Oslo bomb blast
25 July 2011, 10:48 PM
#152
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
25 July 2011, 11:11 PM
#154
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
25 July 2011, 11:14 PM
#155
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26 July 2011, 12:14 AM
#156
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The essence of his thinking isn't on the fringe, though. The Progress party is the second most popular in Norway, Angela Merkel holds comparable views as do many of the Danes and so forth. It's the means of promoting those views that are extreme along with how he envisages them coming to fruition, but not the essence of the views themselves. It's baffling.
It won't compound their sense of alienation, because they weren't alienated. At risk of repeating myself, the Christian-right are on the rise all over Europe. This was my point in my posts above - he's damaged the very philosophy he believes he's promoting. It just doesn't add up.
I understand the political ends of the IRA and AQ and Tamil Tigers and Hamas and so on; I don't get this. The Progress party were edging towards power via legitimate political means - he may well have put a halt to that which surely defeats the desired outcome.
It won't compound their sense of alienation, because they weren't alienated. At risk of repeating myself, the Christian-right are on the rise all over Europe. This was my point in my posts above - he's damaged the very philosophy he believes he's promoting. It just doesn't add up.
I understand the political ends of the IRA and AQ and Tamil Tigers and Hamas and so on; I don't get this. The Progress party were edging towards power via legitimate political means - he may well have put a halt to that which surely defeats the desired outcome.
Ironically, the more the mainstream of that ideology move away from violence etc.. and try and become a legitimate movement, the more disenfranchised individuals like this become. They view the mainstream of their own cause as traitors or cowards. In their eyes, they're not hurting their cause they are the saviours of it: the "real" proponents of the ideology.
Logic and extremeism are not often bedfellows!
Last edited by New_scooby_04; 26 July 2011 at 12:16 AM.
26 July 2011, 12:47 AM
#157
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: Pottering around ...
Posts: 3,573
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26 July 2011, 08:11 AM
#158
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adds up perfectly when you think about it: as someone once said, an idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. When you edge towards the more extreme ends of an ideology: be it political/religious whatever, you attract people who are more predisposed towards this type of behaviour; it's particularly prevalent in right wing politics much of which is rooted in fear, ignorance and hatred.
Ironically, the more the mainstream of that ideology move away from violence etc.. and try and become a legitimate movement, the more disenfranchised individuals like this become. They view the mainstream of their own cause as traitors or cowards. In their eyes, they're not hurting their cause they are the saviours of it: the "real" proponents of the ideology.
Logic and extremeism are not often bedfellows!
Ironically, the more the mainstream of that ideology move away from violence etc.. and try and become a legitimate movement, the more disenfranchised individuals like this become. They view the mainstream of their own cause as traitors or cowards. In their eyes, they're not hurting their cause they are the saviours of it: the "real" proponents of the ideology.
Logic and extremeism are not often bedfellows!
I am talking about ALL RELIGIONS!
26 July 2011, 08:19 AM
#160
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adds up perfectly when you think about it: as someone once said, an idea isn't responsible for those who believe in it. When you edge towards the more extreme ends of an ideology: be it political/religious whatever, you attract people who are more predisposed towards this type of behaviour; it's particularly prevalent in right wing politics much of which is rooted in fear, ignorance and hatred.
Ironically, the more the mainstream of that ideology move away from violence etc.. and try and become a legitimate movement, the more disenfranchised individuals like this become. They view the mainstream of their own cause as traitors or cowards. In their eyes, they're not hurting their cause they are the saviours of it: the "real" proponents of the ideology.
Logic and extremeism are not often bedfellows!
Ironically, the more the mainstream of that ideology move away from violence etc.. and try and become a legitimate movement, the more disenfranchised individuals like this become. They view the mainstream of their own cause as traitors or cowards. In their eyes, they're not hurting their cause they are the saviours of it: the "real" proponents of the ideology.
Logic and extremeism are not often bedfellows!
26 July 2011, 09:58 AM
#162
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's pretty dumb to take a relativist stance and say that the ideas of this or that religion are no more good for promoting violence than others.
How many Quaker terrorists have you heard of?
26 July 2011, 10:06 AM
#163
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some religions seem more geared to promoting violence that others though.
It's pretty dumb to take a relativist stance and say that the ideas of this or that religion are no more good for promoting violence than others.
How many Quaker terrorists have you heard of?
It's pretty dumb to take a relativist stance and say that the ideas of this or that religion are no more good for promoting violence than others.
How many Quaker terrorists have you heard of?
swap the word quaker for just about any the mainstream religion then, instead of picking the exception that proves the rule which you obviously well know is the case. Troll by any other name
?
26 July 2011, 10:58 AM
#164
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How many religions do you know which actively promote violence and murderous actions?
Don't you think that sort of thing is more likely to be at the feet of individuals and against the basic teaching of the average religion.
Les
Don't you think that sort of thing is more likely to be at the feet of individuals and against the basic teaching of the average religion.
Les
26 July 2011, 11:16 AM
#165
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Disco, Disco!
Posts: 21,825
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
so then, kill others that do not believe in 'your' god, pretty clear from the text?
26 July 2011, 11:21 AM
#166
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Deuteronomy 17
If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
so then, kill others that do not believe in 'your' god, pretty clear from the text?
If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant; 17:3 And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded; 17:4 And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel; 17:5 Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.
so then, kill others that do not believe in 'your' god, pretty clear from the text?
26 July 2011, 11:30 AM
#168
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyway a religion does not have to actively promote such action it can enable it.
Islam preaches slavish obedience to text, and fatalism. Fatalism is bad because it renders the individuals conscience unimportant...far easier to kill if it is 'Gods will'. Uncritical following of scripture is dumb to for similar reasons, plus the religious elites who do the interpreting have undue power. You won't find anyone arguing with God in the Koran like say the old testament.
Last edited by tony de wonderful; 26 July 2011 at 11:35 AM.
26 July 2011, 11:30 AM
#169
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: God's promised land
Posts: 80,907
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26 July 2011, 11:50 AM
#170
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Islam allows NONE of this. It's just literally what the Koran says and there are no arguments.
I think some British scholar a few years ago showed how transliterating a few dots in the wrong order is some key Koran passages changes the meanings totally. The thing about 40 virgins in heaven (or whatever it is) if you are a maryer changes to something like you get a bunch of grapes or something amusing like that.
Islam won't innovate and so this because it would be admitting that the Koran is not directly the word of God but something imperfect crafted by man, even if the errors are from repeated copying/transliterating.
26 July 2011, 12:15 PM
#171
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why are people getting caught on up on religion; as far as I've read this is about a much broader issue: an objection to multiculturalism. Religion is just ONE component of that!! As it happens, he focused on Islam, but with someone of this nature, what they cite as their primary objection is incidental; it might just have easily been people who weren't born in Norway, people who were born to only one Norwegian parent, black people, gay people, people without blonde hair and blue eyes...... These people don't want people of different cultures in their country period- they have to start somewhere by focusing on something, but to think their beef is limited to that is myopic!
Last edited by New_scooby_04; 26 July 2011 at 12:27 PM.
26 July 2011, 12:21 PM
#172
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26 July 2011, 01:00 PM
#174
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're forgetting that mainstream Christianity allows passages from the bible to be studied, re-interpreted etc. Linguistic studies can identify orders that passages were inserted, who wrote them, where translation and transliteration errors are etc. It's an ongoing process and field of research.
Islam allows NONE of this. It's just literally what the Koran says and there are no arguments.
I think some British scholar a few years ago showed how transliterating a few dots in the wrong order is some key Koran passages changes the meanings totally. The thing about 40 virgins in heaven (or whatever it is) if you are a maryer changes to something like you get a bunch of grapes or something amusing like that.
Islam won't innovate and so this because it would be admitting that the Koran is not directly the word of God but something imperfect crafted by man, even if the errors are from repeated copying/transliterating.
Islam allows NONE of this. It's just literally what the Koran says and there are no arguments.
I think some British scholar a few years ago showed how transliterating a few dots in the wrong order is some key Koran passages changes the meanings totally. The thing about 40 virgins in heaven (or whatever it is) if you are a maryer changes to something like you get a bunch of grapes or something amusing like that.
Islam won't innovate and so this because it would be admitting that the Koran is not directly the word of God but something imperfect crafted by man, even if the errors are from repeated copying/transliterating.
Les
26 July 2011, 01:26 PM
#175
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Home
Posts: 14,758
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm up to page 517 and so far it's been a critique of cultural-Marxism, nigh-on the complete history of conflict between Islam and Europe and virtually everything ever written by Robert Spencer. Nothing too nutty, yet, although there are another 1000 pages to go.
26 July 2011, 01:39 PM
#176
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Luther Bible was important too, by translating into the vernacular it cut out the priest middle man between the masses and the Bible. It was a kind of democratisation of Christianity.
26 July 2011, 01:40 PM
#177
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 10,329
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
26 July 2011, 02:00 PM
#178
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is what baffles me about fundamentalism - it's just completely impractical and unpragmatic. If one follows it through to its logical conclusion it's doomed to failure. I've been thinking out loud on this thread, trying to get inside Brievik's head, but I just cannot fathom where he thought this would end-completely divorced from reality? Functioning psychopath? Evil?
in an effort to change his way of thinking would be a complete failure.
Liike suicide bommbers, it is very difficult if not impossible to guard against.
Les
26 July 2011, 02:08 PM
#179
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2002
Posts: 39,877
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Certainly it is true that Christian religions consider that their interpretation of the bible would be the best explanation of what it all means in fact and that it is their job in life to guide their members accordingly.
Les
26 July 2011, 02:10 PM
#180
Moderator
iTrader: (4)
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: The Terry Crews of moderation. P P P P P P POWER!!
Posts: 18,687
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I sometimes wonder whether all the political and religious rhetoric spouted by such psychotics like the perpetrator of this attrocity isn't just a way to try inveigle others toward a much less complicated motive motive, which has been expressed quite eloquently in a Batman movie.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efHCdKb5UWc
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=efHCdKb5UWc
Last edited by New_scooby_04; 26 July 2011 at 02:16 PM.