Originally posted by Alliance
If the pope offends everyone, people won't think he's a bigot singling out/calling for the destruction of a specific religion.The meeting would at least be symbolic. ANd you don't know if it would accomplish anything or not.
And you don't know if offending muslims accomplishes anything or not.
The situation is inflating reguardless of what the pope does or says. Sure he could go up and talk about how Christianity is just as violent and I'm sure the Muslim world wouldn't have been offended by it, but they wouldn't have been effected by it either, it wouldn't have even caught their attention.
Through criticism maybe he will reach some of the more reasonable Muslims, and if not Muslims then certainly many non-Muslims will start to see that the current situation with Islamists and their aggressive, over-sensitive ways is unacceptable.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It's 2006; those ****ing Arabs seriously need to get with it.They adapt to to technology, yet their mentality is still in 800 A.D. 😖.......
Thats what annoys me , it's a complete backwards nation that follow an archiac religion which refuses to be 'diluted' . Look at Modern bibles , those have been revised so many times it's probably 50% bullshit (Not that it isn't 100% bullshit anyway)
Originally posted by Bardock42
Err...what?And you don't know if offending muslims accomplishes anything or not.
Generally, offending people only sitrs them into action against you.
Originally posted by Quiero Mota
It's 2006; those ****ing Arabs seriously need to get with it.They adapt to to technology, yet their mentality is still in 800 A.D. 😖.......
Maybe if we stopped assassinating their leaders. We'll..we did take a short break. The arab world is not in 800 CE. In 800 CE Baghdad was the intellectual and cultural capital of the world. The Arabs have a very modern mentality, its just not the one that you (and I) would prefer them to have.
I'm sure bombing the hell out of them is a productive way to help them industrialize...oh wait...we don't want them to industrialize. Why? Because we made them hate us.
Originally posted by BoogerEater
I am not a kid. I do agree with what the pope said. I agree with this statement. If you believe the Koran teaches peace make sure you are looking over your shoulder.Questioning the concept of holy war, he quoted a 14th-Century Christian emperor who said Muhammad had brought the world only "evil and inhuman" things.
Originally posted by Alliance
Generally, offending people only sitrs them into action against you.Maybe if we stopped assassinating their leaders. We'll..we did take a short break. The arab world is not in 800 CE. In 800 CE Baghdad was the intellectual and cultural capital of the world. The Arabs have a very modern mentality, its just not the one that you (and I) would prefer them to have.
I'm sure bombing the hell out of them is a productive way to help them industrialize...oh wait...we don't want them to industrialize. Why? Because we made them hate us.
You're being a a Islamic extremist apologist. They hate us because they fear Democracy and progressive thinking. Look what happened in Iran in 1979, the Shah was leading his country into modern times, the religious powers knew that would kill their religious stranglehold on the populace and they lead a religious violent revolt, overthrew him and sent him into exile. If the revolt never happened, we'd most likely have a much more stable and peaceful Middle East right now
Originally posted by Robtard
You're being a a Islamic extremist apologist. They hate us because they fear Democracy and progressive thinking. Look what happened in Iran in 1979, the Shah was leading his country into modern times, the religious powers knew that would kill their religious stranglehold on the populace and they lead a religious violent revolt, overthrew him and sent him into exile. If the revolt never happened, we'd most likely have a much more stable and peaceful Middle East right now
never mind that the CIA and m16 through a covert operation years before put that shah into power....
the prime minister at the time was trying to nationalize Iran's oil and Great Britain did not like that, so they decided to get the U.S. to help them initiate a coup to overthrow him...
Guess what one of the strategies was that the u.s. used to overthrow the prime minister? get the religious leaders of Islam to declare a holy war against the government... yea, the same people who would later call the united states "the great satan"... hmmm
oh yeah, and never mind that the shah who was pretty much a puppet of the united states, was already facing a lot of opposition because of how he used his secret police, the savak, to control the country...and oil.
Without the actions of the U.S. years before its unlikely any sort of Islamic revolution would have occurred in such a manner.... People were already angry at the united states and the prime minister, the leaders of the Islamic revolution just harnessed the discontent.
Originally posted by Bardock42
I disagree, Sam. It's not everyones duty to watch their mouth so Muslims or any other group is not insulted. But that is a problem all religions have, the Islam just portrays it most obvious recently. I don't get how you can be one of the world religions, but still be offended all the time. It just sounds like no fun at all. Anyways, what the pope wanted to say (and if you are not a Muslim also did say) was very true and intelligent. Religious aggression from which side ever is not necessary or acceptable.The Muslims demanding an apology is ridiculous. Religion should be treated like everything else and as such also be subject to criticism.
Ok i agree, freedom of speech and all. Religion must also be a subject of criticism. But it works either way. Pope said something about islam because he has freedom of speech, and muslims started "bitching" about it and they ALSO has a freedom of speech and right to be dissapointed about that. So Pope started it, muslims continued, so now i don't see why everyone start that "muslims are whining again" thing, they have right and can do that just like Pope can criticise Islam.
Long live freedom of speech and freedom of expression. But i still do think it only works to the point untill it turns in obvious insult, like swearing.
Originally posted by Sam Z
Ok i agree, freedom of speech and all. Religion must also be a subject of criticism. But it works either way. Pope said something about islam because he has freedom of speech, and muslims started "bitching" about it and they ALSO has a freedom of speech and right to be dissapointed about that. So Pope started it, muslims continued, so now i don't see why everyone start that "muslims are whining again" thing, they have right and can do that just like Pope can criticise Islam.
Long live freedom of speech and freedom of expression. But i still do think it only works to the point untill it turns in obvious insult, like swearing.
They have right to express their opinion. They burn puppets and demand apologies. That's a difference. They may do it, but I may point out that they behave like little retarded children.
Originally posted by Sam Z
Ok i agree, freedom of speech and all. Religion must also be a subject of criticism. But it works either way. Pope said something about islam because he has freedom of speech, and muslims started "bitching" about it and they ALSO has a freedom of speech and right to be dissapointed about that. So Pope started it, muslims continued, so now i don't see why everyone start that "muslims are whining again" thing, they have right and can do that just like Pope can criticise Islam.
Long live freedom of speech and freedom of expression. But i still do think it only works to the point untill it turns in obvious insult, like swearing.
I would prefer to hear provoked complaining as oppose to forced silence.
Originally posted by Bardock42
They have right to express their opinion. They burn puppets and demand apologies. That's a difference. They may do it, but I may point out that they behave like little retarded children.
It doesn't really matter, they still can do that. My point is that it's funny that Pope has freedom of speech to say these things about islam but when they get upset and express their feelings about it everyone forget about that right and start blaming them for only trying to get apologies. It's simply not fair.
Originally posted by Sam Z
It doesn't really matter, they still can do that. My point is that it's funny that Pope has freedom of speech to say these things about islam but when they get upset and express their feelings about it everyone forget about that right and start blaming them for only trying to get apologies. It's simply not fair.
It's entirely fair and the comparison is silly. Someone expressing opinions to make a point as the Pope did is an application of free speech and fair enough, though controversial.
People holding mass, hate-filled demonstrations and making death threats is completely beyond the pale. There is no moral equivalence between the two actions.
Even accepting that the majority of complainants were not so extreme, the fact remains that almost every time Islam exercises its right to free sppech (a right that does not exist in several Muslim countries), they simply expose how petty and childish alot of the mentality behind it is. It weakens them. Many of the complaints made against them are simply in despair at this kind of mentality.
Of course, plenty of Muslims do not feel compelled to complain so, and fair enough to them.
And so it is absolutely and totally fair to criticise such unjustified reaction whilst giving the Pope a pass on the free speech card.
Originally posted by RobtardThe only reason the autocratic Shah rule was installed by a U.S. engineered coup in the first place was ideological conflict with the Soviet Union and oil. The Islamic Revolution was a culmination of 26 years of Shah dictatorship.
You're being a a Islamic extremist apologist. They hate us because they fear Democracy and progressive thinking. Look what happened in Iran in 1979, the Shah was leading his country into modern times, the religious powers knew that would kill their religious stranglehold on the populace and they lead a religious violent revolt, overthrew him and sent him into exile. If the revolt never happened, we'd most likely have a much more stable and peaceful Middle East right now
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
The only reason the autocratic Shah rule was installed by a U.S. engineered coup in the first place was ideological conflict with the Soviet Union and oil. The Islamic Revolution was a culmination of 26 years of Shah dictatorship.
The Shah had been in power since 1941, since it was a monarchy; he was next in line when his father was thrown out by the Allies because of his Pro-Nazi ways. Also, his "dictatorship" was much more humanitarian than the Ayatollah lead theocracy that replaced it. The guy was modernizing his country; he was actually giving women equal rights which is almost unheard of it that part of the world. Was he a complete saint? Of course not. But yes, blame America...
The 'coup' in the 50's is arguably a coup, there are two or more sides to every story.
Originally posted by xmarksthespot
Yay. American martyr complex. It doesn't matter whether or not I "blame America" by making a simple statement about historical actions. Whether Iranians blamed America and the impact of the installment of the Shah on perception of the West is the important thing.
Martyr complex? America didn't sacrifice itself; we're still the sole world superpower and will be for some time to come, no complex here. Of course the Iranians blame America, they were lead and are currently lead by Islamo-facist extremist who view America as the "Great Satan" because they fear Democracy and progressive thinking, those ideologies threaten their control. Iran would crumble if women were equals, God forbid...
By your tone "U.S. engineered coup" you clearly blame America as the fiend yet again, but you are right, it doens't matter. Most of the world hates America, then again, when you're #1, in the right or wrong, people tend to hate you. Who ever becomes the next world superpower, be it China, Iran or New Zealand, they'll be despised just the same. Something to consider, if a country like Iran were to have hegemonic world power like America does currently, how will they use/abuse that power?