There goes the neighborhood - Tunisia Edition

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Lotus

There is every reason to believe that moderates and toleration will then gain more voice and more power and the current ugliness will subside.

I pray you are correct in your optimism.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by Hog1

I believe you area bit confused as I have not actually quoted anything you warn me against.....and I can ASSURE you Sir I would never couch a quote.....either randomly or specifically.

I don't believe you did and I'm not accusing you of such

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Lotus

2. Correct, politically Turkey is a secular democracy. You are making my point here. It has been a secular democracy 88 years.

It's been a secular Democracy despite not because of islam.

Originally Posted by Lotus

It is also actively Muslim in terms of the religious practices of the population. Has been for about 1,000 years. Just because it is referred to politically as a "secular" democracy does not mean there is no religion.

Agreed.

Originally Posted by Lotus

Therefore, as I type these words, Islam and democracy have a nearly century-long track record of being compatible in Turkey.

Wholly incompatible, at odds and in a prolonged power struggle which islam is now beginning to win.

Originally Posted by Lotus

So we see that when you said, "There's no example of islam and Democracy being compatible," you were mistaken. .

You have still not given an example of islam and Democracy being compatible. It's generally a Theocracy with the facade of democracy.

Originally Posted by Lotus

You can speculate about the future of Turkey all you want. But my argument is not built on speculation - I am providing hard evidence..

You have provided no evidence, merely your opinion.

Originally Posted by Lotus

So my initial point, that you made a false statement, remains established.

Only in your opinion.

Originally Posted by Lotus

Evidence, not speculation, shows that it is simply untrue to say, "There's no example of islam and Democracy being compatible." I will respond to the rest of your post just to defend myself:

Originally Posted by Lotus

3. Religious intolerance in Indonesia does not mean that Islam and democracy are incompatible there, just as religious intolerance in the USA does not mean that Christianity and democracy cannot coexist here. It just means that there are some intolerant people. When the mosque in Tennessee was burned last year, did that mean that Christianity and democracy are incompatible? No.

As islam is a political system as well as being a cult I don't think your comparison is valid. One mosque in Tennessee? Compared to the worldwide stealth imposition of the Pact of Umar? Now I'll be the first to admit a lot of mosques worldwide get destroyed, but it's by moslem-on-moslem violence. Rarely is it by another religious group or my lot.

Originally Posted by Lotus

4. India. India consists of more than Hindus. There are more than 220 million Muslims in India, making India the world's third largest Muslim country. India is also a democracy. So 220 million Muslims in India coexist with democracy.

Most give the figure as 165M but even at 220M they are still less than 15% to 80% + Hindu. Nice use of a large number to give credence to your claim. How did Pakistan come to be partitioned from India? If you'd like an instant replay observe Kashmir. More overwhelming evidence that moslems, when they reach a certain %, cease playing 'nice'. Cline's observation, from 2008 (I think):
Below two percent Muslims are well-behaved citizens and cause little apparent trouble for the host society.
At two percent and three percent Muslims begin to proselytize from other ethnic minorities and disaffected groups with major recruiting from the jails and among street gangs.
From five percent on Muslims exercise an inordinate influence in proportion to their percentage of the population. They push for the introduction of halal ("clean" by Islamic standards) food, thereby securing food preparation jobs for Muslims. They increase pressure on supermarket chains to feature it on their shelves--along with threats for failure to comply (United States, Switzerland, Sweden). At this point, Muslims work to get the ruling government to allow them to rule themselves under Sharia, or Islamic law. (England, Netherlands, Philippines).
When Muslims reach 10 percent of the population, they increase lawlessness as a means of complaint about their conditions (Paris--car burning). Any non-Muslim action that offends Islam will result in uprisings and threats (Amsterdam, Denmark--Mohammed cartoons, murder of Theo van Gogh).
After reaching 20 percent of a population expect hair-trigger rioting, Jihad militia formations, sporadic killings and church and synagogue burning (Indonesia, Ethiopia).
After 40 percent you find widespread massacres, chronic terror attacks and ongoing militia warfare (Bosnia, Chad).
From 60 percent you may expect unfettered persecution of non-believers and other religions, sporadic ethnic cleansing (genocide), use of Sharia Law as a weapon and jizya, the tax placed on [conquered] infidels (Sudan, Albania).
After 80 percent, expect to find state-run ethnic cleansing and genocide (Syria, Egypt, UAE).

Originally Posted by Lotus

5. Bangladesh. Same argument as Indonesia. If the religious intolerance of some invalidates democracy then democracy does not exist anywhere on the planet. Religious intolerance exists in some form everywhere.

And you'll get the same answer. The madrassars are the lifeblood of radical (or to me mainstream, old-school) islam and the supposed moderate form is just a convenient facade for jizya from unsuspecting Western states.

Originally Posted by Lotus

6. Egypt. Just because they have the Muslim Brotherhood does not mean that they haven't had democratic elections, albeit imperfect. Does the presence of the KKK make the USA not a democracy? No. You make a non-argument about Egypt.

When has the KKK represented 39% of the voting public in an election? That's what the hilariously named Freedom and Justice Party are at right now and that's with almost 40% 'undecided'. That was a Straw Man and a pretty weak one too.

Originally Posted by Lotus

7. The democratic impulse in Islam which I mentioned pre-dates the division into legal schools. Abu Bakr, who was the first caliph (or leader after Muhammad), was put in his position by democratic election. Thus democracy has remained a paradigmatic ideal because Abu Bakr was the first of the Rightly Guided Caliphs as well as Muhammad's bff. Later caliphs turned into hereditary monarchs but still had sham "elections" for their sons out of respect for this precedent. The hadith which you produced does not change this fact.

What kind of representation do women get under this 'democracy'? And Dhimmis?

Riiiiiight!

I sincerely apologize for taking so long to respond, I am able to look in anonymously on WP but can't post. I eagerly await your response.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Lotus

But what was mentioned above is something different: local neighborhood anti-Coptic repression in Egypt and similar realities. This problem is structurally similar to mosque burnings in Tennessee. It is a problem of local intolerance rather than global terrorism.

Anti-Copt repression in Egypt is part of the Pact of Umar and imposition of Dhimmitude as I previously mentioned and nothing to do with, or to be falsely be compared to, ONE mosque getting burnt out by some idiot white supremacists.

Mosque burnings? Rhetoric at its finest! I'm now convinced that Lotus is part of the problem.

Look up the FBI stats on hate crimes, see who's at the top with 72%.

[Lotus]

Redskin Rat, once again the only problem is that you refuse to admit when you are wrong.

Let's leaving aside other examples which only serve to confuse you and focus on just one example. Turkey has been both democratic and Islamic for 88 years. Therefore your statement that there are no examples of the compatibility of Islam and democracy has an 88 year track record of being wrong. IT IS JUST THAT SIMPLE.

Intelligent conversation involves changing one's notion to fit the evidence. Yet again and again you fit the evidence to meet you preconceived notions.

There is no further point in my arguing with someone who ignores examples which do not fit their preconceived notions. There is no further point in my arguing with someone who uses outdated concepts and outdated statistics. But most of all, there is no further point in my arguing with someone who refuses to admit when they are patently mistaken.

The rest of this thread is full of posters who have intelligent things to say. I don't always agree with them but at least they are engaging in good-faith intelligent conversation. I see no point in dragging that conversation down by responding to you further.

As one last note, once again you have launched a personal attack against me rather than admit that you are mistaken. That is a pretty sucky thing to do. It conversation with you less than pointless.

[RedskinRat]

Originally Posted by Lotus

Redskin Rat, once again the only problem is that you refuse to admit when you are wrong.

So at least I'm consistent, right?
Are you even reading my rebuttals or is your bias just clouding your ability to look at anyone else’s opinion as anything other than invalid?

Originally Posted by Lotus

Let's leaving aside other examples which only serve to confuse you

I'm far from confused, sweetie.....

Originally Posted by Lotus

and focus on just one example. Turkey has been both democratic and Islamic for 88 years. Therefore your statement that there are no examples of the compatibility of Islam and democracy has an 88 year track record of being wrong. IT IS JUST THAT SIMPLE.

As I previously stated 'despite' islam. There has been a ongoing and aggressive attempt at de-democratizing Turkey halted only by the military/secular powers. To argue otherwise is to either be so ignorant of the situation that your opinion should not be taken seriously or that it's a deliberate attempt at misinformation.

Originally Posted by Lotus

Intelligent conversation involves changing one's notion to fit the evidence. Yet again and again you fit the evidence to meet you preconceived notions.

Until I agree with your position I doubt that you'd see my side as intelligent. See my next statement.

Originally Posted by Lotus

There is no further point in my arguing with someone who ignores examples which do not fit their preconceived notions. There is no further point in my arguing with someone who uses outdated concepts and outdated statistics. But most of all, there is no further point in my arguing with someone who refuses to admit when they are patently mistaken.

Classic argument from an 'educator', my sister-in-law pulls that shit all the time when she's losing her position.

Originally Posted by Lotus

The rest of this thread is full of posters who have intelligent things to say.

Sure.......<rolls_eyes>

Originally Posted by Lotus

I don't always agree with them

Most of us (judging by this forum) can barely agree on how to support our team!

Originally Posted by Lotus

.... but at least they are engaging in good-faith intelligent conversation. I see no point in dragging that conversation down by responding to you further.

Then don't, you've failed at every opportunity to actually SUBSTANTIATE your position. Just telling me you're right isn't the kind of evidence I'll accept.

Originally Posted by Lotus

As one last note, once again you have launched a personal attack against me rather than admit that you are mistaken. That is a pretty sucky thing to do. It conversation with you less than pointless.

Personal attack? Saying (tongue-n-cheek) that you are part of the problem? You CAN'T be THAT sensitive.......

'Sucky'.......**** sake!

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by Lotus

However, in both Egypt and Tunisia there are sizeable numbers of folks who prefer secular democracy to either an Iranian Islamic model or, in the cases we are discussing, mob rule by Islam. The Arab Spring revolts were driven more by a striving for democracy than they were driven by calls for Islamic government. As emotions settle, the questions will be less "How to we erase traces of Mubarak or Ben Ali?" and more "How do we create a beneficial new society?" There is every reason to believe that moderates and toleration will then gain more voice and more power and the current ugliness will subside.

Hindsight is always 20/20 and I understand being hopeful for peace, however the widespread violence we are seeing brings us back to the reality I feared with the "Arab Spring" that violent Islamic, anti-American, factions would take over these countries and make the ME a much more dangerous place....particularly for non-Muslims and moderate Muslims

[BleedBurgundy]

Don't you just love religion. Look at our omnipotent deity working in mysterious ways! Isn't it glorious? Praise jeebus. Also, way to go America for sticking your collective nose where it doesn't belong for decades. That policy is clearly working out for you. You should stick with that.

[Slingin Sammy 33]

Originally Posted by BleedBurgundy

Don't you just love religion. Look at our omnipotent deity working in mysterious ways! Isn't it glorious? Praise jeebus. Also, way to go America for sticking your collective nose where it doesn't belong for decades. That policy is clearly working out for you. You should stick with that.

This is clearly a problem with "religion" overall, not violent Islamic extremist factions. I was just watching the news reports of violent mobs of Christians, Jews, Buhdists, moderate Muslims, etc. storming the Egyptian and Libyan embassies here in the U.S. in retaliation.

Last I checked the U.S. was providing many countries in the ME with billions (aggregate) in aid to improve people's standard of living and attempt to promote human rights.....bad U.S., very bad!


:frusty:

[los panda]

i hate people who don't share my beliefs and values, they're obviously all evil.

[hooskins]

Religion can be great but there are many examples where it abused. This is one of them. Violence is never the answer.

[los panda]

human nature is not professional

[BleedBurgundy]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

This is clearly a problem with "religion" overall, not violent Islamic extremist factions. I was just watching the news reports of violent mobs of Christians, Jews, Buhdists, moderate Muslims, etc. storming the Egyptian and Libyan embassies here in the U.S. in retaliation.

Last I checked the U.S. was providing many countries in the ME with billions (aggregate) in aid to improve people's standard of living and attempt to promote human rights.....bad U.S., very bad!


:frusty:

Might want to broaden your frame of reference a bit. Once you do, I'm sure you'll find plenty of violent behavior attributable to the western religions you mentioned. (hmm... Crusades? Salem witch trials? Catholic persecution of scientists)

And regarding the US, let's cut the shit. Any dollar that makes its way into the ME is sent with the underlying purpose of subverting their chosen way of life in favor of the western style which we, in our infinite wisdom, have decided to force upon the rest of the world. If they want to live under an Islamist government, that's their right. We don't have the moral authority to get involved. If we had abstained from being so goddamned proactive in the affairs of other nations, there's a good chance that there would never have been a 9/11. Just because we send some funds their way does not mean we have the right to interfere.

With regards to the violence we're discussing, it can be boiled down to two simple factors:

1) religion provides the moral authority to do violence against those who have beliefs contrary to yours. (contrasted with agnostics and atheists who don't have any supernatural father figure to tell them it's alright to go mass murder each other)

2) the US has repeatedly ****ed with these people in such various and obscenely short sighted ways that we are now collectively reaping what we have sewn.

Those two pieces combined result in what we are experiencing now. Impossible to deny.

[Alvin Walton]

Cracks me up when people bring up the Crusades.
How long ago was that?

[That Guy]

yes, christians never pointlessly murder other religions. not in the crusades, not in the holocaust, not during the black plague (the first thing that happened is they blamed the jews and started killing them).

granted, those examples are a bit dated, but i'd says christians have killed plenty in their time too.

and you don't need to aggregate. egypt is scheduled to get 2billion from us next year alone as one of our non-NATO member allies.