Re: Current Issues in Religious Tolerance

Robert Arvay wrote:

> Greetings;
>
> Pat Kohli <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > Robert Arvay wrote:
>
> > > As to your unfounded ad hominem attack, I have not only never said
> > > anything even remotely like what you accuse me of, I have consistently
> > > sympathized with the Arabs, and with ALL oppressed people.
> >
> > "I have been trying to gain an insight into the Arab Islamic mindset,
> > to better understand the intransigent hatred and fanaticism besetting
> > the Middle East."
> > - Robert Arvay, 8 August 2002
>
> Taken terribly out of context.  Yes, hatred does beset the Middle
> East, and yes, I am trying to understand the Arab-Islamic mind.  When
> parents strap bombs to their children and send them out to kill
> themselves and other children, I would say that there is a problem.

When you categorize infanticide as typical of the Arab-Islamic mind, it
is clear that there _is_ a problem, but it seems that this problem is
not yet clear to _you_.  Let me assure you, though, it remains clear,
even clearer the more you post this sort of bizarre distortion.  How
many Arab Muslims do you know, and, of those, how many are, as you
describe, parent who would, "strap bombs to their children and send them
out to kill themselves and other children"?

> I
> would further say that excusing it, glamorizing it, and ignoring it,
> are all the wrong reactions.

I am tempted to ignore it simply because it is off topic here.  On the
other hand, there is the observation that others follow in your
footsteps, and though they don't post the more blatant hate speech that
you find (except Darrick), the OT political stuff would pose a problem
when everyone else is doing it.

> But I also offer suggestions--- NOT a
> "let's kill them all," suggestion as you would have me to say, but
> rather, democracy, anti-corruption, and economic prosperity, which
> would change the character of desperate hoplessness into one of
> promise and hope.

I'm thinking these things sound good.  Let's try them out here, and, if
they work well, we'll tell others about our experiences and help them as
they choose to emulate our successes.

>
> Why you choose to distort my theme is beyond me.

I do not chose to distort your theme.  My choice would be that you take
your bile to the next town down the turnpike, and post it there.

>
> >
> > -------------------------------------
> > "During the Cold War ....the subjects of the Soviet empire ....were
> > pretty much like us - folks who wanted life, liberty and the pursuit
> > of happiness.
> >
> > But this is not true of the Middle East.".
>
> If I recall, this was a quote from a columnist who was pointing out
> that while in the USSR there were pro-democracy forces, the Middle
> East, having no history or experience with democracy, relies on
> autocratic and theocratic solutions.

I'm not buying the excuse.  1) The USSR was not a democracy before the
Bolsheviks - there was no democratic tradition, a) though there may have
been those with democratic aspirations, there were no "Pro-democracy
forces" in the USSR.  I'm not sure if you are referring to the western
interventionist forces in the 1920s, or some utter fantasy.  2) If you
consider the original text, it reflected common values of life, librty
and happiness, and to suggest that these values are completely absent,
or even rare in Arabs, is simply the naked anti-Semitic bigotry that it
appears to be, and your attempt to dress it up as something else, is
your own cynicism about the gullibilty of your audience here.

  "I used to tell my students that the American dream is best described
as life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Now I am convinced my
students were right and I wrong. I learned the hard way when the
Americans ruined my life,   confiscated my liberty and ended my
happiness. 
  The US bombed Al-Jazeera because it was angered by reports that did
not confirm its one-sided picture of the war. For the past five years,
Al-Jazeera and other Arab stations have been gaining credibility and
fame not only in the Arab countries but also in the West, competing with
international networks such as the BBC and CNN. Al-Jazeera in particular
became very popular during the American war on Afghanistan. The channel
aired voice recordings of Al-Qaeda and Taleban leaders as well as the
speeches of President Bush and allied leaders. This decision to
broadcast both sides was in keeping with its motto "The opinion and the
counteropinion" but the Americans could not allow such freedom of
expression to prevail. The US sent its first warning to Al-Jazeera in
November 2001, bombing its Kabul office, destroying its equipment and
forcing its journalists to flee. An Al-Jazeera cameraman was sent to
Guantanamo Bay as a war prisoner."
- Dima Tareq Tahboub, after her husband, a journalist, was killed at the
Baghdad office of Al Jazeera.
http://www.arabia.com/newsfeed/article/english/0,14183,427157,00.html

> Exactly the wrong prescription.
> Democracy can be and should be introduced to the Middle East.
> Again, your interest seems not to be in illuminating the discussion,
> but on killing the messenger.

Robert, if I seem impatient with bold faced bigotry, and hypocrisy, I'm
kool with that. I am in no way interested in killing the bearer of such
bigotry and hypocrisy, though; I'd much rather make an example of him.

> > ------------------------------------
> >
> > Robert, perhaps you don't intend it, but you do seem very much the hateful 
> > anti-Semitic bigot when you post here
>
> Perhaps you're too eager to see me in that light, or at least so to
> portray me.
>
> > about the middle-East.  Reading you, and your paste-ins from JWR, I'd think there 
> > is a pipeline of hatred and bigotry
> > running from here to there.  Your attempt to paint Mrs. Arafat, a mother with 
> > children, as an apostate from Islam,
> > struck me as particularly hateful.
> >
> All I did was point out that Mr Arafat does not send HIS OWN children
> out on suicide missions--- only the children of others.  And that was
> quite clear in context.  But I'm the one who's hateful?

Not so.  You falsely alleged that his wife was a Christian, and this
implies that she has apostasized from Islam, a nasty libel, on your
nasty part.  

"But that result would have made Arafat less wealthy and less powerful. 
So
instead he keeps his Christian wife and child in Paris"
http://groups.google.com/groups?q=g:thl3197666160d&dq=&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=e247d7b6.0311021637.7fc610a6%40posting.google.com

This was pointed out to you at the time, so that you might correct your
libel for the benefit of others who might be reading, and might mistake
your lies for facts.  At that time, right after your libelous lie, you
did not choose to correct it; a correction at this time would be less
efficacious, sadly.  Then, you chose to mock me, "So then tell me, where
do Arafat's family live?"
http://groups.google.com/groups?hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&selm=e247d7b6.0311040507.51900912%40posting.google.com

I find it sad that you approach your personal attacks with such
carelessness.  It would seem to me that if you had any concern about
personal integrity, you'd either avoid libeling Mrs. Arafat, or try to
correct yourself when you were caught it.  But you carry-on like it is
some game, and you get points for smashing more furniture, and then
belching loudly when you are asked to clean up your mess.


Bye bye!
- Pat