<OT> -- WAY OT Re: So it goes . . .

[Andrew L. Gould]

On Wednesday 07 April 2004 03:18 pm, Roger Oberholtzer wrote:
> On Wed, 2004-04-07 at 20:18, Michael Hipp wrote:
> > Condon Thomas A KPWA wrote:
> > > David,
> > >
> > > I appreciate the (way off topic) essay on fighting terrorism.
> > >
> > >>I know many think that singling out Muslims is not kosher,
> > >>but keep this
> > >>in mind:
> > >>by Rick Mathes
> > >>
> > >>>Last month I attended my annual training session that's required for
> > >>>maintaining my state prison security clearance. During the training
> > >>
> > >>session
> > >>
> > >>>there was a presentation by three speakers representing the Roman
> > >>
> > >>Catholic,...
> > >
> > > <SNIP>
> > >
> > > Please go to the Snopes site and read on the Islamic legend.  It has
> > > some basis, but is not factual.
> > >
> > > http://www.snopes.com/politics/religion/allah.asp
> >
> > Note that that snopes article can only directly say that the event  in
> > question was wrong, its feeble attempt to refute the notion of "jihad"
> > just doesn't hold water.
> >
> > There are a few facts that can't be argued with:
> > - Muslims do routinely kill non-Muslims for no particular reason.
> > - Muslims routinely commit suicide in the process.
> > - These events take place all over the world in essentially all of the
> > various factions of the religion.
> > - Those who purport to speak for Islam routinely call for the killing of
> > non-believers.
> > - No Muslim publicly disagrees with these "spokesmen" or offers a
> > different message.
> > - No Muslim seems to be bothered that these "spokesmen" claim to
> > represent all of Islam.
> > - When Muslims kill non-believers, no other Muslims condemn the act.
> > - When Muslims kill non-believers, Muslims all over the world routinely
> > cheer, take to the streets in celebration, and go on global television
> > to bless the event.
> > - The stewards of various Mosques all over the world routinely raise
> > funds, provide services to, and even give direct assistance to Muslims
> > whose stated purpose is the killing of non-believers.
> >
> > (Did I miss anything?)
> >
> > George Rodham-Bush may think Islam is a religion of peace. But no other
> > thinking person does.
> >
> > Until these alleged billions of peaceful, tolerant Muslims start doing
> > something about their very violent and hateful brethren, then I see no
> > realistic option but to assume they at least tacitly support it. To-date
> > they have, in the entirety, been utterly silent.
>
> A truly deafening silence. Probably because your run-of-the-mill Moslem
> is taught not to discuss the Koran because they are not educated to do
> so. And if they get it wrong, they will be committing a great sin.
> Either because they misquote Mohammad, or because they may lead some
> other believer astray by a mistake.
>
> Only the Iman is considered educated to the extent that he can discuss
> the Koran without making a mistake. I was in Riyadh one time watching a
> TV show from Mecca. The show was one in which people could write in and
> have their questions on Islam answered. I will never forget the answer
> to one question: A Saudi wrote in to ask why people circled the home of
> Mohammad in Mecca some set number of times. He was asking because he
> wanted to explain this to his non-Moslem friends. Well, the Iman blew
> his top. Told the guy that he had no right to discuss the Koran as he
> was not educated to do so. In fact, the whole lengthly answer was only
> this complaint, He never did answer the actual question. For a similar
> reason, it is not allowed to bring a Koran into the country, The reason
> is that there may be a mistake in it, and this could lead some follower
> to do the wrong thing.
>
> The other thing that Islam lacks (and probably why it spreads as it
> does) is that there is no central worldwide leadership. No single group
> is charged with defining Islamic beliefs, Every Iman is effectively the
> boss in his area.
>
> I truly believe that most Moslems are peaceful and dislike terrorism.
> The TV in the U.S., with its various agendas, do not show how everyone
> is acting. There was a BBC World special a week or so ago in which they
> tried to address this. They asked things like "Are you better off now
> than a year ago?" (only half felt so), and "Do you expect to be better
> off in a year from now?" (much more than half felt so - faith in the
> future still strong). Many Iraqis made an interesting point: they felt
> that many were complaining now because they could, For so long they
> could say nothing in public. Now they feel it is almost their duty to
> exercise this recent freedom. They are also complaining so that whatever
> gets set up will consider their views. Squeaky wheel and all. For most
> it did not seem lost on them that the fact that they could complain is
> in itself something. The BBC went on to tell that there are some hundred
> newspapers in Iraq now, all with different vies of things - a healthy
> sign. A year ago there were a handful. All with similar things to say.
>
> Has this sort of thing been reported in the US press?

No.  We have free press here -- not just freedom from governmental 
interference, but freedom from professional standards of unbiased reporting.  
Basically, ratings rule.