The Third Jihad

[Sundae]

Oh, I am sooooo sorry. My bad....

Apology accepted.

You know what?
This thread gives me hope.

I see (read) Americans defending Muslims. And accepting that Islam is a religious choice and not necessarily a devil's mark which denotes genocidal tendencies.

And I am pretty sure that those who have positive personal experiences of Islam are in the minority, meaning that the others are just taking it on faith (ahem) in human nature.

Thank you for unintentionally bolstering my faith in reasoning human beings.

[TheMercenary]

I do believe that the majority of Islamic people are peaceful and loving. Same goes for all religions. There are extremists in all aspects of society. But sometimes, as history has shown us, small segments of these groups can get the masses to do things that they would not otherwise do. Do you not think that radical elements of society can do this?

[Sundae]

Of course - I've already mentioned what happens When Good Christians Go Bad.

My post was sincerely meant as a positive post about Dwellars seeing people rather than religion. I don't think that was the case three years ago and I view it as a step forward.

You and I are on the opposite side of the argument in many things, and this is one, but again I am heartened by your last post. And again, it gives me hope. I'm not an apologist and you are not racist. We can agree to disagree.

[TheMercenary]

Thank you for you post. And thank you for seeing through some of my comments, if you knew me personally you would know that I am far from racist, I am certainly not a right wing conservative bible thumper. I have not been in a church for years, well not to include since my father died and before that when my sister died. I have extremely liberal views on some things, and conservative views on others. I like to play devils advocate to extremely liberal comments as well. Most people miss the point. Thanks again. You are a good person.

[classicman]

hahahahahahaha

[classicman]

Geraldine Ferraro ran on a Dem ticket as the VP with Mondale - she wasn't treated like Hillary. Why do you suppose that is?

[DanaC]

*Shows ignorance of American political history* I have never heard of either of those people...

I do think the media treats female politicians differently to the way hey treat male politicians...and I think the electorate have different expectations of female politicians than those they have of male politicians...

Well, duh. *Chuckles* The media expresses and distills (potentially distorts) current cultural preoccupations. It reflects back our cultural expectations and that includes how we view men and women. On the public stage, men must prove themselves to the electorate by showing their strengths and talents and so it is with women; but there had better be 'good wife and mother' on her list of strengths if she wants to be within a mile of high office.

It's expected that a man on the public stage will have a wife in his private world; but how good a father and husband he is only really becomes an issue if he's a cheating bastard. Domestic affairs have the potential to weaken him in public opinion, but they're unlikely to be a strengthening asset.

*shrugs* It's not a conspiracy. It's just the way it is.

[TheMercenary]

A wife and a Mistress....

The first woman to run for President:

Victoria Woodhull, born in 1838 in Homer, Ohio, was selected by the Equal Rights Party to be its candidate in the 1872 election.

http://www.loc.gov/wiseguide/may06/women.html

[DanaC]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

A wife and a Mistress....

The first woman to run for President:

Victoria Woodhull, born in 1838 in Homer, Ohio, was selected by the Equal Rights Party to be its candidate in the 1872 election.

http://www.loc.gov/wiseguide/may06/women.html

No shit? Fantastic, thanks for the link! That's really interesting. I tend to stick pretty much with Britain in the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, only really look at whats going on in other countries where it relates back to Britain *smiles* so it's kind of nice to step out of that and look at similar social movement elsewhere.

Though, actually, now I know shes from the nineteenth century, I think I have heard of her. Her names been mentioned in the context of women in te 'public sphere'. I had assumed you weretalking about candidates in more recent history:P

[classicman]

I was Dana. Merc took it to a whole nother level.

[TheMercenary]

It is only because I heard it on NPR. Yea I am a NPR junky. Whatever......

[classicman]

I wasn't takin a shot at you Merc - I was just sayin...

I really don't think that any of the shit Hillary gets is because she is a woman. Its simply because of who she is, thats all.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by classicman

I wasn't takin a shot at you Merc - I was just sayin...

I really don't think that any of the shit Hillary gets is because she is a woman. Its simply because of who she is, thats all.

No worries. I did not take it any other way. Just shooting from the hip. A weakness of mine.

[tw]

Originally Posted by classicman

I really don't think that any of the shit Hillary gets is because she is a woman. Its simply because of who she is, thats all.

That's right. She is who Rush Limbaugh has been telling us to hate for over eight years now. Many will simply believe what they are told to believe - including WMDs. Rush Limbaugh and the many other Republican party mouthpieces have been telling us for at least a decade to hate Hilary Clinton. Not all of us are smart enough to ignore or demand 'reasons why' from those wacko extremist mouthpieces.

[TheMercenary]

This from a beloved brother and friend:

I got the DVD, "Obsession," in the mail and in a newspaper from the group that is responsible for making these films. They were distributed only in "battleground" states with no effort - THEY said - to influence the election. My first though is this is from some fundamentalist christian pro-Israel group. It is actually from a Rabbi named Raphael Shore. See below. This is all partisan anti-Muslim rhetoric designed to scare people into voting for McPalin.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/erik-o..._b_125969.html
Raphael Shore is an Israeli-Canadian film writer, producer, and Rabbi employed full time by Aish HaTorah.[1][2] He is the founder of The Clarion Fund, a non-profit organization that seeks to advance the idea that the United States faces a threat of radical Islam. Shore is also a regular critic of the media coverage on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, coverage which he alleges is regularly anti-Israel. [3]
Shore's documentary about radical Islam, Obsession, became a controversial part of the 2008 presidential campaign when he distributed copies of it to 28 million voters in U.S. swing states in an apparent attempt to convince them of the dangers of Islamic terror in the run-up to the election. [4] Shore has declined to reveal who funded both the production of the film or dissemination of the DVDs. [5]
Shore is currently a full-time employee of Aish HaTorah[6], an Orthodox organization devoted to promoting Jewish learning, and has collaborated with its sub-organization, HonestReporting, a pro-Israel media watchdog site.
Shore wrote and produced the documentary films Relentless: The Struggle for Peace in the Middle East and Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West.
Raphael Shore is the twin brother of Ephraim Shore, the former head of HonestReporting.[7]

The information above would need to be further vetted to be accepted at face value. The typical event has occurred. He says, she says, he says, she says. Somewhere you will need to make your own decisions.