Tuesday, September 18, 2007


[UPDATE: Even more comments were left below by Anonymous, so see further rebuttal of them here!]

I've been enjoying this dialogue, from the comments to this posting.

The standard talking points are useful to review here, and might get some people thinking:
Anonymous said...
It's a shame you're so racist and can't see the difference between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism. But then again, what else can one expect from someone who equates one of the world's three major religion with Satan-worship and holds another up as the model of justice and tolerance...I suppose bigotry and hatred come easy to people like you. Pity.

11:01 AM, September 13, 2007
My first reply:
RDS said...
Typical leftist tactic, to begin with charges of racism when nothing I've ever said has anything at all to do with race!

It's always the 'progressives' who are hyper race-conscious.

The differences between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism pale in comparison to their similarities, being motivated mainly by an irrational dislike of Jews.

Yes, hatred comes easily to me for things that are objectively evil; what's wrong with you that you excuse it?

You think it's ok to laud as the most perfect of all men a pedophile and rapist of a 9 year old girl (Aisha), who was "surprised" that the "prophet" came to her bed when she was "still with her dolls"? I don't care what society you're talking about, never at any time has it been "normal" to rape pre-pubescent girls -- unless your moon-god says it's ok.

You like pedophiles and their followers?

Shall we get into mohammed's banditry and multiple murders? How about torture -- real torture, not panties on the head? How about using his moon-god to justify breaking apart his family so he could have incestuous sex with his daughter in law?

I don't care what bad things anyone has done in spite of their religion, I care what they do because of it: really follow the words of Jesus and you get lives dedicated to helping the sick and the poor of all races and creeds.

But follow the words of mohammed and you get rape, slavery, and war against the infidel.

So yeah, hatred of that comes easily to me.

Why doesn't it for you?

Can't tell right from wrong? Too scared of being called a racist or bigot to speak the truth? Pity.

8:41 PM, September 13, 2007
Anonymous came back with the predictable litany, which I will respond to piecemeal:
Anonymous said...
Oh right, I forgot that the ethnic cleansing, genocide, and other assorted atrocities during the Inquisition, Crusades, and Holocaust were all unfortunate side-effects of the benevolent alms-giving of your Christ-living brethren.
Where to begin!

First, this ignores my point entirely, that a priori, the mere fat that people who happen to be nominally Christian, or muslim, or Hindu, or white, or purple, or whatever, do bad things, for whatever claimed reason, is entirely uninteresting because we know that from time immemorial man's capacity for evil is unlimited.

What, the world lived in peace and harmony until Christianity came along?

Now, even an atheist should concede that even if religion is hooey, it affects how people think and thus how they act and so religious beliefs have real world consequences. And the question is then: does any particular relgion, on balance, tend to dampen or amplify our worst impulses? And do they tend to encourage, or discourage, our better nature?

Whether or not religion exists at all, people would still find stupid ways to divide the world into "Us" versus "Them", so it's not very useful to simply point the finger at religion (throwing the baby out with the bathwater) and feel morally superior.

That ignores the impact, for example, Christianity had on reducing human sacrifice (more common than most people believe), since God's sacrifice of His own divine Son made all future human sacrifice unnecessary.

It's simple-minded to just assume that all religions are equally useless. Indeed, wouldn't that be highly improbable?

Furthermore, one must ignore that godless, atheistic, rational communism has 100 million corpses on its hands.

Yeah, you don't need religion to find excuses to oppress.

And one relgion encourages slavery, for example, and the other discourages it by preaching universal brotherhood -- whether or not fallible humans always adhere to the message. The most fervent abolitionists were Christians. Muslim arabs ran much of the bulk of the slave trade. Doesn't that make a difference?

One religion teaches we are all dearly beloved children of God, the other that we are allah's slaves. The word islam means "submission" for a reason. The name "Abd'allah" (Abdullah), meaning "slave of allah", is highly popular for a reason.

President John Quincy Adams noted that, of Jesus,
But of mohammed,

Between these two religions, thus contrasted in their characters, a war of twelve hundred years has already raged. The war is yet flagrant…While the merciless and dissolute dogmas of the false prophet shall furnish motives to human action, there can never be peace upon earth, and good will towards men.”
None of that matters?

But to specifics, the Inquisition, though at times abused, actually was a reform that by injecting judicial proceedings actually exonerated many people from baseless charges of witchcraft and thus saved them from irrational mob justice!
...the inquisition was always more lenient than secular authorities and less likely to impose the death penalty. To common people this rather lessened the attraction of reporting neighbours for vindictive reasons. Also, the inquisition had higher standards of evidence which tended to disregard the confessions of witches incriminating each other and inquisitors were markedly sceptical about some of the more fantastic stories of broomsticks and devils. The most famous case involved the release of 1,500 alleged witches held by the Spanish inquisition after an investigation by an inquisitor uncovered massive flaws and inconsistencies in the evidence.

(Sources: pages 260 – 1, Rodney Stark For the Glory of God Princeton 2003; page 113, Peters; see also: Gustav Henningsen The Witches' Advocate: Basque Witchcraft and the Spanish Inquisition (1609-1614), 1980 and Brian P Levack The Witch-hunt in Early Modern Europe Harlow 1995)
The Crusades? A useful counterjihad gone awry, with nothing particularly surprising about it in the context of the times.

And the Holocaust? That old "Hitler was a Christian!" claim? Nazism had elements of pagan Teutonic mysticism, and Hitler rejected his family's Catholicism; indeed, he admired islam!
There are negative statements about Christianity reported by Hitler's intimates, Goebbels, Speer, and Bormann.[24] Joseph Goebbels, for example, notes in a diary entry in 1939: "The Führer is deeply religious, but deeply anti-Christian. He regards Christianity as a symptom of decay." Albert Speer reports a similar statement: “You see, it’s been our misfortune to have the wrong religion. Why didn’t we have the religion of the Japanese, who regard sacrifice for the Fatherland as the highest good? The Mohammedan religion too would have been much more compatible to us [Nazis] than Christianity. Why did it have to be Christianity with its meekness and flabbiness?"[25] ... He was reported to say that religion should die on its own accord.
I love how Anonymous has to retreat to know-nothingness all of a sudden in the face of uncomfortable revelations about islam:
Anonymous said...
I'm not really going to debate the attributes of Islam over any other religion because, well, I'm not a Muslim, and because religion as a whole is very dangerous to open-mindedness and hope, since it emphasizes fear and blind devotion to nonsense in the name of maintaining an insular, homogenous, and altogether irrational lifestyle. But it's good that you think Jesus loves you - congrats on that.
Such attempts at mockery would be more effective perhaps if I were a churchgoer.

And really, isn't that a simpleminded, strawman view of what religion is all about? Through a bigoted double standard, Anonymous found it easy to criticize Christianity specifically, but then refuses to look islam in the eye.

As for islam, by comparison with these terrible sins oddly attributed by Anonymous to Christianity rather than human nature,
More people are killed by Islamists [following the jihad demanded by their god and prophet] each year than in all 350 years of the Spanish Inquisition combined.

Islamic terrorists murder more people every day than the Ku Klux Klan has in the last 50 years.

More civilians were killed by Muslim extremists in two hours on September 11th than in the 36 years of sectarian conflict in Northern Ireland.
Jesus loves even you too, by the way; but that must rankle!

But now it's all about Israel and Iraq!
Anonymous said...
The lies you promote with regard to the political situation in Palestine are what really bother me - but it's really a waste of my time to try to educate a war-mongering facist like you who supports apartheid, racial supremacy, and the U.S.-aided slaughter of tnes of thousands of innocent people.
Lies? I present my honest understanding of the facts. If my facts are in error I'm happy to consider corrections. Evidence?

US-aided slaughter of tens of thousands? Please. The Lancet "study" is thoroughly discredited. What, nobody was slaughtered under kind old Uncle Saddam?

As a physicist I tell you that doctors are notoriously bad at statistical analysis. Indeed,
the Lancet authors “cannot reject the null hypothesis that mortality in Iraq is unchanged.”
And now, let's complete the standard "let's hate Western civ" story by bringing in the Native Americans!
Anonymous said...
But I assume that an Ann Coulter-loving "patriot" like yourself probably thinks that the Native Americans had it coming to them, too. I mean, hey, they didn't believe in Jesus either. Idiots.

6:43 PM, September 16, 2007
Oh, that's funny! Yes, they did indeed "have it coming", but not because they didn't believe in Jesus! I'm perfectly willing to accept in the spirit of ecumenicalism that the Great Spirit reflects some aspect or facet of Jehovah. In fact, the beatified Native American, the Blessed Kateri Tekakwitha, is one step away from becoming a Catholic Saint.

But the pagan moon-idol known as allah, in spite of deliberate lies to the contrary, is a completely different entity anthropologically, theologically, and psychohistorically.

But I digress.

No, the Native Americans had it coming to them because they were vicious cannibalistic stone-age savages; Thomas Jefferson himself wrote the following, enshrined in the Declaration of Independence, as one of the colonial grievances against King George:
He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions.
You know better than such an eyewitness?

[REMEMBER: please see here for followup and rebuttal to the further comments left below by Anonymous!]


Anonymous Anonymous said...

While I will certainly not even address your disgusting, Custer-esque contempt of American Indians and other City-On-A-Hill superiority complexes present in your response (and perhaps just refer you to Charles C. Mann's book 1491: New Revelations of the Americas Before Columbus), I do think there are a great number of issues you raise that warrant a response…even though I know full well that you won’t be moved to consider new ideas or transform into a forward-thinking humanist and will surely continue spouting hatred and bigotry until you die, alone with your god and your anger.

My comment regarding not being a Muslim and therefore not wishing to have a religious discussion was not stated out of any sort of ignorance on the subject. I do feel that any discourse on the contrasting merits of different religions is a dubious enterprise...we might as well discuss which is a better book, The Great Gatsby or The Sun Also Rises. Better yet, let's tussle over the merits of the original Star Wars Trilogy (if I think The Empire Strikes Back is the best one, does that make Jesus love me? Uh oh!). Either way, regardless of whether this is stupid argument (which it is), you seem to want to debate Christianity and Islam and try to prove some bogus theory that Jesus-fanatics are better than Mohammed-fanatics. I find it sad and pathetic to try and justify your (or anyone's) way of thinking by citing scripture written thousands of years ago by humans, by the leaders of a cult that holds as much rational credibility as the belief in Zeus, Gilgamesh, Zoroaster, Xenu and the Galactic Confederacy, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, Nana Buluku, or Krypton's Almighty Zod.

The claim that certain religions or belief-systems are more violent than others or that promote violence over peace and understanding is absurd, as most religious doctrine present a hypocritical view of the world, one that serves the interest of the writers of the doctrine while condemning those who may not follow orders or have divergent viewpoints. Even to snicker at a pagan moon-idol while exulting almighty Yahweh is, at best, the stupidest thing you could attempt to do.

Because scripture is often (if not always) bent in order to promote certain (say, extra-religious) endeavors and more often than not, these interpretations of doctrine serve to benefit the specific goals and agendas of those doing the interpreting as they see fit. And, for those who claim that religions can not be condemned for the actions of people who 'act in the name of god', how else should a man-made belief system be judged if not by its followers? But I suppose that argument only works when it adheres to pro-American, pro-Christian thinking, so as to condemn obvious targets such as Bin Laden while avoiding having to mention Jim Jones, Timothy McVeigh, or David Koresh. But, no matter...onto the annoying crux of your argument (and without your obnoxious bold text for righteous emphasis!!)…

To know both the Bible and the Qur’an is to know that both are equally intent on bloodlust as they are on tolerance under the omniscient, benevolent, and omnipresent essence of one true god (wrathful, vengeful, and insecure are traits I can readily identify, but this may offend your pure sensibilities). Both texts are full contradictions, issues that can easily be exploited by those wishing to promote certain beliefs. As David Rodier of American University in Washington, D.C., an expert on the world's religions, states, "If people are intent on using religion to motivate terror or violence, they'll find an excuse there no matter what the actual text says." He continues, "Religion, after all, speaks to our most basic and ultimate convictions, and if you are wanting to use violence, if you can find a religious justification, then you can find a very powerful motivation."

The Qur’an actually states time and again how tolerant Islam is of other religions and how religion itself is a very personal thing, and that the choice of belief is of one's own concern, not that of anyone else. It stresses its viewpoint that belief is to one's own benefit and that non-belief is a detriment; however, it distances Islam from the notion of religious compulsion. For instance, the Qur’an passage 2:256 states, quite clearly, "There is no compulsion in religion - the right way is clearly distinct from error." Also stated is this, "The Truth is from your Lord; so let him who please believe and let him who please disbelieve." (18:29) Oh wait, more you say?

"Clear proofs have indeed come to you from your Lord: so whoever sees, it is for his own good; and whoever is blind, it is to his own harm. And I am not a keeper over you." (6:104)

"If you do good, you do good for your own souls. And if you do evil, it is for them." (17:7)

Oft-repeated in the Qur’an is the notion that, if you meet a non-believer, your only service to god is to deliver the message of Islamic truth and to do no more. For this statement in its various, repeated forms, see the following passages: 3:20 / 5:92 / 6:66 (oh no, the beast! the beast!) / 6:69 / 10:108 / 13:40 / 24:54 / 39:41 / 50:45 / 64:12...

Islam also preaches that human nature and the natural order of things calls for some people to believe and others not to believe and that those who do not will not be attacked for not sharing the beliefs of others. As passage 10:99 states,

"And if your Lord had pleased, all those who are in the earth would have believed, all of them. Will you then force people till they are believers?"

The promotion of goodness and virtue are important within the Qur’an as well. Take the following passage, for example, "...if Allah had pleased He would have made you one religious community, but He wishes to try you in what He has given you. So vie with one another in virtuous deeds." (5:48)

Reading passages 41:33-35, one can understand that the tenets of Islamic preaching call for speech, not force; by doing good deeds instead of simply preaching about it (something Ted Haggard might want to look into); by returning harm done to you by your opponents with goodness, thereby turning your enemies into friends; and by exercising a great deal of patience and tolerance which is the only way to get your message across. Patience in the face of mockery and abuse, in fact, is mentioned a great deal throughout the Qur’an if you care to take a look (7:198-199 / 20:130 / 33:48 / 50:39 / 73:10).

Your twisted, Occidentally-centered notion that Judeo-Christian beliefs are superior to those found in Islam demonstrates perfectly how bigoted, xenophobic, intolerant, and racist your belief system really is. This abhorrent worldview is, however, not shared by Muslims who adhere to the words of the prophet Mohammed, as clearly articulated in the Hadith,

“All mankind is from Adam and Eve, an Arab has no superiority over a non-Arab nor a non-Arab has any superiority over an Arab; also a white has no superiority over a black nor a black has any superiority over a white - except by piety and good action.”

Not only does Islam praise equality, but it denounces violence more often than someone with your biased blinders on may have thought (and, am I to expect a response regarding the Ten Commandments which also states “Thou Shalt Not Kill” smack dab in the middle of a two Testament tome of murder, revenge, and various divine smitings?)…Islam actually respects the sanctity of human life and of the unity of mankind:

The Qur’an states, “Take not life, which God hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus doth He command you, that ye may learn wisdom.” (6:151)

And we continue…

“If any one slew a person - unless it be for murder or for spreading mischief in the land - it would be as if he slew the whole people: and if any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole people.” (5:32)

“O mankind! We created you from a single (pair) of a male and a female, and made you into nations and tribes, that ye may know each other, not that ye may despise (each other). Verily the most honored of you in the sight of God is (he who is) the most righteous of you. And God has full knowledge and is well acquainted (with all things).” (49:13)

The Qur’an forbids aggression and the provocation of malice when it states, “And do not let ill-will towards any folk incite you so that you swerve from dealing justly. Be just; that is nearest to heedfulness” (5:8) and here, “Help one another in works of righteousness and goodness, and help not one another in sin and aggression.” (5:2) The Qur’an, in common with our founding fathers, even denounces tyranny (Thomas Jefferson must be rolling over in his watery grave!) when it states, “God commands justice and doing good and giving to relatives. And He forbids indecency and doing wrong and tyranny. He warns you so that hopefully you will pay heed.” (16:90)

We all know that the usual sound bytes from the good ol’ Apostles still hold dear. I mean, how can you argue with Matthew when he writes, “You have heard that it hath been said, Thou shalt love they neighbor, and hate thine enemies. But I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.” (Matthew 5:43-44) And what of Luke, “But love your enemies, and do them good, and lend never despairing; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be Sons of the Most High: for he is kind toward the unthankful and evil.” (Luke 6:35)

And those are nice sentiments from noble saints, but what of the Judeo-Christian idea of allowing others to believe in religions different from their own? Let’s take a gander at some of your greatest hits:

For example, your precious Bible states, “One who blasphemes the name of the Lord shall be put to death” (Leviticus 24:16) and it doesn’t stop there…

“Do not bow down before their gods or worship them or follow their practices. You must demolish them and break their sacred stones to pieces.” (Exodus 23:24)

“If you ever forget the Lord your God and follow other gods and worship and bow down to them, I [Moses] testify against you today that you will surely be destroyed.” (Deuteronomy 8:19)

“If you hear it said about one of the towns the Lord your God is giving you to live in that wicked men have arisen among you and have led the people of their town astray, saying, ‘Let us go and worship other gods,’ then you must inquire, probe and investigate it thoroughly. And if it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done among you, you must certainly put to the sword all who live in that town. Destroy it completely, both its people and its livestock.” (Deuteronomy 13:12-15)

“Whoever sacrifices to any god other than the Lord must be destroyed.” (Exodus 22:20)

“If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is of thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers; Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him: But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people. Thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the Lord thy God.” (Deuteronomy 14:6-10)

“If a man or woman living among you in one of the towns the Lord gives you is found doing evil in the eyes of the Lord your God in violation of his covenant, and contrary to my command has worshiped other gods, bowing down to them or to the sun or the moon or the stars of the sky, and this has been brought to your attention, then you must investigate it thoroughly. If it is true and it has been proved that this detestable thing has been done in Israel, take the man or woman who has done this evil deed to your city gate and stone that person to death.” (Deuteronomy 17:2-5)

“Anyone who blasphemes the name of the Lord must be put to death. The entire assembly must stone him. Whether an alien or native-born, when he blasphemes the Name, he must be put to death.” (Leviticus 24:16)

Ug, this is tedious and boring, but oh so righteous! Onward, stalwart Christians! Thrice more into the breach of intolerance!

“And it shall come to pass, that every soul, which will not hear the prophet, shall be destroyed.” (Acts 3:23)

“If there come any unto you, and bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your house, neither bid him God speed: For he that biddeth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds.” (2 John 1 10-11)

“Believers must not commune with unbelievers. What fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness, light with darkness, believers with infidels?” (2 Corinthians 6:14-15)

We could go on forever providing quotes that serve our purposes, but I feel like that's a waste of time. I only engage this part of your vitriolic rant to suggest that I may not be the know-nothing liberal pleading ignorance as you so cheerfully claimed. Honestly, I could sit here all day and list the countless horrors found in the Bible, passages not only condoning but commanding rape, murder, baby-killing, the subjugation of women, slavery, and prostitution (for a little taste, see some of the following passages, or just read the whole damn Bible, and save yourself the hassle of skipping all of the other fun stuff!) - Deuteronomy 20:10-17 / Ephesians 5:22-24 / Exodus 21:20-21 / 1 Peter 2:13 / 1 Peter 2:18 / Leviticus 25:44-45 / Judges 21:10-24 / Numbers 31:7-18 / 2 Samuel 12:11-14 / Exodus 21:7-11 / Zechariah 14:1-2 / Deuteronomy 22:25-29 / Judges 5:30 / Deuteronomy 21:10-14 / Deuteronomy 22:23-24).

But, what else can one expect from a religion full of ridiculous contradictions? (Quick question: God said “Let there be light” on Day One, but waited until Day Four to create the Sun? Smart.) I mean, look at what your lord and savior, Jesus Christ has to say about things:

“Peace I leave with you; my peace I give you.” (John 14:27)
“Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.” (Matthew 10:34)

Ok, so he’s a bit confused, but this next pair is a real gem of Alberto Gonzales-esque proportion and logic. Jesus claims that, “If I testify about myself, my testimony is not valid.” (John 5:31) and then, a mere three chapters later, states that, “Even if I testify on my own behalf, my testimony is valid.” (John 8:14) If only Scooter Libby could’ve been as legally savvy as the messiah.

Even your beloved US Presidents and founding fathers also may not agree with your point of view regarding the benefits of Christianity (or perhaps any religion). Take this little tidbit from Jefferson’s Notes On Virginia, “Millions of innocent men, women, and children, since the introduction of Christianity, have been burned, tortured, fined, and imprisoned, yet we have not advanced one inch toward uniformity. What has been the effect of coercion? To make one half of the world fools and the other half hypocrites.”

In fact, Jefferson echoes certain Islamic sentiments, such as his disinterest in forcing religion upon others as well as his hope that good deeds, rather than what is preached, show the true nature of man: “I never told my religion, nor scrutinized that of another. I never attempted to make a convert, nor wished to change another's creed. I have judged others' religions by their lives, for it is from our lives and not our words that our religions must be read.”

But then again, the Bible seems not to be clear where it stands on the issue of deeds and faith. James 2:14-1 claims, “What good is it, my brothers, if a man claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save him?...Faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead,” while Ephesians 2:8-9 states, “For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith…not by works.” Maybe your god should get on his own same page.

Or, to cut to the chase, maybe this Jefferson quote works better, “Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man.”

But it doesn’t stop with doubting Thomas, unfortunately for patriots like you. Check out what James Madison had to say about your lovely belief system: “During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry, and persecution.”

Maybe John Adams should have taught his son a bit of his healthy religious skepticism when he said, “The divinity of Jesus is made a convenient cover for absurdity,” and this, “But how has it happened that millions of fables, tales, legends, have been blended with both Jewish and Christian revelation that have made them the most bloody religion that ever existed.”

No wait, why don’t we look at what Revolutionary writer Thomas Paine has to say about religion, if you can stand it:

“All natural institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit.” (The Age of Reason)

Or this…

“Of all the systems of religion that ever were invented, there is no more derogatory to the Almighty, more unedifiying to man, more repugnant to reason, and more contradictory to itself than this thing called Christianity.” (The Age of Reason)

It is my hope that Jefferson’s hope for the future comes to fruition:

“The day will come when the mystical generation of Jesus, by the Supreme Being as His father, in the womb of a virgin will be classed with the fable of the generation of Minerva in the brain of Jupiter.” (Letter to John Adams, April 11, 1823)

I suppose these dolts don’t really know what they’re talking about, at least not the way you do. You know your god is an infinitely compassionate and loving divinity, far more rational than the god of Islam. I mean, just look at this proclamation of peace from Exodus 15:3 - “The Lord is a man of war.” I suppose the doctrine and the followers are one and the same in your case.

But, I digress.

Now, again, let me reiterate: Any religious document or belief can be twisted by fringe elements of any society in order to benefit an agenda, and I subscribe to no such doctrine. I think belief in Jehovah, Mohammed, a divine Buddha, Vishnu, and Quetzalcoatl are all equally absurd, which is why it’s frustrating that you saw fit to divert the genesis of this discussion towards that of weighing the merits of two of the world’s major religions rather than actually addressing your misunderstanding of Zionism and its disastrous policies and effects. It’s a pity you have no knowledge or understanding of history and are aware of only the disturbing and perverted propaganda of power-hungry racists. Maybe if you knew about the atrocities of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians during the Arab-Israeli War of 1948 and the subsequent systematic genocide, starvation, and other war-crime fundamentals of the BenGurion/Golda Meir/Ehud Barak/Ariel Sharon school of apartheid.

I’d happily provide you with news articles, books, and other matter from which to learn the truth about the Palestinian situation if I actually thought you cared at all. But, anyone who equates resistance against the overwhelming military might of a foreign occupation with extremist terrorism based on blanket racism is surely deceiving themselves, or at least allowing themselves to be deceived. It seems that you would benefit from some historical context with, say, some knowledge of the 60 years of oppression that is destroying the people of Palestine, a people who have been vastly and routinely murdered, subjugated, relocated, and demonized for the benefit of an Israeli land grab and racist colonization of the “Holy Land,” an area inhabited by Palestinians for well over thirteen hundred years. Maybe you should read about the massacre at Sabra and Shatila in 1982 and about what really happened in Jenin in April 2002…it helps to learn about bulldozer operator Moshe Nissim (code name Kurdi Bear). Sure, I don’t expect you to take what I say as gospel (especially since we’ve seen how reliable the gospels are; see entire section above), as people like you refuse to look outside of FoxNews or the New York Post for your in depth examination of current events and political analysis. Resistance to governmentally-sanctioned talking points is certainly not a neoconservative strength and I can only assume that fascists like yourself would probably have attacked Munich’s White Rose Society in the early 1940’s for not falling line with the Third Reich at the time.

But hey, who’s to care about conditions and realities in the West Bank or Gaza Strip, that are far worse than South Africa’s nightmarish Bantustans, when gay people might be getting married somewhere this very minute?! What a travesty! Let’s focus on what’s really important here…which, if I’m to believe your hero Daniel Pipes, is clearly to make sure that no god-fearing, patriotic American has to be burdened with the uncomfortable sight of Arabic writing on a t-shirt, let alone, having Arabic language and culture being taught in a Brooklyn public school. It’s true, there’s really no point in confusing good ol’ Western values and words with those crazy Arab ones, I mean, we’ll just rid ourselves of dangerousness terrorist codes such as “alcohol,” “algebra,” “giraffe,” “magazine,” “admiral,” “mattress,” “sugar”, “lilac,” and let’s be sure to forget the entire concept of zero that’s been secretly infiltrating our defenseless children’s math textbooks for generations now. Even the name of the Brooklyn school is troubling, because it sounds suspiciously foreign and you know how much we hate foreigners, especially when they are Lebanese poets who like Walt Whitman. I mean, this Khalil Gibran character they named the school after could have been some sort of Muslim spy working for any number of clandestine terrorist organizations, rather than being a Christian, whose maternal grandfather was a Catholic priest and whose seminal work The Prophet was carried to World War II by many American GIs after his death in 1931. But, you and Daniel Pipes are right, Arabic is to be feared and banned from all things American, because if we can aggressively keep this dang stranglehold on freedom, academic or otherwise, isn’t that what really makes us free?

I have little else to write to you and your non-existent legion of blog readers.

I can only suggest that you try reading less Joan Peters and Alan Dershowitz and more Norman Finkelstein and Tanya Reinhart and try to open yourself to ideas that you may not be privy to or that you haven’t thought to learn about, even if you wind up not agreeing with them. People like you don’t read books, news articles, or see films that are shunned by the likes of such notorious bigots (oh sorry, in your world, you might know them as ‘luminaries’ and ‘soothsayers’) Rush Limbaugh, Bill O’Reilly, or Ann Coulter. And when you decide that books you disagree with are not worth reading, you might as well save yourself the trouble of rallying against them and just burn them instead.

You’re a disgusting and ignorant human being and it’s a shame you’ll never realize truly how evil and dangerous people like you are to the survival of this world and the different people in it. And with that, I will never visit your racist and offensive blog again. Cheers.

1:53 AM, September 19, 2007  
Blogger RDS said...

Response to this tedious rant correcting its logical and factual errors is here!

12:45 AM, September 20, 2007  

Post a Comment

<< Home