Libertarian Muslim

Thank you Adam, I hope you're well aslo. I support change within Iran definitely. But what kind of government would they like to put in place and how are they trying to achieve it?

Adam, 1. No, it's not my contention that Iran hasn't oppressed its own people over the years. Having said that, it's not a justification to launch war on Iran. 2. Iran is a theocracy but again, this is not a reason to launch a war on it. 3. I don't know for sure whether Iran has the intentions of building a nuclear arsenal but I do sincerely believe that they have the right to develop one as a means of deterrent to stop other nations from attacking them. If that stops the US and Iran from attacking then great. Attacking Iran is not only a bad idea tactically, but also logically, to expect positive change to occur after bombing a country is silly. The US and other nations should open up trade with Iran and allow the ideas of liberty to spread naturally because nothing brings hardliners into power in Iran than the threat of war against them. The people are proud and won't accept Western interference. Again, I never stated the huge benefit was for Israel as a whole, in fact the only thing that will benefit Israel as a whole would be a just peace agreement between themselves and the Arabs but they've still not come around to having one. The assertion that they'd only launch a war if it were in their benefit is counter to what's happened in the past 60 years. How many years have been fought over the last 60 years that were unnecessary and didn't benefit the nations as a whole that were engaged in them? Most of them had that as the case. Israel may feel under threat from Iran but that doesn't reflect the truth and is not a justification for launching a war on Iran. Also, in terms of Israel feeling threatened?

It's not in Israel's interest or anyone else's interest to have a war with Iran but since when do the interests of a nation get in the way of the minority of decision makers who can find huge benefits in launching unjust wars on innocent parties?

LM, For all your knowledge, you don't have the slightest idea. One false principle, and all your knowledge falls flat. I have a very good idea actually. Israel, reluctant to go to war against Iran by themselves or be seen as starting the war has been sending in the MOSSAD pretending that they're the CIA to get groups to launch attacks on Iran blowing up mosques and government facilities in the hope that Iran would lose patience and strike out against the US, thus pulling the US into a war. It's the typical story of one weak loud mouthed punk that has a bigger and stronger friend and then tries to start a fight between his friend and some random person he doesn't like. Iran is completely justified even now in attacking the US if we use the same ridiculous standards that the US has in the past to launch wars against other nations, but Iran doesn't want a bar of it, they're wanting to avoid war at all costs and for good reason. It will not be pretty for anyone involved.

LOL I'd be so surprised if a war did break out. From what I can see, the US is desperately trying to avoid it and in fact, Israel seems to be doing everything they can to make it happen, even by posing as the CIA and getting groups from Baluchis in Iran and Pakistan to attack Iranian targets with terrorist attacks, same with the Kurds.

William I sincerely apologize if I seem to have ignored what you have said. I do appreciate your comments and would love to discuss more with you. I don't really use twitter though, what would you like to discuss? Thanks,

Actually, that's the exact reason. The State controls everything with primary education and doesn't allow parents to choose their children's education curriculum. Some parents want to home school, some parents want to include a religious education in their children's upbringing etc. And no, they won't be like religious schools in Pakistan, this is Turkey we're talking about, they're a very educated and proud nation and they won't ever accept such a thing.

Sorry Michael, I thought you meant that it was levels like that in scientology.

Hmmm Michael, there are no nafs levels and there is no original sin in Islam. Your nafs are simply your desires, we all have desires as people. Sometimes we want to do things which are not good for us or which may hurt others, and so we either give in to those desires and temptations, or we decide against it because we believe it is the wrong thing to do.. That is the struggle against one's nafs, and as a whole is the greatest form of Jihad.

On the subject of Islam. Craig Winn wrote a book titled "Prophet of Doom". It consists of passages from the Koran in chronological order, for each passage 5 of the most respected translations, and commentary from Craig Winn. The book is free of charge. [...] The truth about Islam is in the Koran. Perhaps Muslims should kill everyone who reads the Koran or encourages people to read the Koran. I see it does not take long for the hypnotic quality of stereotype to do its number on my first post. I do feel a little bit like Phil, bemoaning my 'good points' ignored, sob sob, but I can state my concerns without whining and keening, perhaps. The cartoon of Islam presented by the three worthy gentlemen here is evocative, and in a strange way, comforting. Without doing a lick of work in challenging and testing the assumptions underlying the stereotypes, cartoon notions allow us to slip into comforting old slippers of mental habit. Infidel knows enough about Islam to know it is Evil. Same with Ba'al, and so, apparently with Jerry. And all LM needs to know about Ba'al is that he is The Jew. What is the point remarking upon or discussing reality -- which is not an Orc, nor Muhammed, nor slavering Jews -- examining the reality of this man el-Shater and his chances of acquiring power? What is the point of remarking upon the details of his life, his character, his actions, his policies, and his competitors? What is the point of looking at Egypt and its relationship (security, above all) with the US, with the peace treaty, with war and Israel and the rest of the challenges of beginning the end of the authoritarian era? As Phil might say it in rather more stagey, operatic screams and flounces, why do I raise such issues on OL?** Since Jerry, Ba'al and Infidel already know the plot, the ending and the major events, no need to refer to reality -- or discuss it -- whatsover. As for our Libertarian Muslim, he happily draws on the oldest, sleaziest of caricature himself. From refuge of contempt and arrogance, the four creatures regard each other and test their ability to work some wisdom from complicated issues. Fuck it. Fuck discussion. Far better to simplify, cut a big slab of I Got The Truth cake, cite some Crank-of-the-third-class, step into those comfy slippers, and slop around a bit -- amongst ones prejudicies, ones set-pieces, ones pleasurable illusions of possession of knowledge and mastery. ___________ ** while continuing to sob and keen, I should note that like Phil, I do take my voice and opinions and eyeballs to other forums. Phil has his classes in poetry at the local church, and I have my Syria Comment. I will think twice before sob sob hiccup, raising an issue here for Cartoonizing ... hiccup snivel. By my comments I was merely pointing out how ridiculous the notion that someone's religion makes them a monster. Does being a Jew make you a troll? No.. Does being a secular non practicing Jew make you a troll? No.. Neither Judaism nor Islam make a monster, one's nafs do.

What is it about Islam that changes secular non practicing Jews into blood thirsty internet trolls that begin salivating over their keyboard at even the slightest mention of Islam?

Israel can't destroy Iran's proxies, they've been trying since the 80's and have failed miserably with an outright defeat when they attacked Lebanon in 2006. Furthermore, it appears that Israel is again trying to draw the US into a war by using their Mossad agents to recruit terrorists to launch attacks inside Iran and all the while telling those terrorists that they are working for the CIA, not Mossad. I think the US has caught wind of this and I believe that the Iranians know that Israel is doing this and are therefore exercising restraint and not responding against the Americans. This means nothing really, they can intend to fly to the moon but that doesn't necessarily mean they'll be able to. In fact one could almost guarantee that if Israel attacks Iran it will face a military response that it can not handle. I think this is really preposterous. Iran would never use chemical or radiological weapons against Israel or anywhere else. Anyone who suggests that they would should produce some type of evidence that Iran demonstrated the intention to do so. If anything, history shows that Iran is very anti WMD as during the Iran Iraq War the Iraqis were using British and US supplied Chemical weapons against Iranian cities and the Iranians didn't respond with Chemical weapons. I think people are freaking out a little too much over the prospect of war, I honestly don't think that the US or Israel will actually attack Iran openly.

The US would never launch a ground war or an air war on Syria and I doubt very much that Israel or the US would attack Iran openly. They know what would happen in both cases and they're not prepared for those consequences.

I found the article hilarious. Does anyone here want to explain why they think that there is a push to reduce the school age of compulsory schooling? Why they'd have a push for more Islamic schools and after all of that, try and explain what the Islamic schools are like in Turkey? Anyone have any ideas? Infidel, as you started this thread, you should do so.

Hi Michael, Those are some very good points! Thank you for responding. I also agree that the US is a sleeping giant, but so is the Middle East. I don't think that the fact that the US is a sleeping giant means that it is not in decline, in fact I think the fact that it is in a decline and that there is economic hardship being caused is what is causing the sleeping giant to wake from its stupor. I also don't think that the US not buying oil from the Middle East would make a difference, in fact if anything it would be beneficial for the Middle East if the US wasn't interested at all in oil there. I also note that you state the cartels in the Middle East are leveraging a high price because the US can afford it, I disagree.. I think oil prices have not reflected the increase in prices that other commodities have had nor do I think it properly reflects the turmoil in the region and I believe that it's not the market that is dictating the price, but in fact it's alliances the oil barons have with the US government that keeps it artificially low which is of an economic disadvantage to the people in the Middle East but a huge advantage to the leadership in the region who enjoy US support. Next, you also state that no external force can stop the US from intervening and only the sleeping giant can. Well, actually I think this is where I need to state that without the external forces the sleeping giant would not awake as those external forces contribute to the economic hardship that Americans feel and without that, the giant would keep sleeping as it has done while their government continued its actions.

I'm not sure it would make a difference sir? I'm still waiting for someone however to address the entire post I made.

Excuse me, but where did you get the idea that the USA has profited from involvement abroad? It is the same old "it's for the oil" argument. So show us the oil - perhaps 'looted' from Iraq, for instance. Nope, the US has - largely - been a victim of its "I am my brother's keeper" mindset. And yes - it would be "so bad". Actions should be initiated by principle, not forced by "economic decline." It would be so bad for whom? I agree with you that it should be initiated by principle and not forced by economic decline, but the US has continued on this path for the last 50 or so years so why should the victims of such interventionism have to wait until Americans who are largely apathetic and generally care not about how the US Government's behavior effects the rest of the world? If it hasn't really happened for 50 years, what precedence is there in that 50 years that would indicate that such change would happen without Americans suffering immense hardship? It seems that the only thing that Americans care about is hardship in their own lives and that it would require immense hardship in the lives of Americans to get them to actually pay attention to what their government is doing both at home and abroad because it would effect them and they'd want something done about it.. If Americans were more judicious in ensuring that their government's behavior around the world was appropriate and did not adversely and unjustly effect others then it would be another story, but that is not the case. If that's the only way to stop the US from intervening in the rest of the world's affairs then perhaps that is what the US needs. At least the victims of such interventionism wouldn't have to suffer any longer and the most suffering would be on those who have become complacent and neglected their obligations as citizens who should be controlling what their government does. And to your other point, yes, the US has benefited greatly from interventionism.. The Military Industrial Complex gets a whole lot of money out of it.

It's not good or bad? Tell that to the people who are victims of US interventionism..

A good point Martin. And now for some very uncomfortable questions. If an American economic decline so big would stop the US continuing down the same road and would stop it intervening, then is it such a bad thing for the world? No doubt it would put a lot of Americans in economic hardship, but are they not responsible for their own government's actions as it is a democracy? Is their apathy and lack of attention to their government's behavior an excuse for not stopping their government or should they wear that responsibility as they have benefited from their government's actions economically whilst it was profitable to do so. Let's make it easier and put in the context of another nation because sometimes it's hard not to be biased.. If it had been the Soviet Union doing the same thing with interventionism and an economic decline was the only way to stop them, then is that so bad?

I for one would voluntarily give New Jersey to the Chinese if they promised to hunt down those people from the Jersey Shore and punish them severely for helping to ruin more and more TV.

Food for thought

I find it humorous that people who doubt the 9/11 story are labeled as having a crazy imagination when actually, the official story of 9/11 is infinitely more far fetched than most other explanations, especially when we take into consideration the fact that previous US Governments have drawn plans up to use terrorist attacks against their own people to justify wars and have also lied about attacks on the US to launch wars. The only difference in this case is that people seem less inclined to accept that their government has lied to them (again). The government wouldn't lie to us, right?

I'm sorry, who is peddling this?

I think the problem is that we're just so scared of the possibility that the very governments that we elect into power and their cronies may do things which are so disgusting so as to justify a war that maims millions and in the process feeds the military industrial complex that we'll believe any far fetched story that is given to us by them because they are our leaders and their stories help us all feel at ease and reassured.. If we were to believe that something like the 9/11 official story was not true, we would then have to ask very uncomfortable questions like, if it is not true, then who was responsible for this? Who knew? We would then have to believe that it could be possible that the very foundations of our way of life, our republic had been eaten at by a cancer.. It's like a person who notices that realizes that they have many of the symptoms of cancer, yet due to not wanting to have it confirmed to them that they do in fact have cancer they refuse to get it checked out by a doctor, thinking that simply by not discussing it or acknowledging that those symptoms are there, that the problem will go away.. But all the while the problem gets worse and worse until one day, something gives and with or without the wish of the poor sick person they find out they have cancer and Instead of treating it early and going through some minor surgery or therapy so that the person could live longer that cancer is now untreatable and terminal, and so our sick person will die from it.. That is what is happening, our nations are riddled with a cancer, they were 10 years ago at 9/11, they were 20 years ago when we put sanctions on Iraq, they were 30 years ago when we gave Iraq chemical and biological weapons to use against the Iranians, they were 40 years ago when we invaded Vietnam, they were almost 50 years ago now when we said nothing, when a noble President was murdered and we refused to say anything and simply swallowed that official story.. We've become too comfortable in our lives. Our material wealth. Our lack of having to sacrifice like people in other nations and so we refused to ask questions because if we all did ask those questions, it would mean that an uncertain change would come.. And we are too scared to be around change.. No longer are the land of the free nor the home of the brave.. Instead we've become the land of the compliant and the home of the cowardly.