The Middle East Explodes...

[mean_liar]

Small nitpick: its the Book of Revelation, not RevelationS.

Corollary: Apocalypse means Revelation in Greek. There's only one apocalypse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse

[Username17]

Small nitpick: its the Book of Revelation, not RevelationS.

Corollary: Apocalypse means Revelation in Greek. There's only one apocalypse.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apocalypse

If you want to get all nitpicky, that's the Apocalypse of John. There's also the Apocalypse of Pseudo-Methodius, the Apocalypse of Peter, the Apocalypse of Paul, the Apocalypse of Stephen, the Apocalypse of Thomas, and the Apocalypse of James (which comes in two parts). The fact that most Christians these days recognize the Apocalypse of John and not the other Apocalypses is pretty much historical accident.

-Username17

[tzor]

Corollary: Apocalypse means Revelation in Greek. There's only one apocalypse.

Main Entry: 1apoc·a·lyp·tic Pronunciation Guide
Pronunciation: |päk|liptik also |apäk- sometimes |apk-
Variant(s): also apoc·a·lyp·ti·cal \-tkl, -k-\
Function: adjective
Etymology: Late Greek apokalyptikos, from Greek apokalyptein + -ikos -ic, -ical
1 a : of or relating to an apocalypse b : resembling or having the characteristics of an apocalypse
2 a : forecasting or predicting the ultimate destiny of the world in the shape of future events b : PROPHETIC, REVELATORY
3 : foreboding imminent disaster or final doom
4 : wildly unrestrained : GRANDIOSE
5 : ultimately decisive
- apoc·a·lyp·ti·cal·ly \-tk()l, -k-, -li\ adverb

There are two major Apocalyptic books in the Bible. In the old testament we have Daniel, chapters 7-12.

In the first year of King Belshazzar of Babylon, Daniel had a dream as he lay in bed, and was terrified by the visions of his mind. Then he wrote down the dream; the account began:

[quote="Daniel 8:17']When he came near where I was standing, I fell prostrate in terror. But he said to me, "Understand, son of man, that the vision refers to the end time."[/quote]

[Maj]

Next on the pile: Oman. Protesters there, however, don't want to see their sultan taken out - just the officials he's appointed.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

I was told by someone on my friend's list that I should be angry about these events, and if I wasn't I should "read my bible".

Perhaps he thought you reading the bible would just make you angry?

The Bible doesn't make me angry, I know it at least fairly well. (I am no scholar, but I have read the whole thing two or three times). What people decide to take from it makes me angry. I can't be angry at a book, a book is an inanimate object and can't make moral and ethical decisions by itself.

[tzor]

No, really we are not at war with Islam; Islam is at war with us. Organizers of ‘Shari’a for America’ Rally Anticipate Fatwa on ‘U.S. Interference’ in Islamic Lands Thursday, March 03, 2011

(CNSNews.com) – A Lebanese-based radical cleric notorious for his fiery sermons and support for jihad soon will deliver a fatwa regarding “U.S. intervention in Muslim lands,” according to a controversial Islamist group that says it plans to hold a pro-shari’a demonstration at the White House on Thursday.

A Web site promoting Thursday’s so-called “Shariah4America” rally says the fatwa – an Islamic religious injunction – will be delivered by Omar Bakri Mohammed.

“With the unwarranted interference of America in the Middle East, and having been left with no other alternative, the impending fatwa will clarify the reality of the crusade against Islam and Muslims as well as the appropriate response to a very bitter foreign policy,” it says.

Fortunately, there are some exceptions.

While it is not clear if the planned event in D.C. will go ahead, several groups are planning counter-demonstrations on Thursday. They include the American Islamic Forum for Democracy (AIFD), whose president Zuhdi Jasser denounced the event as “an affront to very idea of America.”

Jasser in a statement challenged American Muslims to take a stand against the shari’a-promoting ideology.

“The silence of American Muslims against the Islamic state and political Islam allows radical groups like this to speak for all Muslims,” he said.

[sabs]

I think you have you exceptions backwards.

American Muslims by the large fall into Quote #2
The EXCEPTIONS Fall in quote #1

[tzor]

I don't think so, I think American Muslims are the exceptions of Muslims around the world. (American anything tends to be the exception, consider how long it took for American Catholics to really get into the Vatican the notion that religious freedom is a good and wonderful thing - now they talk about it all the time.)

[PhoneLobster]

I don't think so, I think American Muslims

After you embarrassed yourself SO BADLY with the "no French Muslims" line that you ran away with your tail between your legs without so much as a whimper in response when you were so hilariously caught out in UTTER IGNORANCE. You are coming back with that zombie argument AGAIN?

Know you no shame? Have you no memory? Do we need to permanently cycle you through the same links to the same responses to your SAME stupidity OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

[Maj]

I don't think so, I think American Muslims are the exceptions of Muslims around the world. (American anything tends to be the exception, consider how long it took for American Catholics to really get into the Vatican the notion that religious freedom is a good and wonderful thing - now they talk about it all the time.)

Mathematically speaking, this isn't possible.

According to the World Population Clock, as of the minute or so ago that I pushed the button, there are approximately 6,903,501,449 in the world.

According to Wikipedia, there are approximately 1,571,198,000 Muslims. The US has about 2,454,000 of those.

If you subtract the number of American Muslims from the total, you're left with 1,568,744,000 - 22.7% of the world. That means that there is one Muslim for every four other people in the world.

They could totally take us. Seriously. If the world was actually full of nothing but Islamic extremists that wanted to kill us and take our freedom, they could totally do it.

But it's not. You have a minority of Muslims who scream louder than anyone else and go blow themselves up. Worse yet, you have a media system that loves to give them megaphones.

You are afraid. Your fear is not reality. It's just fear.

Personally, I'd still kinda like to go to Egypt, and I hear that despite the political change, now's a really good time to go. I wish I had the money.

[tzor]

Actually Maj, I don't think I ever said that the general Muslim population (except in America) wants to kill us. (And if I inferred that, then I appolgize.) I thought that I was implying that the general Muslim population, if given the chance, would welcome Shiria law, effectively making Islam the only real religion (non Muslims could pay the fine and might, if they are feeling nice, not die). The one exception might be in America where the notion of separation of church and state extends into the notion that different faiths can live together and one can both be a faithful Muslim and a faithful American, who is faithful to the Constitution of the United States.

And I'll say it again, the average Muslim in France would, if they had the chance, fuck the republic, force Sharia law on everyone and to hell with the infidels. This is also true in England. This is the reason why many in Europe are now saying "multiculturalism" has "failed."

Yes, the number of radical Muslims is a small number, compared to the rest of Islam. The number of Twelvers is even smaller. The number of people who actually think the Madi will suddenly appear (actually, they think he is already here) is even less. But the number of people who wouldn't mind fucking the infidels within Islam is exceptionally large; these are the people who don't oppose the few radicals, and occasionally welcome them.

[Zinegata]

The hugely secular nature of all the Middle East revolts thus far kinda puts a massive damper on tzor's "Muslims are out to kill the world" theory.

The truth is, there have been precious few Muslim regimes with an overtly fanatical bent to them. Most of Islamic states that have existed in the world have been surprisingly moderate and allow extensive rights and privilages to their non-Muslim subjects.

Heck, even Iran treats its Jews with a great deal of decency.

It's just that people keep thinking Muslim Government = Khomenei's Iran or Taliban Afghanistan.

[PhoneLobster]

And I'll say it again, the average Muslim in France would, if they had the chance, fuck the republic, force Sharia law on everyone and to hell with the infidels. This is also true in England. This is the reason why many in Europe are now saying "multiculturalism" has "failed."

And yet in the conversation about that, in which you claimed you couldn't find any "Muslims who thought of themselves as French", So I went and decided to see exactly how hard it would be to find these elusive Muslims who thought of themselves as French. I looked only as far as wikipedia to find one quote THAT SHUT YOU THE FUCK UP ABOUT THAT.

You remember right, the one where multiple studies have found that French Muslims are among the MOST "integrated" and "patriotic" in the world? THAT quote.

You ran away, tail between your legs, just stopped DEAD in your racist little "Sharia Muslims will conquer the EU ANY SECOND NOW!!1!!" conversation and dared not defend yourself, and went off to rant in a "non-political" thread about how Commies were attacking your precious bodily fluids.

But here we are a month later and you are trundling out the "French Muslims hate France!!!!" line again. Why? You have NO FUCKING EVIDENCE, actual fucking studies into how much French Muslims hate France indicate that French Muslims actually LOVE France and other French people more than your "Exceptional American Muslims" love America and Americans.

You didn't dare discus that then, you let it drop like a hot potato so you could PRETEND now that you never got fucking stomped into the ground in your idiocy. But sorry, you got stomped. Any and every piece of proof was against your lies then and it is STILL THE CASE, reality didn't change because you shut your racist mouth and tried holding your breath and waiting it out. Things don't work like that you mentally 4 year old twat.

[tzor]

Heck, even Iran treats its Jews with a great deal of decency.

While at the same time the leaders of the government of Iran constantly promote their rhetoric of whiping Israel off the face of the earth.

Oh and how do you define "decency?"

[MfA]

American Muslims by the large fall into Quote #2
The EXCEPTIONS Fall in quote #1

They are by and large self identified Sunnites, so forgive me for being slightly sceptical. Lets determine this the democratic way ... and actions speak louder than words. Whichever demonstration is bigger has the larger number of American Muslims truly supporting it.

I think quote #1 will win ... there are very few Muslims which will truly stand up against the Sunnah. The Quaranites are seen as apostates by the majority of Muslim, and Islam is not friendly to apostates. The Sufis kinda get away with it as long as they pretend to deconstruct the Sunnah rather than reject it outright, but their toleration in major Islamic country is generally on a razor thin edge.

[sabs]

You probably think that we should expel those dirty Sikhs and their turbans. They're clearly terrorists.

By your line of thinking, most of the US is gun totting maniacs who like to blow up IRS buildings.

[MfA]

Sikhs consistently violating concealed (or exposed) weapon laws should not be allowed citizenship.

If most of the people in the US self identified as Kaczynskiites then yes, I probably would consider them as supporting terrorism.

[Maj]

Actually Maj, I don't think I ever said that the general Muslim population (except in America) wants to kill us. (And if I inferred that, then I appolgize.) I thought that I was implying that the general Muslim population, if given the chance, would welcome Shiria law, effectively making Islam the only real religion (non Muslims could pay the fine and might, if they are feeling nice, not die).

You know that Shariah isn't a monolithic, every Muslim agrees on it kind of thing, right?

While at the same time the leaders of the government of Iran constantly promote their rhetoric of whiping Israel off the face of the earth.

Not that I'm trying to defend Iran, but there is a huge difference between supporting Jews and supporting Israel. Jewish people are cool. I don't have a problem with them. Israel is not so cool. It's an island of assholery disguised as a democracy and supported by foreign aid. Personally, I think it should be "moved" someplace else where the people will be safer and less able to perpetrate crimes against humanity while using the Holocaust as its defense.

[Koumei]

and went off to rant in a "non-political" thread about how Commies were attacking your precious bodily fluids.

Wait, what? Which one was that? Because the usual racist drivel is boring, but this sounds like it could be hilarious.

[sabs]

Actually Maj, I don't think I ever said that the general Muslim population (except in America) wants to kill us. (And if I inferred that, then I appolgize.) I thought that I was implying that the general Muslim population, if given the chance, would welcome Shiria law, effectively making Islam the only real religion (non Muslims could pay the fine and might, if they are feeling nice, not die).

You know that Shariah isn't a monolithic, every Muslim agrees on it kind of thing, right?

While at the same time the leaders of the government of Iran constantly promote their rhetoric of whiping Israel off the face of the earth.

Not that I'm trying to defend Iran, but there is a huge difference between supporting Jews and supporting Israel. Jewish people are cool. I don't have a problem with them. Israel is not so cool. It's an island of assholery disguised as a democracy and supported by foreign aid. Personally, I think it should be "moved" someplace else where the people will be safer and less able to perpetrate crimes against humanity while using the Holocaust as its defense.

I think that boat has sailed though. To be fair, Israel is in a bad spot.
They got put in a place where they weren't welcome, surrounded by people who sqaid form day one, "We're going to wipe you out" right after having suffered from the Holocaust. Yes, they do assholey things. Yes the 'settlement' by Russian Jews with AK47's is a bad bad setup. But Israel /is/ their native home. If all your neighbors try to break down your door and kill you, and the only reason they failed is because you're more bad-ass then them. You kinda have the right to be a dick to your neighbors.

That being said, Israel needs to figure out how to co-exist with the Palestinians.

[PhoneLobster]

To be fair

To be fair it doesn't particularly sound like you've really followed anything to do with Israel since it's foundation, let alone recently, in any great detail at all.

The situation as it stands now is basically ENTIRELY Israel's responsibility (well, them and the USA). They have thrown away and stomped on SO MANY opportunities for peace, and even on almost entirely their terms, it isn't funny.

And if you don't know that and think that it's "fair" because the Israelis are fighting in "self defense" you know NOTHING about the region.

[sabs]

Actually I do know that. But Israel /is/ in a bad spot. Except maybe for Jordan, every single one of their neighbors would like to see them driven into the ocean. They have weekly bombings in their territories. Israel is not blameless. It's a fucked up situation. But it's NOT entirely Israel's responsibility. Israel should treat the Palestinians better, and they need to find a way to live together, and the settlements need to stop. Palestinians also need to stop the bombings.

[Maj]

But Israel /is/ their native home.

I'm going to be a total douche here and say that Israel was the Jews' native home in much the same way that Italy is mine. Just because I was raised with extremely strong Italian cultural traditions doesn't mean that I'm entitled to a piece of Italy (That would be cool if it were true, though).

Further, while my family's traditions are frequently radically different from those of my friends, we've been significantly influenced by the fact that we're Americans and we've lived in America all our lives. Even if we were entitled to a piece of Italy, if we moved there, we'd probably have to deal with quite a bit of culture shock. The language is different, the food is different, the customs are different, the climate is different...

Creating Israel required taking people who shared some common traditions, but often vastly disparate cultures and shoving them into a foreign place and paying a lot of money to keep them glued together. It was done out of guilt and NIMBY thinking.

And in doing all of this, the forces that be completely marginalized the people who actually lived there, and they are still doing so. For the life of me, I don't understand how a country that was founded on the idea of giving an ethnic group spread across time and space a home is valid, but giving the people who lived in that space a portion for themselves isn't. And I don't understand how a people who suffered the horrors of the Holocaust can turn around and do such terribly racist things to other people.

Israel should treat the Palestinians better

Israel can't. Its laws are written for Jews. The purpose of the country is a Jewish state.

[Zinegata]

Heck, even Iran treats its Jews with a great deal of decency.

While at the same time the leaders of the government of Iran constantly promote their rhetoric of whiping Israel off the face of the earth.

Oh and how do you define "decency?"

Iran actually has a minority of Jews living within its borders. Their synagogues are not burned down, and they are allowed to practice their religion.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persian_Je ... us_in_Iran

They are even guaranteed one seat in parliament. Sure, it's a sham parliament, but the Iranian government seriously treats its Jews no worse than any of its own people.

What you need to realize, tzor, is that Islamic governments are not necessarily out to control the world. Some of them were, but that's the exception rather than the rule.

Many of the most feared Islamic Nations - the Ottomans for instance - made decisions based on hard political analysis, not based on what the Koran told them to do. And the vast majority of them also respected the parts of the Koran wherein they were required to take care of unbelievers living within their borders.

And frankly, I suspect that Iran's real motive for opposing Israel is political - they want to be the dominant country in the region again - because they did use to own the whole region until a slew of conquerors came in and took it all away.

Islam isn't actually a warlike religion - it's just distorted in our eyes because of the long history between Islam and the West. It's actually much more about social justice, and Iran is acting out of the perceived need to right previous injustices and to once again own the Middle East (probably because they aren't as politically savvy as the Ottomans - who decided in 1918 that owning an empire full of sand and rebellious people was too much trouble).

[Zinegata]

Israel should treat the Palestinians better

Israel can't. Its laws are written for Jews. The purpose of the country is a Jewish state.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arab_citizens_of_Israel

That's... actually a misconception.

Israel is undeniably a Jewish state, but one in five Israelis are actually Muslim Arab - who have the right to vote and hold office. As long as you're an Israeli citizen, you can freely believe in Allah and yet be a judge on their Supreme Court. Out of 120 members of their Parliament, 14 are Palestinians and belong to (a surprisingly active, but not often publicized) Palestinian political parties.

The problem is that most Palestinians are not citizens. Most of the folks in the Golan prefer to remain Syrian citizens for instance. And extremist Jewish groups don't want more Muslims becoming Israeli citizens.

In short, the issue really boils down to the disputed territories and what to do with the people in them. These folks have been in legal limbo for half a century now.

If tomorrow the world suddenly changes and it decides that the Golan, West Bank, and Gaza do actually belong to Israel now, and that the people living there are by default Israeli citizens, then Israel is required by its own laws to treat these people decently.

But again, not gonna happen - because Syria, Egypt, and Jordan aren't gonna say yes to that, and because it'd probably cause the Jewish extremists in Israel to take up arms against the moderate Israelis and their new Palestinian co-citizens.