Two questions: First, where are the counter-demonstrations? That is, where can adherents of a “religion of peace” be found publicly condemning claims that their religion calls for “death, death, death” over something as comparatively minor as a defiling of the Koran – much less one that didn’t happen? Second, will CNN or anyone else in the MSM write a story observing that no Americans are engaged in mass demonstrations today, torching Korans or calling for “death, death, death” to Muslims in response to the gleeful burning of American flags, much less calls for the murder of our president or the “nuking” of our capitol? The religion is the people's opium! So said Mao! In this situation is simple for the hidden enemy to use the religious hate towards "crusaders" and "jews"! The religious influence and the varies instrumental uses of religious beliefs is an old problem. You should consider that we still have some little trace, especially in Europe, of religious influence in political life. In Europe we have a lot of Christian Democratic parties. Sometime their influence in our public life is a little bit discriminatory. In the case of Islam, poverty, ignorance of the masses who don't have class coscience, tribal structurated societies, made those people easily manouverable from the real power owners: the absolute monarchs or the various dictators. Or mr. Bin Laden and other like him! Don't be surprised for this. In other eras we had the same problem. The arabs hadn't had yet their Voltaire, Rousseau, Kant, Hegel... Lincoln... One day, perhaps... But without culture and social justice this awake will never realize. Greetings Shingen

Wrong: Flushing a Quran Down the Toilet was EXACTLY THE EXCUSE TERRORISTS WERE LOOKING FOR to incite to Commit Mass Murder. From: http://www.strategypage.com//fyeo/howtomakewar/default.asp?target=HTIW.HTM "This strongly indicates that the events in Pakistan and Afghanistan were well orchestrated, with plans in place so that violent demonstrations could be set off whenever a pretext arose" So any time it so much as looks that there may be something wrong we can expect "spontaneous demonstrations". Wonder if such a pre planned demonstration tactic is also used in Europe. (we've got the demonstration with pre planned violence, now just wait for a "reason")

AK wrote: >>That explains it. For the same reason one would not go to the KKK to learn about African American history, or ask an anti-semite about Jewish culture, there is not much one could learn about Islam from Islamophobes<< Main Entry: [2]hate Function: verb Inflected Form(s): hat·ed; hat·ing Date: before 12th century transitive senses 1 : to feel extreme enmity toward 2 : to have a strong aversion to : find very distasteful intransitive sense" This is not a proposition from the later Wittgenstein- its really very simple: Those who hate Jews or those who hate people of African descent are not the people you go to learn about Jewish history or African cultures. Similarly, those who profess to be Islamophobes (i.e. hate Muslims/Islam) are not the best people to listen to regarding matters Islamicate or even Islamic. If there is an argument about why the best way to learn about Jewish people would be through a reading of the Protocols of Zion or commentary on Jewish practices and values by anti-Semites I would like to hear it.

I think you're really on to something. It almost seems to me as if you're saying the best way to learn about jews is to learn *from* jews, and the best way to learn about blacks it to learn *from* blacks. Similarly, the best way to learn about muslims would be to learn *from* muslims. ...so here we are...

would not go to the KKK to learn about African American history, or ask an anti-semite about Jewish culture, there is not much one could learn about Islam from Islamophobes<< Main Entry: [2]hate Function: verb Inflected Form(s): hat·ed; hat·ing Date: before 12th century transitive senses 1 : to feel extreme enmity toward 2 : to have a strong aversion to : find very distasteful intransitive sense" >>This is not a proposition from the later Wittgenstein- its really very simple: Those who hate Jews or those who hate people of African descent are not the people you go to learn about Jewish history or African cultures. Similarly, those who profess to be Islamophobes (i.e. hate Muslims/Islam) are not the best people to listen to regarding matters Islamicate or even Islamic. If there is an argument about why the best way to learn about Jewish people would be through a reading of the Protocols of Zion or commentary on Jewish practices and values by anti-Semites I would like to hear it.<< Where did I claim to be an Islamophobe? I said I hated that barbarian ideology called Islam. I spoke nothing of phobias and fears. I aslo said I hated idiots, such as Osama Bin Laden and yourself, who confuse ideology with flesh and bone. While you're on your neo-eugenics quest for the "Muslim gene" to justify calling people who hate Islam as being racist, I'm going to remain here arguing against an ideology that thrives on the creation of suffering. You have a choice, Sorkoi. You really don't have to continue your campaign to convince people of your stupidity. We're sold.

Quit whining. We aren't going to remove our servicewoman from guard duty just because it is 'offinsive' to Muslims. We are not obsessed with homosexual porn, this was used to intimidate terrorists. When the Iraqi military captured Americans, they beat them. When insurgents killed a Marine, they drug his body through the streets and hung him from a bridge (they did this agains with some private contractors). Stop this, it is 'offinsive' to Americans. We could always hand the insurgents/terrorists over to the Israelis or Egyptians.

>>Where did I claim to be an Islamophobe? I said I hated that barbarian ideology called Islam. I spoke nothing of phobias and fears. While you're on your neo-eugenics quest for the "Muslim gene" to justify calling people who hate Islam as being racist.. If you want to sustain a distinction between fear and hatred perhaps you need to go beyond a reference to a dictionary. In ancient Greek the distinction was not so great e.g. xenophobia means not only fear of foreigners/strangers but also hatred as opposed xenophilia. Some people would suggest that Islamophobia is characterized by one of eight elements: 1. Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change. 2. Islam is seen as separate and 'other'. It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them. 3. Islam is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive and sexist. 4. Islam is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism and engaged in a 'clash of civilizations'. 5. Islam is seen as a political ideology and is used for political or military advantage. 6. Criticisms made of the West by Islam are rejected out of hand. 7. Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society. 8. Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural or normal. Out of interest I would like to know how many of these 8 points you don’t you subscribe to. Just because someone claims not to be an Islamophobic does not necessarily mean that they are not. I am not sure many anti-Semites would want to be burdened with that label of anti-semitism. They were many anti-Semites especially before development of social Darwinism who had nothing against Jews but thought Judaism was a false and primative religion that refused to accept the ministry of Christ. This hostility towards Judaism (i.e system of beliefs and values) was manifested in periodic expulsions and persecutions of Jews. There was no biological basis for this since Jews who converted to Christianity were often not included in these bouts of persecution. Perhaps, if you were more aware of the debate on racism you would realize that biological determinism has not been considered to be its exclusive defining feature for many decades now. You might want to check out this website: http://encyclopedia.laborlawtalk.com/Islamophobia (unlike the sources that some people consider to be valid sources of information this has arguments both for and against use of Islamophobia). >>I aslo said I hated idiots, such as Osama Bin Laden and yourself, who confuse ideology with flesh and bone. I'm going to remain here arguing against an ideology that thrives on the creation of suffering. I am not interested in whether you want argue against or for Islam. The question I asked is why should anyone consider an Islamophobe commenting on Islam any more persuasive then an anti-Semite talking about Jewish societies. The answer to the question is independent of whether one is or not an Islamophobe. >>You have a choice, Sorkoi. You really don't have to continue your campaign to convince people of your stupidity. We're sold. I am not sure how this is a choice. Nor why would I be concerned if ‘people’ (who are these people you are speaking on behalf of- I know SWB seems to think he is the representative of the people, I take it that you also feel you are acting in that capacity) who do not know me professionally or personally think I am stupid. To be called stupid by people who quickly exhaust any capacity for rational debate is not a big deal. Besides I do not need the SP forum to validate my sense of self. So what if there are some bigots and bullies on the SP who want to call me stupid- believe me it really is no insult. Ciao for now.

>>Out of interest I would like to know how many of these 8 points you don’t you subscribe to. >>1. Islam is seen as a monolithic bloc, static and unresponsive to change.<< Nope. >>2. Islam is seen as separate and 'other'. It does not have values in common with other cultures, is not affected by them and does not influence them.<< Nope. >>3. Islam is seen as inferior to the West. It is seen as barbaric, irrational, primitive and sexist.<< Yep. >>4. Islam is seen as violent, aggressive, threatening, supportive of terrorism and engaged in a 'clash of civilizations'.<< Yep. >>5. Islam is seen as a political ideology and is used for political or military advantage.<< Yep. >>6. Criticisms made of the West by Islam are rejected out of hand.<< Nope. >>7. Hostility towards Islam is used to justify discriminatory practices towards Muslims and exclusion of Muslims from mainstream society.<< Nope. >>8. Anti-Muslim hostility is seen as natural or normal.<< Nope. >>I am not interested in whether you want argue against or for Islam.<< Then you're going to have to play your "people who hate Islam are racists" game with someone more your speed, such as someone who cuts his crack rocks with paint chips. Or, you could pay attention to what I've said, and not try to argue against what no one has said. >>The question I asked is why should anyone consider an Islamophobe commenting on Islam any more persuasive then an anti-Semite talking about Jewish societies. The answer to the question is independent of whether one is or not an Islamophobe.<< Do you still beat your wife? When did you stop?

...Do you still beat your wife? When did you stop? ... What? You missed the Saudi board on that one, AK? I'm surprised at you - your mental faculties and recall abilities are failing.C'mon, the CORAN explicitly permits the beating of wayward wives. You are getting slow in your dotage. ...I am not sure how this is a choice. Nor why would I be concerned if ‘people’ (who are these people you are speaking on behalf of- I know SWB seems to think he is the representative of the people,... Not really, Sorky, just a humble servant that prefers to see the peaceful religion of Islam for what it really is - btw - notice anyone rioting or killing anyone lately for burning a bible? If you would stop being such a pissant pedant trying to cherrypick points in order to feel like you've won debate, you might actually be taken seriously on these boards, rather than being know as the new ONEGUS. I'm sure you are impressed with your mental capacities amd education, but that hasnt prevented "the people" of these boards from seeing that you still cant' see the desert for the sand dunes. Get your head out of cloudcuckoo land, and actually take some time to critically read for content, not for points. You might actually get a better reputation for it. And again, as to my sources, I have yet to see you disprove any of them in any manner of critical fashion, other than to say they are bad. Typical pedant. swhitebull - Ne supra crepidam judicaret