the people that influence policy and political force are MORE dangerous then idiots that bomb clinics.

As for the born in america post, yes I missed it. Did it REALLY offend you that much that I asked what country you were from so I could understand where you are coming from?

And relax, you are getting upset over semantics, and misunderstanding what I am saying to justify your own frustration. I DO NOT THINK ALL RELIGIOUS PEOPLE ARE EXTREMIST. I do think that any amount of religion is bad for a society and even the moderates negatively influence their society (in a larger way than the extremist).

And yes Plow, what was your reasonable point? I must of missed it between the mass of bullshit.

Let's go back to the previous page just one more time for the nail in the coffin:

Which country is "our country"? Assuming you are also in the US: What would you consider regular violence? Beating of gays, abortion clinic bombings, KKK, etc?

And I am more concerned with the massive political pressure from right wing groups to curve scientific research in this coungry (stem cell research, evolution, big bang cosmology). Are you really oblivious to the VERY active efforts of such organizations as the "discovery institute" and other quack areas? Does it not offend you that our schools have to go to court to determine wether they have to teach god in the classroom right next to evolution? Does it not offend you that breakthroughs in medicine/physics are limited by funding being cut by religious conservatives?

We dont have as many religious terrorist in this country, but they religious right do just as much harm via influencing policy and lobbying against progress that scares them.

The end.

[Neosutra]

So what would be a moderate American?

Since I cant get a moderate Muslim's definition out of you.

And no, middle eastern muslims dont seem "moderate" to me. Specifically due to their treatment of women.