Disclaimer 1: Yes, I know that Islamic terrorists comprise like 0.00000001% of the Muslim population.
Disclaimer 2: Yes, I know that Western nations over the course of history have plundered other nations.
Disclaimer 3: Yes, I know that this post seems anti-Islamic, but I want to make it clear that it is not Islamic religion or belief under attack here, it is the behaviour of a small group of psychopaths within the Islamic community.
*
Whether it be 9/11, the Bali Bombing, the Spanish rail bombing or the latest carnage in India, the common denominator is violent Muslims, perpetrating unspeakable atrocities upon innocent people in the name of God and their religion.
The invisible and dubiously existent hegemony will have me call these people 'terrorists', or even more insidious than that is the post-modern variant, 'insurgents', a word that does nothing but muddy the news to the point that we don't know what the hell is happening in Iraq or Afghanistan and who is fighting who and why.
I join Christopher Hitchens in calling these people what they are: religious.
Make no mistake - they think they are doing God's work. They think they will be rewarded in heaven. It says so in the Old Testament, and in the Koran.
No doubt in the coming days we'll have a series of people popping up in the media defending the Muslim community, and a whole bunch of peaceful, reasonable Muslims defending their brothers and sisters by creating a berth wider than the Grand Canyon around what they believe and what those nasty terrorists believe.
Enough is enough, I say. If a player on a football field does something wrong, the whole team has to take the fall. Likewise, if an apocalyptic and psychopathic Islamic group goes about slaughtering innocent people, the whole Islamic community need to fucking sort it out. Are you a Muslim and not a terrorist? Good. Use your influence to weed out these pathetic morons and anyone who supports them. Denounce them. Kick them out of your mosques. Pull down their places of worship. Do not offer them solace. They are PSYCHOPATHS and you created them - yes, you, Islam.
You know, it's a crazy inverse relationship we have with Muslims. Everytime one group of Muslim psychos blow something up, for some reason we have to like other Muslims even more... Mark my words - at some point soon Ruddy will have to come out and say something nice about Muslims. If it keeps going like this, if some Jihadist fuckface blows up a small nation, we'll have to kiss the feet of moderate Muslims and give them money and season tickets to Bell Shakespeare. ENOUGH! Hey, Muslims: Take responsibilty for your religion.
Don't blame America, don't blame the British cos of what they did 50 years ago, don't blame western imperialism, don't blame poverty. What your bretheren have done is sickening, disgusting, sub-human and totally fucked, and they chose to do it themselves, and they did it in your name, and your God's name.
The calm, reasonable, likeable and peaceful Muslims in Australia need to fire up a bit. They need to kick some heads - internally. I say to them: I respect your right to your religious belief, but in return for that religious belief, you owe me, him, her and them the chance to sleep safely at night.
I can't fix it, but you can, because you have access to these people within your religious administration.
So fucking fix it.
Oh... and Christians? Don't think you're escaping my tirade either. The Mumbai killers believe in God. So do you. Believe me, you are much more alike to these terrorists than I am. Your beliefs are essentially the same - all you differ on is the interpretation of God's specific will.
This is as much a religious problem as it is an Islamic one. So don't go trying to distance yourself too far from these terrorists you weasels. This is what fervent God-believing does to people, and you're as much to blame as anyone, given that the Old Testament started all this.
Abraham, dudes. Abraham. You lot share him.
*
I'm Captain Kneejerk, sleep tight kiddies.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
46 comments:
I've toyed with the idea for some time now about setting up a site called the "Campaign for a Better God".
Whether you subscribe to the Christian or Judaic or Islamic branded model of our favorite imaginary friend, the central question must be "Is this the best God we can come up with? In more enlightened times, when a God ceased to meet the needs of the community who created it, we just made up a new one, more suited to current tastes and needs.
Why are we persisting with a clearly Psychopathic, jumped up bronze age Storm God whose every printed utterance breeds nut jobs on all sides?
To sum up, God(TM) is a CuntCunt, and should be replaced with a more competent deity as a matter of priority.Enough!
NewGod (TM) barracks for Richmond.
Just gettin' in early.
I've often thought it odd that St Kilda was the only football team to be Cannonised.
this might just be me, being simplistic but i hardly think terrorists who commit acts in the name of their 'god' deserve to be identified as a part of a religion.
in the end, Islam, Christianity, Buddhism etc is just a category they are lumped in.
I think that most religions are variations of the same codswallop are have been responsible for some shitty things.
but in the end psychopaths are just psychopaths
Peaitlreiecnia: I disagree. It's time to start simplifying things, because we've made it too complex over time in denying that their religion has anything to do with it, when in fact, if they were not religious, they would not be slaughtering innocent people.
They did it in the name of God. Let's all face up to that.
...and may I add: Yes, psychopaths are psychopaths, but not all psychopaths strike in a coordinated attack on innocent people and butcher them in the name of a sentient being. It takes a religious psychopath to do that.
I'm sorry, in spite of my general dislike for organised religion, this is just ugly, anti-theistic hate-mongering.
You start out with disclaimers to excuse yourself the worst of your tirade, then proceed to trample right over them. You might as well have said, "I don't hate religious types, but..."
Violence is neither unique nor fundamental to religious people. Rather, angry, narrow-minded people use whatever belief system they latch onto to justify their noxious actions.
Even though the Muslim community have, on many occasions, stated clearly that they don't support these extremists, it is not for them, or any other religious community, to constantly repudiate these terrorists for your benefit. You have intelligence and common sense - use them to see these people for what they are: violent, rigid-minded zealots who abuse the belief system of anyone else for their own ends.
Oh... and Christians? Don't think you're escaping my tirade either. The Mumbai killers believe in God. So do you. Believe me, you are much more alike to these terrorists than I am. Your beliefs are essentially the same - all you differ on is the interpretation of God's specific will.
The fuck? I mean, seriously, dude. Let me put to you an argument as odious as "Pol Pot was an atheist. So are you. Believe me, you are much more alike to this mass-murderer than I am. Your beliefs are essentially the same - all you differ on is the interpretation of non-theistic morality", and see just how impressed you'd be. That interpretation that you imply is so minor is a gaping chasm.
And that doesn't even touch on the hubris expressed in implying that your non-religiosity makes you a better person than the religious.
when in fact, if they were not religious, they would not be slaughtering innocent people.
There are many ways I could argue against this, but simple answers seem the easiest. Bullshit. Bullshit, bullshit, bullshit.
They'd slaughter innocent people no matter what their belief system, and you know it.
Don't use anti-terrorist sentiment as a platform for generally railing against your perceived illogicality of religious belief. It's completely unfair, and if it were done to you in a different guise, you'd rightfully protest.
but in the end psychopaths are just psychopaths
The problems arise when we elevate pyschopaths to the status of "Supreme Being", and attribute the words of men craving temporal power to have the authority of the "Supreme
Being". Look out the window!
Violence is neither unique nor fundamental to religious people.
Religious violence is, and this was religious violence, and that was the topic of my post.
"They'd slaughter innocent people no matter what their belief system, and you know it."
No, I don't know it at all. I don;t think I agree with that at all. I think their religion armed them with a misguided bravado that enabled them to perpetrate this crime.
"it is not for them, or any other religious community, to constantly repudiate these terrorists for your benefit..."
If not for my benefit, then for the benefit of the families of those murdered, they should.
*
Your argument about Pol Pot doesn't wash with me because he was an agrarian Utopian communist and I'm not that. Hitler would have been a better example to throw at me and to that I would answer: Yes, Hitler was an atheist saxon non-commie and so am I, and so, indeed, my country went to war against him. They took it upon themselves to take him on.
*
Well, what do you propose Boogey? We just all sigh and say, "Oh, that's a shame then isn't it?" Seriously, who else but fellow Muslims can stop this? The US? The UN? Not likely. It has to come from within. Just like Milosevic... they overthrew him from within his own supporter-base... rank and file Serbs. Farmers. Office workers. Housewives. They got together and toppled Milosevic and good on them.
Likewise, I think rank and file Mulsims need to start infiltrating and influencing these psychos. they need to speak to their religious leaders who in turn can filter the message up that this is NOT what the nation of Islam is, or is meant to be, or should be.
*
And maybe I worded my disclaimers poorly. All I wanted to say was that I know Muslims aren't psycho-killers.
Oh, and...
"And that doesn't even touch on the hubris expressed in implying that your non-religiosity makes you a better person than the religious"
Guilty as charged, as long as you lessen the charge (like murder to manslaughter) that I think I am a better person than a religious person who is certain he/she is are going to heaven and I am not. I am a better person than they. I plead guilty to that.
Religious violence is, and this was religious violence, and that was the topic of my post.
No, it isn't. Religious people are not violent by virtue of their religious beliefs. It is the familial, cultural and economic settings they are raised in that influence whether they will be violent and fundamentalist, or peaceful and inclusive.
To put it quite simply, poverty, lack of education, familial violence, culturally-instilled hatred of other ethic groups - these are stronger predictors of aggression and terrorist tendencies (for want of a better term) than choice of religion or even atheism.
But your article strongly conveys the message that it is a person's religious beliefs that most influence them in becoming a violent mass-murderer. That is quite simply wrong.
"it is not for them, or any other religious community, to constantly repudiate these terrorists for your benefit..."
If not for my benefit, then for the benefit of the families of those murdered, they should.
They did not commit the crimes. Why should they have to apologise ad nauseum for that actions of others, who commit acts of terror and violence, just because the latter appropriate their belief system? Why should they have to suffer endless guilt and be forced to constantly apologise for the actions of people they have no control over?
The point about Pol Pot (or Hitler for that matter) was not to suggest my analogy was in any way valid, but to point out the stupidity of yours.
Many Australian and American Muslims fight in our armed forces to combat terrorism. They are doing exactly what you said you would have done against Hitler.
Well, what do you propose Boogey? We just all sigh and say, "Oh, that's a shame then isn't it?" Seriously, who else but fellow Muslims can stop this?
Of course that's not what I'm saying. I'm just opposing your attempts to paint this as a religious problem, and demand that Muslims take it upon themselves to rectify it. That achieves nothing but more "us vs them" mentality. Like "we secular Aussies didn't cause this problem, you Muslim Aussies did, now go clean it up before we accept you're fair dinkum."
The Muslim community has repudiated the actions of terrorists many times before, but you ignore that in order to put the onus on them to fix what is a worldwide problem that affects everyone.
The way to tackle this problem is for all countries that oppose terrorism to say, loudly and clearly, "we oppose extremism and violence in all forms, and we divorce it from religion".
Messages like yours solve nothing, but just encourage thuggish nationalists to think they hold the high moral ground over those they don't want to share their country with.
I never said Aussie Mulsims had to apologise for the atrocities committed by Muslims overseas. But they are in the best position of anyone in this country to do something, anything, about it. They have influence. I don't.
"we oppose extremism and violence in all forms, and we divorce it from religion".
But how can you, when the catalyst for the action was religious?
And is that all you've got? A statement? A press release? Is that it? We, as a world, do a press release repudiating violence? Yeah, cos that'll stop them. Sheesh.
"Religious people are not violent by virtue of their religious beliefs."
Jihadists are. Come on Boogeyman. They are open about it. They admit it.
"poverty, lack of education, familial violence, culturally-instilled hatred of other ethic groups - these are stronger predictors of aggression and terrorist tendencies (for want of a better term) than choice of religion or even atheism"
I agree with you there, but I really think that in the case of religious violence, it is the religion that tips them over the edge... that takes them from being embittered and angry to downright murderous. It gives them license, or something.
*
I find fervent nationalism to be as equally abhorrent as fervent religion, so don't stick that on me, please. I'd much prefer Australia to be a peaceful Muslim country than one run by 'thuggish nationalists' as you put it. I'm all for increasing immigration, and I really don't care where the people come from. As wide and varied as we can get it, I reckon, and I would certainly not suggest we should cut down on Muslim immigration. Far from it, Boogeyman. That's an unfair accusation you're throwing at me.
I'm saying though that Aussie Muslims should, instead of throwing their arms up and saying, "Nothing to do with us!", should say, for once, "We'll see what we can do about this."
IAnd I'm not saying 'we secular Aussies', I'm saying 'we secular Earthlings'.
*
Oh, and I'm also pissed off with the Hindus for hassling the Indian Muslims for so long. All of you: CHILL!
I'm saying though that Aussie Muslims should, instead of throwing their arms up and saying, "Nothing to do with us!", should say, for once, "We'll see what we can do about this."
And what I'm saying is that you shouldn't single them out to take responsibility for Muslim extremism. It's a worldwide problem, and they should participate in eradicating it as much as everyone else, but it's unfair to place the major onus on them to fix it.
I never said Aussie Mulsims had to apologise for the atrocities committed by Muslims overseas. But they are in the best position of anyone in this country to do something, anything, about it. They have influence. I don't.
Unfortunately, they don't have any. Al Queda sympathetic Muslims don't listen to western Muslim leaders.
"we oppose extremism and violence in all forms, and we divorce it from religion".
But how can you, when the catalyst for the action was religious?
And is that all you've got? A statement? A press release? Is that it? We, as a world, do a press release repudiating violence? Yeah, cos that'll stop them. Sheesh.
No, of course it's not just a 'press release'. It's a strong definition of a country's position on terrorism, that it will be opposed by all means, including force, and sends a clear message to terrorists that they act alone, and claim no fraternity based on religion with Muslims of your own country. And it sends a message that that that country doesn't oppose them because they are Muslim, but because they inflict violence and terror on innocent people.
Oh and also, the catalyst for some people to walk into a high school and mow everyone down with a machine gun is sometimes video games. That doesn't mean we should repudiate video games just because they happen to tip a few nutters over the edge.
NewGod (TM) barracks for Richmond.
Just gettin' in early.
So from this I take it you and your NewGod (TM) fully support the Sri Lankan terrorists then.
While we're talking Richmond do you recall a player by the name of Rob Fuller?
Religious people are not violent by virtue of their religious beliefs. It is the familial, cultural and economic settings they are raised in that influence whether they will be violent and fundamentalist, or peaceful and inclusive.
To go back to the Irish conflict, at no time during my 15 years in London did I ever see a Church leader from Team Catholic or Team Proddy come to the media (mainstream TV) and denounce the violence and ask them NOT to make this a religious war. Maybe if they had condoned it a little more then it'd be easier to accept. I know first hand from my brother in Belfast during the time, that a couple of Priests were all for the terrorists acts and would tell their congregation to support the war when they can. Yes economics play a big part.. if your poor and life sucks then why not get involved, but the church do like to throw a can of kero on the fire from time to time. Reconcilliation and peace comes from those who lead.
Archbishop Desmond Tutu.. the only religious leader with a set of iron balls.
I'm saying though that Aussie Muslims should, instead of throwing their arms up and saying, "Nothing to do with us!", should say, for once, "We'll see what we can do about this."
Same as above. Ensure that all Muslim leaders publicly condone the acts of violence and excommunicate all extremistsa dn their supporters from their mosques/churches/synagogues. Preach that acts of terrorism in the name of god is unholy and that all the virgins they'll receive will be 75+ with crabs and exzema.
I've slept and calmed down.
I agree with Homesick. I want the rank and file Muslims - ordinary, decent people just getting on with life - to exert pressure on their Imams to in turn exert pressure upwards in the hope that any extremists or extremist sympathisers within the wider Muslim community are excommunicated.
Men running through hotels, randomly killing innocent people, calling themselves 'Muslims' - it's not on.
And in a broader sense, I want religion, in all its forms, to take a hard look at itself.
*
I'm going away for a few days. Back Monday. Have a good weekend all.
I want the rank and file Muslims - ordinary, decent people just getting on with life - to exert pressure on their Imams to in turn exert pressure upwards in the hope that any extremists or extremist sympathisers within the wider Muslim community are excommunicated.
I think that's a swell idea, but I don't think it'll do a great deal to sort out terrorism or extremism. It might if Islam was a coherent, well-structured organisation with a top-down chain of command, but I don't think this is the case. To use Christianity as an example, I can write all the letters that I want to the Pope, but I doubt it'll do anything to stop the elders of the Seventh Day Adventist Church acting like arseholes. And if/when you do squeeze arseholes out of your church, they're just as likely to form their own little branch and continue doing what they do in the name of your religion. I just don't see there being that much that your average "rank and file Muslim" can do about this stuff.
So you're going with Boogeyman's press release option then, Alex?
Cool. We could fax it to them!
*
Yes I know there's a zillion sects of Islam, and many of them hate each other, but they are still the best equipped to tackle this problem.
Up to date reports this morning are saying some of the killers had come in from Pakistan.
Surely there are groups in Australia that have some contact with the Imams who counselled these killers.
It's a furphy to suggest people are driven to political violence by poverty or oppression.
Studies have shown most suicide bombers are from prosperous, educated backgrounds - as, I suspect, will be the case in India.
According to Muslims, the Old Testament was sent to the Jews, and then when they got it wrong, the New Testament was handed down, and then when the Christians got it wrong, the third part in the "trilogy" if you like, of holy books, the Koran, was sent to the believers, through Mohammad.
All books from the one god. The same dude. Yahweh. God. Allah. All one.
Perseus made the comment somewhere I think that the other monotheistic religions should also take some responsibility or action regarding what's happened in India. That they all believe in a god. Well perhaps this is even more fitting considering, it's the same god. But the Jews don't accept anything that came after the Old Testament, the Christians accept Old and New but nothing after, and the Muslims take it all as God's word (though they argue that the Old and New testaments lost the meaning and accuracy by passing through too many hands, translators, etc Chinese whispers changed the message).
What a fucking mess. That's all I have to say. It's not religion that causes terrorist attacks, these people aren't like this because of religion, but religion is helping them, in their minds, to enact such horror. And possibly religion is being used to influence their thinking, by people in power above them, say their leaders or directors. But the original reason for the violence is not a simple "kill the infidels" type of violence. There is more behind it.
So you're going with Boogeyman's press release option then, Alex?
I agree that regular Muslims should put pressure on their churches (or whatever) to force out those who preach extremist views. That's the right thing to do. I just question whether that will result in less of these kinds of incidents. I imagine that excommunicated preachers will take their loyal followers with them and will inevitably attract new followers. At this point, I can't see what other Muslims can really do. Unless you're advocating some kind of Islamic vigilante movement (you're not, are you?)
I think the problem is more basic than religion. It's typical male behaviour, all this violence. I think we should put heaps of oestrogen in the water
And iced-vovos. That will solve all the world's ills!
It's typical male behaviour, all this violence.
Care to explain this chick, then?
And golden stardust Melba, don't forget the stardust
Ramon is that the best you can do?
I've often thought it odd that St Kilda was the only football team to be Cannonised.
That's evidence that God is asadistic CuntCunt right there!!
How about this one?
It's typical male behaviour, all this violence.
Umm, sorry to double post but there are a LOT of female suicide bomber.. well there were. They're meat jigsaws now.
The Tamils started it and the 'insurgents' have taken it up with enthusiasm
Boy am i glad I missed this last night. I was at a briefing for a Marlin fishing competition this weekend. I'm going out to hopefully nail some giant fish.
I'm with Perseus, as usual.
You're a great debater Boogey, but you're doing exactly what Perseus said most people do. Over complicating the issue.
We must all oppose senseless violence in all its forms. But moderate Muslims MUST be in the front line when it comes to violence from Muslims.
All the socio economic bullshit is just that. Bullshit. These acts are being carried out in the name of Islam. Islam MUST condemn them.
Have a nice day. Get drunk, it's the last Friday of the week after all. And can I complain about how bloody hot it is in Moresby this week?
Sure why not Wari. Sydney too cold, Moresby too hot. It wouldn't be a proper comment without a weather-snippet from you.
Yesterday, Melbourne had hail stones as big as gold balls I tell you. Golf balls!
Well, marbles then. Tom-bowlers.
Or this one?
I said typical male behaviour and I stand by it. The majority of violence in the world is carried out by men. Your examples of violent women are more the exception than the rule
I did not say all men are violent or no women are violent. I said violence is more typical of men
Next you'll be telling me the moon is made of cheese
I've often thought it odd that St Kilda was the only football team to be Cannonised
The Melbourne suburb of St Kilda was named after a ship, not a saint.
There is no St Kilda.
There is no St Kilda.
Who was the ship named after?
Then who was the ship named after?
Sorry Mr E. You beat me to the punch.
Great minds think alike as they say. Whoever "they" are.
Sorry Mr E. You beat me to the punch.
I shall offer a silent prayer to St Kilda to grant you forgiveness.
Allow me:
http://www.skhs.org.au/~SKHSarticles1/articles/St_K_Timeline_1800-2010.html
Sorry, I am also one of those luddites who can't do the fancy-pants linking thing.
Tutorial tomorrow morning?
1841 Governor La Trobe, at a picnic by the sea, names the area St Kilda after the ship Lady of St Kilda anchored off St Kilda Beach. The ship, in turn, was named after the Hebridean (Scottish) island of St Kilda. St Kilda Hill becomes a seaside resort with many holiday houses in Robe and other streets.
OK, So who was the fucking island named after?
My money's on a Saint named Kilda.
Silly me, i'd always thought that St Kilda was named after the football team, just like Geelong and Footscray.
Sigh:
"No saint is known by the name of Kilda, and various theories have been proposed for the word's origin, which dates from the late 16th century.[12] Haswell-Smith
(2004) notes that the full name St Kilda first appears on a Dutch map dated 1666, and that it may have been derived from Norse sunt kelda ("sweet wellwater") or from a mistaken Dutch assumption that the spring Tobar Childa was dedicated to a saint. (Tobar Childa is a tautological placename, consisting of the Gaelic and Norse words for well, i.e., "well well").[3] Martin Martin, who visited in 1697, believed that the name "is taken from one Kilder, who lived here; and from him the large well Toubir-Kilda has also its name".[13][14]
1580 Carte of Scotlande showing Hyrth (i.e. Hirta) at left and Skaldar (Haskeir) to the north westMaclean (1972) similarly suggests it may come from a corruption of the Old Norse name for the spring on Hirta, Childa, and states that a 1588 map identifies the archipelago as Kilda. He also speculates that it may refer to the Culdees, anchorites who may have brought Christianity to the island, or be a corruption of the Gaelic name for the main island of the group, since the islanders tended to pronounce r as l, and thus habitually referred to the island as Hilta.[15] Steel (1988) adds weight to the idea, noting that the islanders pronounced the H with a "somewhat guttural quality", making the sound they used for Hirta "almost" Kilta.[16]
Maclean (1972) further suggests that the Dutch may have simply made a cartographical error, and confused Hirta with Skildar, the old name for Haskeir island much nearer the main Outer Hebrides archipelago.[15][17] Quine (2000) hypothesises that the name is derived from a series of cartographical errors, starting with the use of the Old Icelandic Skildir ("shields") and appearing as Skildar on a map by Nicholas de Nicolay (1583). This, so the hypothesis goes, was transcribed in error by Lucas J. Waghenaer in his 1592 charts without the trailing r and with a period after the S, creating S.Kilda. This was in turn assumed to stand for a saint by others, creating the form that has been used for several centuries, St Kilda.
[from wiki http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/St_Kilda,_Scotland]
Have I naught to do other than research for you wee bairns on this Friday night?
Melba, I'm so impressed by your l33t researching skills that I'd like to offer you the post of editor-in-chief of Australian Defamer.
I'd like to, but I can't.
I know, Ramon. It took me hours of trawling through the internet, making notes, and then putting it all into my own words.
Melba that is positively tragic.
Nice work though.
And all you greenies out there will be glad to know not one marlin was killed (or tagged for that matter) on the weekend. The main theory is that it's been so hot here (water temp 32 C at the surface) that they were staying deep during the day and feeding at night.
I know you needed to know that.
I needed to know that, thanks.
Also Wari, my comment above was sarcastic, but in a nice way. I hate not being able to adequately translate tone in these fucking comments.
I didn't research, I just googled, cut and pasted. But I did use quotation marks and cited the source. Like all good researchers.
Post a Comment