Whatever happened to the McCarthurs and the Pattons

[tw]

UT's post suffers from a fundamental flaw. He sees the world same as Rush Limbaugh. Them verses us. Cowboys with black hats versese cowboys with white hats. Good verses evil.

Reality - the world is a multi dimensional complexity where two enemies share a common adversion to a forth or seven different enemies.

Those who understand the world also knew that Saddam more feared the Muslim Brotherhood than he did the US. They knew that Osama bin Laden was just another example of a multi-dimensional entity that has existed since the 1400s. In a single dimensional world, the enemy of Saddam - bin Laden - was a Saddam ally.

In a previous discussion about the Muslim Brotherhood, UT all but denied it even exists. Well yes. He must if he views the world only in terms of 'them verses us'.

Even in Israel - a close American friend - is an adversary of America - who also happens to be its leadership. Likud stands for things adversarial to principles that America stands for. But then it is a complex and multi-dimensional world. The world cannot be as UT has just posted. "Them" - the evil muslims - verses "Us" - the righteous christians? This is the same mentality that says "god is on our side".

[wolf]

Wait, wait, wait ... how can Israel, and the Arab conflict be the fault of the US, when it was the Brits that carved up the Middle East?

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by wolf

Wait, wait, wait ... how can Israel, and the Arab conflict be the fault of the US, when it was the Brits that carved up the Middle East?

Because tw sees the world in the black and white tones painted by Al Franken and Bill Maher.

[wolf]

Thanks. I'll sleep better now.

[tw]

Originally Posted by wolf

Wait, wait, wait ... how can Israel, and the Arab conflict be the fault of the US, when it was the Brits that carved up the Middle East?

Where did I post - anywhere - that "Israel, and the Arab conflict [is] the fault of the US". This is also how Rush Limbaugh hypes his lies. Why do you do what Rush Limbaugh does?

Rush totally misrepresents what another says, then he aquaints that person with Hilary. And no I do not know Hilary nor did I ever vote for her. Just dispelling another Rush type accusation before it too is posted.

Even by stripping down what was posted into black and white, no where is there anything that even comes close to "Israel, and the Arab conflict [is] the fault of the US". We should be discussing the merits of UTs post - and not misrepresenting other posts with fictional interpretations. The point was that some misrepresent reality by condensing everything into 'good verses evil', 'black verses white', etc.

For example, UT continuously avoids all discussion of the Muslim Brotherhood - as if it did not exist and was not relevant. This he must do to reinterprete all parties into either 'good or evil'. This he had to do to blame Saddam for terrorism in the US. This is how he justifies the evil Arabs verses the good Christians and their allies the righteous Jews.

This 'good verses evil' rationalization is also how Nazis promoted hate - to justify using propaganda the invasions of other sovereign nations. What other nation would be so evil as to invade and occupy another nation only on lies, myths, and radio talk show host propaganda? Hummm.... Lets see. Japan for most of WWII. North Korea against South Korea. USSR against Afghanistan. Indonesia against E Timor. America against Vietnam. Iraq against Kuwait. There must be a most recent example of such evil. What could it be?

[OnyxCougar]

Originally Posted by iamthewalrus109

All this ties into the mess we are all in now. All of these factors, mixed with the basic greed and averest of the United States has landed us here, its pure and simple really.

Do you mean avarice?

[Undertoad]

tw, just a quick note... I've been an atheist all my life. Wanted to make that one clear.

I would love to discuss the Muslim Brotherhood and I hope I don't "avoid" discussion of anything.

Most of what you've attributed to me was quoted text. Thanks.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

I hope I don't "avoid" discussion of anything.

Izatso.

What other nation would be so evil as to invade and occupy another nation only on lies, myths, and radio talk show host propaganda? Hummm.... Lets see. Japan for most of WWII.

I don't follow this at all. The Jap military had an agenda which they took as far as they could with Hirohito's blessing. The civilian population had no say in the matter whatsoever. They weren't even allowed to question why.

[tw]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

tw, just a quick note... I've been an atheist all my life. Wanted to make that one clear.

Actually, I tried to raise a discussion about religion and pagan beliefs long ago in another thread. No one wanted to bite.

I am not an atheist. But I am not a Muslim, Christian, or Jew in the conventional sense. My problem with all these religions. They all have the same pagan worship that was problematic with Greek and Roman religions.

If a god has a will, then a god is only human. A real god is not on anyone's side. Pagan religions have problems with this concept. Pagan religions need to see everything in 'good and evil'.

These concepts - their religions and mine - should be no problem as long as these pagan religions don't forget their purpose. Religion is only a relationship between one person and his god. Anytime that relationship is imposed on any other person, then that religion has then become satanic worship.

I suspect that concept is too new, too different, or too threatening for others. But then I am not trying to impose religious beliefs on anyone else.

However, that is not true of the Muslim Brotherhood which in many ways is very much like the worst Zionists and is now proclaimed by right wing religious American fundamental Christians. So are all these religions united to attack me? Of course not. That would be interpreting the world as George Jr sees it.

Take this same line of reasoning further. Who should we now blame for creating the Israel Arab problem? There is no black and white viewpoint. However, "blame tw. He is clearly a threat because he is not of our religion." If I saw everything in black and white, then I would have to expect 'them' to all think just that. The Arab Israeli problem is more found in intolerance - a concept that the great Middle East writer Kahlil Gibran exposed.

There is no good and evil, per say. There are numerous parties all with different prespectives. Difficult to explain to a nation (America) who sees Al Qaeda everywhere and that is now so contrary to what Gibran wrote. If it is a Muslim fundamentalist, then it must be Al Qaeda? Again reality is far more complex. Insurgents in Iraq are not Al Qaeda. Al Qaeda has come and has probably gone. This is more the nature of Muslim Brotherhood. To better understand the Arab world, assume that Al Qaeda no longer exists and but another branch of the Muslim Brotherhood has risen to attack the enemies of Islam. And in a few years they will be replaced by others.

Ever wonder why Americans have so much trouble understanding the Arab world and its insurgencies? Americans want to see everything as if all were a common enemy. Does not work that way. Muslim Brotherhood or Wanahabism is not a fixed entity. There is no single enemy. At best, we are trying to attack a concept. A concept we call Al Qaeda - so that we can explain it all only in black and white; good and evil. Unfortunately, by attacking the concept, we threaten the religion and only make more enemies. Ever try to punch out a ghost? This is the problem with the George Jr war on terror. There is no terrorist to attack. Just a lot of insurgents mostly created by America. That is the problem with attacking something you don't understand - be it trying to impose democracy on people not interested or trying to wipe out the VietCong in Vietnam. A military war cannot be won against a concept. Maybe readers of Mao might better explain this. Even King George of 1775 England also made the same mistake.

We never first learned why the enemy existed. We foolishly think we were winning a war because we won every battle. One cannot win a war if one does not first properly define the "enemy". In Vietnam, we were doomed to lose because "we met the enemy and he was us". Without first understanding what the Muslim, Arab, Iranian, etc people want, then we are as doomed as Britian was in India and Afghanistan.

There is no fixed enemy in the Muslim world unless we create it. However we are creating more ghostly enemies every week in Iraq. Just like in Vietnam, they are enemies of our creation for numerous reasons - including our religious biases and some god forsaken need to impose democracy on people who do not (yet) want democracy.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Just so we're all on the same page.
re·li·gion n.
1- a. Belief in and reverence for a supernatural power or powers regarded as creator and governor of the universe.
....b. A personal or institutionalized system grounded in such belief and worship.

2- The life or condition of a person in a religious order.

3- A set of beliefs, values, and practices based on the teachings of a spiritual leader.

4- A cause, principle, or activity pursued with zeal or conscientious devotion.

Idiom: get religion, Informal
To become religious or devout.
To resolve to end one's immoral behavior.

If a god has a will, then a god is only human.

This seems to conflict with 1a where god is considered "governor of the universe". If you're saying humans have a will, therefore if a god has a will that god is only human, your premise is flawed. There is no reason to believe that a human can't also have an attribute that a god has.

Pagan religions have problems with this concept. Pagan religions need to see everything in 'good and evil'.

Are you refering to Christians, Jews and Muslims as Pagan religions? Because of the number of people on this board that consider themselves Pagans instead of the "Big 3", we should define them separately.

Religion is only a relationship between one person and his god. Anytime that relationship is imposed on any other person, then that religion has then become satanic worship.

Here again, Satanic worship is a religion worshipping a particular deity.
One person and his god? See "institutionalized" in definition 1b.
If I believe my god is "considered governor of the universe", then he/she is your god too, you just don't know it. This is where the big problem lies. How much effort should I expend to make you aware that you are under my god's juristiction.
Extreme Christians are prone to converting the heathens "up 'side the head". The Mormons go so far as to baptize long dead forbearers.
Extreme Muslims don't seem to want to convert the heathens, they appear to feel that if you haven't figured it out yet there's no hope, so they just cut your head off.
Extreme Jews don't seem to want to convert anybody. They just want everyone else to get out of town before they slam a stinger air-to-ground, up your butt.

The Arab Israeli problem is more found in intolerance

Absolutely....I'd take that thought further......global.

Difficult to explain to a nation (America) who sees Al Qaeda everywhere

The press seems to use Al Qaeda, terrorists and boogie man, interchangeably. Rather than getting into the nuances of this group or that sub-group, they lump them together under "bad guys" for public consumption. I've seen this in the past and assumed the people I employ to handle such threats (US Gumint) would break it down further for analysis. I think I was wrong.

Ever wonder why Americans have so much trouble understanding the Arab world and its insurgencies? Americans want to see everything as if all were a common enemy.

When I'm out and about, if something bites me I swat it. I could get out my field guide to insects and figure out just what it was but I'd rather kill it and grunt "bug bad". I also accept that no matter how many I kill there will always be more.
The same goes for terrorists, in there will always be groups that have a grievance (real or imagined) against me or just need an enemy (me) as an organizational tool. "Hey guys, forget you're living in ignorance and squalor, god wants us the attack "The Great Satan".

At best, we are trying to attack a concept. A concept we call Al Qaeda - so that we can explain it all only in black and white; good and evil. Unfortunately, by attacking the concept, we threaten the religion and only make more enemies.

Yes, we're attacking a concept and yes, we lump it under Al Qaeda, but I don't agree that we are threatening the religion by attacking those groups that have avowed the US to be the enemy and taken up arms against us. I don't agree with Bush's war but that doesn't mean I don't want to crush any group that wants to attack us. Reasons and nuances be damned, make them understand that attacking the USA is NOT one of the viable options in solving their problems.

One cannot win a war if one does not first properly define the "enemy".

In this case "the enemy" is in constant flux, try to define it and it will change before you're done. I'm afraid we'll have to settle for anyone that (ideally)plans or (practically)trys to attack us.

they are enemies of our creation for numerous reasons - including our religious biases and some god forsaken need to impose democracy on people who do not (yet) want democracy.

Yes, agreed.

[lookout123]

hey bruce, not to suck up or anything, but that is possibly the best post i've ever seen in the cellar. you discussed, refuted, agreed, and explained using facts, without becoming snide or personal. good job. i think this post should be used as the poster child for Quality Posting 2005 .

[wolf]

Many Pagans may actually have a harder time with the concept of "good" and "evil" than most Christians.

Christians and Jews have a nice, easily codified, set of 10 basic behavioral rules, as well as someone to blame when you stray from them. Notice, blame here is externalized ... "The Devil Made Me Do It."

I know that all Christians and Jews are not so simplistic in their understanding, but I'm personally just amused as all get out by people who profess such belief in Free Will and then don't accept the same responsibility for doing "bad" things as they do "good." When was the last time you heard some Christian donate to charity, or provide some other good samaritanly act and exclaim "God made me do it! ... Nope. They made the choice to do good, but the Devil made them sin.

Anyway, where was I going with this? Oh yeah, a lot of folks in the pagan and new age communities (there's overlap in those two factions, but not 100%) approach life, morality, and ethics in a very naive fashion. El will likely agree in my assessment of the Fluffy Bunny types ... they don't even accept or acknowledge the existence of or concept of evil. By pretending it's not there, it will just go away and we can all be sweet happy, loving people together forever and ever, and golly weren't things so much better before the xtians conquered all of Europe?

To address another of TW's statements ... pagans are more likely to "humanize" their godforms than most christians. For us the Gods play a real and active part in our lives rather than representing an unattainable (or difficulty attainable) ideal like the Christian God or Jesus.

[dar512]

Originally Posted by wolf

... and golly weren't things so much better before the xtians conquered all of Europe?

Kids are fun and entertaining for different reasons at different stages in their lives. [Yes, this will connect up in a moment]

One of the things I like about the current phase is that my kids are getting old enough to be studying more interesting stuff. And since I'm the one who helps them study for tests, I get to remember how all this stuff works. The oldest is getting into algebra and both are studying some neat stuff in science.

But the stuff I'm finding the most fun is their social studies. The youngest just finished working through the Tigris/Euphrates "cradle of civilization" stuff. The more I read about early history, the more convinced I am that the whole of history from hunter/gather to yesterday's newspaper is one big long power struggle.

It's comic in a way. Once we discovered/developed farming we had more time. And so we had time to develop the arts -- and tools of war.

[xoxoxoBruce]

It's comic in a way. Once we discovered/developed farming we had more time. And so we had time to develop the arts -- and tools of war.

And turf to defend, half the flight or fight choice was essentially removed.

[xoxoxoBruce]

Originally Posted by lookout123

hey bruce, not to suck up or anything, but that is possibly the best post i've ever seen in the cellar. you discussed, refuted, agreed, and explained using facts, without becoming snide or personal. good job. i think this post should be used as the poster child for Quality Posting 2005 .

Yeah, well fuck you, what the hell do you know you dumb........
Seriously though, thank you. I have great respect for TW, even if we don't always agree. I'd be embarrassed to say how long it took me because I don't type and can't spell and still had to do two edits for spelling and grammer.