Big election victory for Hamas

[Abraham]

The Palestinian Authority has a new problem: Hamas has won the elections.

The US and the EU have declaired that Hamas is a terrorist organisation and demand that a new Hamas-led government will have to renounce violence and recognise the State of Israel.
The US and the EU are also the biggest sponsors of the PA-economy.
Hamas has as its doctrine that "the Zionist entity" has to be erased.
Most of the Palestinians seem to have voted more against Al Fatah then pro-Hamas, out of frustration from the nepotism and corruption under the old PLO-leadership. Furthermore the former Yassir Arafat party is in total disarray and hopelessly divided.

What will happen now Hamas has entered the political arena. Wil it stick to it's doctrinairy point of view about the continual battle against "the Zionist entity" and bring no progress to the political proces and a reduction of much needed foreign aid, or will it make dirty hands, compromise, recognise Israel and become a more or less "accepted", even "fashoinable" political party like so many terror/liberation organisations in the past...

[DAB]

I can not but be amused by all of this. Not because Hamas has won the elections...but because the US and EU are no longer in a position to negosiate from a position of good faith.

At the end of the day, we are going to have to talk to them. Yes it may be the political wing of a terrorist organisation - but so too was Sien Fein in Nr Ireland and we talked to them. What makes this moral position any different? ...And lets face it if we can swollow our pride, some good may come of this.

We do after all have a government of Pallestine now that has the mandate to speak for its people. It therefore stands that progress made with these people will be progress that the Pallestinians will accept. It is a strong government by the looks of things - so it will not have to worry about watching its back... and irronically it is the first government that Pallestine has had that CAN actually reign in the terrorists.

This may be the biggest storm cloud, in the history of Middle Easten storm clouds - but I think their may just be a silver lining.

What is clear though, is that the US and EU can not sulk for six months whilst anomosities are intrenched. Israel, with Sharon gone is feeling extremely vunerable...and if the Pallestinians uthoria is not matched by a sudden change for the better - the hard line views will become intrenched. We have to get moving now...and swollow our pride in the process.

[Skybird]

As expected. Some "intellectual" bubbles in European politician's heads bursted. Situation is of mounting inner tension. Election result is caused by self-dynamic process. Since Hamas is not just some terror club, but an Islamic terror club, and in Islam politics and religion essentially is the same, I cannot see that the aggressiveness of Hammas could be tamed by embracing them in civil responesbilities and governmental authority. Social welfare was what made Hamas big and earned it sympathies in Arab world initially. This did not stop it from fighting and sacrificing it's human weapons in suicide attacks. As long as there is Israel, there will be something like Hamas as well, and if Hamas get's destroyed, another one will come. I don't see and never saw hope for peace for Israel. War is Israel's beginning, life, and ending.

Situation holds little creative potential. Mildly said. Option one is my vote. If it will gain nothing from that, cannot be said in the present. With every bomb they send o Israel, another small "pick!" is added to the destruction of Israel. They can play that for centuries.

[Abraham]

There is a lot of truth in what you say, DAB. But don't forget the US (President Clinton) practically cayoted the IRA to the negotiating table with outlawing them in the States (their financial power base) if they would not compromise.

So the West is in an unique position to cutback on aid to the Palestinian Authority and force Hamas to recognise the State of Israel (which is a reality "on the ground" so to say).
But it will first have to be tough before it starts dividing the cookies, because otherwise Hamas will consider economic support from the West a uninfringable right and will bitterly complain if economic help is ever used as a political tool in the future.

And yes, you are right, Hamas is the only one that can reign in Hamas.

I'm convinced that the EU will take a tough stand on this (the Dutch foreign minister demanded today that Hamas openly recognises Israel and renounced violence).

[CCIP]

Option 3 sounds quite familiar. I think that's it.

I'm not exactly a fan of either side's more extreme elements (be they Palestinian or Israeli), but I find this one nothing short of disgusting.

[Skybird]

The story holds a good taste of irony, though. It was this current US administration demanding democracy in the Middle East. The Middle East is far from beeing democratic, no matter if there was one election or not. But it was a democratic election that brought Hamas to power. It also was American pressure on Mubarak forcing him to have slightly more democratic elections in Egypt - with Mubarak now facing a legitimate oppositon - which is formed by an extremist Muslim organisation as well (Muslim brotherhood). And the victory of democracy in Iraq (ehem, may I ask for a little more enthusiasm and applaus, please...) in the final result will lead to a Mullahcratic government in Iraq, too.

Was this what Bush had in mind when starting to babble about democracy in the middle East - Islamic extremism grabbing for governmental power? :lol: Maybe one should start asking question WHY Kemal Attaturk was so unforgiving on supressing the religious orthodoxy. And why Mubarak ruled with so much dictatorial power und supressed the religious orthodxy. Why Musharaf clashes with the religious orthodxy regularly. And why Indonesia has so much problems with religious orthodoxy. And why Saudi-Arabia needs to be a de facto dictatorship and is attacked time and again by - the religious orthodoxy (Al Quaeda). And why Saddam was such a brutally acting dictator supressing Shia orthodxy and trying to manipulate it.

Maybe because uncompromised power is the only thing that can stop Islamic orthodoxy to advance and spreading it's violance further and further...!?

Before one continues to demand more "democracy" in such countries, one needs to ask some questions. Is the understanding of "democracy" and "freedom" and "peace" and the value of these words the same for them as it is for us? Are such societies even able to form and live by rules that meet our understanding of these terms. AND CAN WE EVEN AFFORD TO HAVE DEMOCRACIES IN ISLAMIC COUNTRIES?

Before the Iraq war started I got accused of not agreeing on that these societies are capable to form their own democracies, and that this evaluation even was some kind of racism by me. Well, all you guys who said like that back then - still thinking I was so much off target when thinking of Egypt, Palestine, Iraq today?

Educate yourself with competent literature from non-Muslim sources, so that you can form an independent understanding of the TRUE nature of Islam that is not distorted by Islam'S twisted, contradictive and two-faced self-description. Don't trust those who are propagating the equality of Islam to Western values for their own opportunistic reasons. Then you'll see how much off target YOU were before.

[U-552Erich-Topp]

:up: :up: :up:

[Abraham]

You are very, very pessimistic, Skybird!
I would like to welcome Hamas to XXIth century international politics.
Let them talk to US & EU foreign ministers instead of to their blinded followers and let them reap the meager harvest of their international performance. If they don't compromise and (thus) fail, they will be wiped away in the next elections or they will show their true colors, avoid elections and start a theocratic tyranny.
The result for the average Palestinian will be demagogy instead of democracy and a progress rate of 0%.
And as we all know: "Every country gets the leader it deserves."
(quote from Yassir Arafat?)

[Skybird]

One only needs to be too optimistic, then all others appear to be pessimistic, Abraham. I think you live by too much wishfulk thinking here. we are talking about one of the most radical Islamic organisation there are, that - different to Al Quaeda - is deeply rooted in public society. If it "fails" (what you consider to be a failure for them, btw? I do not know how to define Hamas "failing"), it will be a collective martyrism, and the will of Allah. Which will be the source of even more admiration and sympathy then.

You are looking at this with far too much (Western) reason and logic. When dealing with Islam, YOU ARE NOT DEALING WITH SOMEONE LIKE YOURSELF, but a totally different mindset and value system. Stop looking at it with your eyes. Look at it with THEIR eyes. Islam has it's own strange logic. You may think Hamas is not representative for Islam. But then you are wrong. It's combination of social welfare and fighting is a textbook example of representing Islam's spirit. Cutting off financial aid by Europe (500 million euros in recent years) is no real threat for them.

[Skybird]

"Every country gets the leader it deserves."
(quote from Yassir Arafat?)

No, old Chinese saying. Quoted by me repeatedly.

[U-214]

I agree with much of Skybird's post,in the sense that forcing democracy to people that aren't ready for it,can lead to dangerous situations.Democracy requires a society with maturity ,that discovers democracy through thirst for something better,not to use it as a means of grabbing power.It also requires a society intellectually evolved enough to use it wisely and elect the best.On the contrary when the electorate is formed by low level educated masses,the elected is simply the one who better can control masses and the means to do that are various,from religious hatred,to nationalism,to populism.And in the ME the danger of misusing democrasy is very high exactly because the masses aren't capable of controlling this "gift".

[SUBMAN1]

This is the worst thing that could happen to Palistine.

-S

[Abraham]

I think within a few months we'll see how things start moving or gettig stuck. Then we'll know wheter I was too optimistic or you too pessimistic.

The facts you give are known to me, of course. My interpretation op the options for Hamas are just different - in my eyes meore realistic (of course) - then your predictions.

But one thing I'll correct:
"Every country gets the leader it deserves."
old Chinese saying quoted by Skybird
:D

[Abraham]

This is the worst thing that could happen to Palistine.
-S
I agree that it was a bad result, but it did not "happen" to them, they deliberately chose it.
With an absolute majority!

[Skybird]

Democracy requires a society with maturity ,that discovers democracy through thirst for something better,not to use it as a means of grabbing power .It also requires a society intellectually evolved enough to use it wisely and elect the best.

Absolutely. And while it can be argued that western people always vote for the best (I thinkt that event has become rare by now, as long as "best" does not mean "best manipulator"), the spirit of what you say corresponds to what I use to say, and repeatedly did say: freedom is no right (that depends on a cultures value system only), it is an ability that must be learned (and can be unlearned, too).

Abraham,
again you talk of "let's see in a few months". I think in years, and often even in decades.
While Islam thinks in centuries, the West thinks in legislative periods at best, and time periods between the release of two profit bilances - if it has that patience. Politician's decimale system is reduced to the numbers one, two, three, and then full stop, and election. :)

Faster! Quicker! Rapid! Time is money! Lifetime is wasted! But freedom only lies in the present moment. That's why Westerners are slaves of their timetables.

[Ducimus]

I think any progress towards peace in the middle east has just effectively been flushed down the toilet.

My gut feeling is this is just the tip of the iceberg and will snowball into something much larger and ferocious. Hamas is a militant, terrorist organization. Most (all?) western powers do not negotiate with terrorists, period. Hamas as the potential to become a palastinian taliban. I think the country could isolate itself even further. Isrial will become more defensive and zenophobic.

Hamas in charge i think is the catalyst needed to ignite the place, and others will get sucked into it. I think it will all snowball.

[XabbaRus]

There is a lot of truth in what you say, DAB. But don't forget the US (President Clinton) practically cayoted the IRA to the negotiating table with outlawing them in the States (their financial power base) if they would not compromise.


OK just to go OT...How long did that take the US to do?

Anyway wishful thinking hopes they will wake up and smell the coffee and compromise. Doubt it though.

As for Clinton and the IRA...was too long coming and look at that. Norhtern Ireland though much much improved is still divided. They can't seem to get their act together parliament wise.

Too many people with too much to lose with a real peace and proper political process. Israel/Palestine thing is just the same.

[Abraham]

...
Abraham,
again you talk of "let's see in a few months". I think in years, and often even in decades.
While Islam thinks in centuries, the West thinks in legislative periods at best, and time periods between the release of two profit bilances - if it has that patience....
@ Skybird:
You misinterpret me here, Skybird.
And the fact that Islam thinks in generations doesn't have to be the Rule of the (international political) Game.

What I mean is what we already see today: Pres. Abbas has asked Hamas to form a government based on the platform to continue negotiations with Israel. If they don't, he will resign. Some may say "Who cares", but the Palestinian people voted against Fatah to change things; corruption, nepotism, the social circumstances, the Israeli occupation/military control. Most of them are sick and tired of their own circumstances and democracy gives them a right to express themselves.
Hamas is forced by time to make it's point clear; accept political responsability or remain an inefficient witness of its own principles...
They will simply have to make that fundamental decision and make it soon, or they will split (which I expect) and there will be several major parties that will have to form coalitions (which is good for democracy).

Don't forget that international policy has its own dynamics and a country that abstains, declines (see Cuba, North Korea, Afganistan under the Taliban etc.)

I'm not so much worried about Hamas in the government then about the next elections. Will they ever be held...?

@ XabbaRus:
Long, very long. It took a political decision in the White House and Congress to outlaw if necessary the IRA support in the States.
The situation is more optimistic now.
Hamas is already widely considered a terror organisation, that's not a political hurdle anymore.
Another difference is that although N-Ireland was poor, there were miminal living conditions, it was part of the EU Ireland (another support base) was part of the EU.
The Gaza Strip and the West-Bank are incomparably poorer and totally depending upon support from the EU and the US. Stop the flow of money and any government will go down.
It should be thit for that... The Palestinians should learn that their best interests lay in good relations with the EU and the US.
But yeah, that requires some solid rethinking...

[micky1up]

so there goes the argument that not all palastinians are terroists they just voted in a terroist group

[Abraham]

It's really not that simple.

Sadly Hamas is much more than a terror organisation, although its main goal remains the "liberation" of "all of Palestine" which means the destruction of the State of Israel.

However, Hamas profited from the void left by the former PLO leadership in social, educational and medical services. Hamas opposed the nepotism and incredible corruption of the "Old Guard"o f Al Fatah (the inner circle around Yassir Arrafat).
For aid or education Hamas turned out to be a valid alternative of the Palestinian Authority.

I think the vote was as much if not more against corruption and nepotism as for terrorism.
Few Palestinians have the idea that Israel will one day really disappear in thin air...
(that's by the way why the Iranian President is so irresponsable).

[The Avon Lady]

It's really not that simple.

Sadly Hamas is much more than a terror organisation, although its main goal remains the "liberation" of "all of Palestine" which means the destruction of the State of Israel.

However, Hamas profited from the void left by the former PLO leadership in social, educational and medical services. Hamas opposed the nepotism and incredible corruption of the "Old Guard"o f Al Fatah (the inner circle around Yassir Arrafat).
For aid or education Hamas turned out to be a valid alternative of the Palestinian Authority.

I think the vote was as much if not more against corruption and nepotism as for terrorism.
Few Palestinians have the idea that Israel will one day really disappear in thin air...
(that's by the way why the Iranian President is so irresponsable).
Their goal is our disappearance and Israel (first and foremost but not alone) has only fueled those hopes even more so than ever in the past.

Theirs is a society that worships death as the ultimate divine sanctification.

Face the facts, world. The sooner, the better.

http://img101.imageshack.us/img101/1018/09tf.gif

[Skybird]

Hm, someone has recovered from the initial shock, it seems. :)

[Skybird]

It's really not that simple.

Sadly Hamas is much more than a terror organisation, although its main goal remains the "liberation" of "all of Palestine" which means the destruction of the State of Israel.

However, Hamas profited from the void left by the former PLO leadership in social, educational and medical services. Hamas opposed the nepotism and incredible corruption of the "Old Guard"o f Al Fatah (the inner circle around Yassir Arrafat).
For aid or education Hamas turned out to be a valid alternative of the Palestinian Authority.

I think the vote was as much if not more against corruption and nepotism as for terrorism.
Few Palestinians have the idea that Israel will one day really disappear in thin air...
(that's by the way why the Iranian President is so irresponsable).

Not precisely. Hamas IS the authority in social caretaking, building schools, hospitals, feeding the poor, educating the young, in that regard it had accumulated more credibility amongst their people than Fatah, which also was - and is - very corrupt. Hamas' win may be a protest vote or not, but for palestinians they are especially popular for their social face. The West may not like it, but that's a fact. It should not excuse the other, violant face of Hamas. It also has a solid basis of competent personell (businessmen, people with higher education) that by years of experience in their profession should come up with not a little ability to master administrative work. these are probably not the ones that are to be seen on TV when they report about another hysterical anti-Israel demonstration.
But no matter what they will ever say and what vows they ever will make - they will not give up on their anti-Israel sentiment and their use of violance. Maybe they will hide it for opportunistic reasons. Maybe not. The result will be the same.

[The Avon Lady]

Hm, someone has recovered from the initial shock, it seems. :)
Are you referring to me?

What shock? :-? This was no surprise for anyone that knows what's going on here (which would exclude Bush, Rice, Blair, Fischer, Straw, etc.).

And watch them change their tune as time goes by.

My! That was fast (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1137605926822&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)! :88)

[The Avon Lady]

And who said dodos are extinct (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1137605924691&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)?! :nope:

[kali]

Educate yourself with competent literature from non-Muslim sources, so that you can form an independent understanding of the TRUE nature of Islam that is not distorted by Islam'S twisted, contradictive and two-faced self-description. Don't trust those who are propagating the equality of Islam to Western values for their own opportunistic reasons. Then you'll see how much off target YOU were before.
Where is the merit in only considering or even exposing yourself to those things that you're already likely to agree with? Reading only non-muslim souces gains you no enlightenment nor will it expand your understanding of anything. This is a recipe for a closed and bigoted mind and does nothing towards the furtherment of democracy. It is much easier to vilify another if you don't have to listen to him, consider his opinion or question that he is even capable of thought. And ultimately it is easier to kill him.

Proponet of National Socialism explains himself such about the Jewish question

Educate yourself with competent literature from non-Jewish sources, so that you can form an independent understanding of the TRUE nature of Jews that is not distorted by Judiasm twisted, contradictive and two-faced self-description. Don't trust those who are propagating the equality of Judiasm to Western values for their own opportunistic reasons. Then you'll see how much off target YOU were before.

Arabs are not like us, they have a different religion and all and well they dress funny and they talk funny and who can understand that scripple that passes for writing. there just not ready for democracy nor do they value human life like we do. perhaps a solution without their bothersome input is required, perhaps one that is well....FINAL

[Skybird]

Take it slowly, and welcome, btw, Kali. With a thread counter of 1 you surely do not know much about recent debates here in this forum, right? So don't be that easy to go for people here personally ;) I have my reasons to have written that, and these have been illustrated in many threads and long essays in recent months and years - and in detail so.

[The Avon Lady]

I'm all for reading Islamic literature from Muslim sources. By all mean, read every word of the Quran, Hadiths and Surras.

And start reading books by devout Muslims, like A Guillaume's "The Life of Mohammad: A Translation of Ibn Ishaq's Sirat Rasul Allah", though you'll have a hard time finding it.

There's plenty more. Go to the sources, indeed. Then you'll see whether the non-Muslim alarmists are full of hot air or deserve our utmost attention.

[Konovalov]

With a thread counter of 1 you surely do not know much about recent debates here in this forum, right?

Perhaps he was a lurker on these forums but felt now the need to speak out and voice his opinion? But the simple fact is that neither you nor I can be sure of this. So to say that he "surely does not know much about recent debates" is a little presumptuous. ;)

[kiwi_2005]

ok your gonna think this is funny, but aint these the last days? in biblical terms. Isn't it, When Isreal is surrounded by her enemies your know these are the last days....

Just a thought.

[The Avon Lady]

ok your gonna think this is funny, but aint these the last days? in biblical terms. Isn't it, When Isreal is surrounded by her enemies your know these are the last days....

I don't think it's funny. :nope:

However, the last days have been going on for these last years. :dead:

One thing, however, is certain. We're getting closer with each passing day. :88)

[kiwi_2005]

I only said funny cos i know some will see it that way. I dont, i think its happening as I speak. The last days means yrs.

[The Avon Lady]

I only said funny cos i know some will see it that way. I dont, i think its happening as I speak. The last days means yrs.
Yes. It retains its meaning clearly in the original Hebrew, "Acharit Ha'yamin", literally translated as "the end of (the) days."

[Abraham]

Educate yourself with competent literature from non-Muslim sources, so that you can form an independent understanding of the TRUE nature of Islam that is not distorted by Islam'S twisted, contradictive and two-faced self-description. Don't trust those who are propagating the equality of Islam to Western values for their own opportunistic reasons. Then you'll see how much off target YOU were before.
Where is the merit in only considering or even exposing yourself to those things that you're already likely to agree with? Reading only non-muslim souces gains you no enlightenment nor will it expand your understanding of anything. This is a recipe for a closed and bigoted mind and does nothing towards the furtherment of democracy. It is much easier to vilify another if you don't have to listen to him, consider his opinion or question that he is even capable of thought. And ultimately it is easier to kill him.

Proponet of National Socialism explains himself such about the Jewish question

Educate yourself with competent literature from non-Jewish sources, so that you can form an independent understanding of the TRUE nature of Jews that is not distorted by Judiasm twisted, contradictive and two-faced self-description. Don't trust those who are propagating the equality of Judiasm to Western values for their own opportunistic reasons. Then you'll see how much off target YOU were before.

Arabs are not like us, they have a different religion and all and well they dress funny and they talk funny and who can understand that scripple that passes for writing. there just not ready for democracy nor do they value human life like we do. perhaps a solution without their bothersome input is required, perhaps one that is well....FINAL
@ Kali:
First of all welcome aboard!

A few remarks from me as moderator.
You quoted a part of a posting from Skybird. It is advisable to use the quote button in the upper right of postings and delete whatever you don't want to quote. You can also type: and cut and paste, as long as you finish with /quote (between [].
If you want to be a regular poster, or post about potentially controversional subjects, it is wise the check:
http://www.subsim.com/phpBB/faq.php#0
[quote]What are Subsim.com's editorial policies?
The Radio Room forum is not the place for flaming, spewing, or otherwise mouthing off. We do not allow posts where people are called idiots, morons, etc. We respect your freedom of speech, we ask that you respect our rules. You are welcome to express your opinion about games and other subjects. We do not want SUBSIM Review and the Radio Room forums to degenerate into a collection of *This game sux!!!!* and other immature rants. Like something or dislike something about a game, express your thoughts in reasoned and responsible terms. There are any number of forums which allow unbridled idiocy to reign, we want the Radio Room to be a civil, mature forum for discussions about naval and subsims, tactics, mods, playing tips, troubleshooting, and submarine topics in general. As such, we retain the right to edit and/or delete posts we find offensive. We also have the right to ban users who contribute to poisoning the well. Just as a radio talk host has the right to decide who he airs and a newspaper editor decides whose letters he prints and whose he throws away, the moderators in the Radio Room forums have final say on rants and spews they decide should be cut.

What role do Subsim forum moderators play?
Subsim forums allow a wide range of discussion freedom but there are limits. Moderators volunteer to see that the forums do not descend into chaos and anarchy and that the rules are adhered to. Members should not publicly attack a Moderator or intentionally undermine a Moderator's actions. It is okay for a member to publicly ask a Moderator why an admonishment was issued; it is okay for a member to publicly disagree with a Moderator. It is not okay for a member to harass, bait, or slander a Moderator. If a member wishes to challenge a Moderator action that involves the member, this challenge must be raised in private via PM or email, not in public.
Actually it is good for all of us to read these rules every now and then.
They were set by "Onkel" Neal Stevens, the founder of Subsim.com. We're basically his guests here and as such we have to behave.
The General Topic Forum allows members to discuss (almost) every subject, but in order to keep the discussions to the point we do not allow personal attacks, generalisations about racism (anti-Semitism included) or about religions. ("All Christians are ... " etc. to name but one example). This does not exclude criticising religions or the behaviour of religious persons.

More specific I find your posting not fair towards Skybird. You alter his quote and put it under the banner:
"Proponet of National Socialism explains himself such about the Jewish question"
You further make references to "the FINAL solution" in a way that may be both offensive towards Skybird as well as towards our Jewish forum members.
As you certainly know some subjects are sensitive. Always keep in mind how other forum members might react to your postings. When in doubt, press the Preview button before the Submit button.
If you stick to these rules, you'll be most welcome and you'll find plenty of space on this forum to express your opinion!

Abraham
(with moderator cap on)

[Abraham]

I think if the West takes the stand that Hamas will have to abstain from violence and recognise Israel before further aid projects are initiated, the party will split up in an dogmatic and a pragmatic wing. A majority party within the Palestinian Authority is an unlikely phenomenon anyway.

A little bit of Realpolitik and tough bargaining from the West is needed:
No honey for the West, no money for Hamas.
No peace with Israel, no Palestinian State.

And let's not forget this is the Middle East. It's the worlds biggest marketplace.
They sell fruit, they sell souvenirs, they sell drugs, they sell weapons, they sell women, eventually they'll sell principles...
In the meantime everybody talks with everybody behind everybody's back.
;)

[Type941]

say hello to democracy you all so much support. doesn't get more democratic that that.. Perhaps the US feked up and need to be sending in some 'opposition' who would say elections were 'not fair'. Give them all a flower and make another flower revolution. Oh wait, that won't work - they'd be shot to shxt.

Quite sad actually this whole business. Now you got terrorists in power. :shifty:

[TteFAboB]

doesn't get more democratic that that

Democracy is not about electing a great government, it's about removing it.

Palestine is as democratic as one of Kapitain's polls.

[Skybird]

I start to wonder if option 1 and 3 are really excluding each other.

[bradclark1]

Looks like a war between the Fatas and the Hamas.

[August]

say hello to democracy you all so much support. doesn't get more democratic that that.. Perhaps the US feked up and need to be sending in some 'opposition' who would say elections were 'not fair'. Give them all a flower and make another flower revolution. Oh wait, that won't work - they'd be shot to shxt.

Quite sad actually this whole business. Now you got terrorists in power. :shifty:

I got news for you, terrorists have always been in power in the Palestinian controlled areas, unless you think Arafat was some sort of saint, which he certainly wasn't.

Unlike you, i have no problem with democracy. Peace is never worth absolutism and tyranny.

[U-552Erich-Topp]

:) Yes Avon Lady, they are slowly getting rid of Israel. I agree with you.

[Hitman]

Looks like the democracy won again :hmm:

Anyone else willing to defend democracy as a good government system?

I can right now remember that Hitler also reached the power through an election....

Aristhoteles said it already 2500 years ago: The democracy is the government of the majority and the majority are unfortunately the idiots. Great. :shifty:

On a more positive note, I just saw a documentary at TV interviewing some people at Palestina and looking for answers. One of them -but not the only contributing reason- could be that after so many years of an static conflict with no apparent progress, people were tired and wanted to shift to someone else to see what happens. Most Palestinians seem to think things could not be worser (They are wrong but who cares...) so they elected Hamas if not really being supporters of them.

In any case I think the Palestinians have been right in something: Hamas at the government will end once and for all this conflict. But they did not guess that it will probably end with the extermination of the palestinians :huh:

[Type941]

say hello to democracy you all so much support. doesn't get more democratic that that.. Perhaps the US feked up and need to be sending in some 'opposition' who would say elections were 'not fair'. Give them all a flower and make another flower revolution. Oh wait, that won't work - they'd be shot to shxt.

Quite sad actually this whole business. Now you got terrorists in power. :shifty:

I got news for you, terrorists have always been in power in the Palestinian controlled areas, unless you think Arafat was some sort of saint, which he certainly wasn't.

Unlike you, i have no problem with democracy. Peace is never worth absolutism and tyranny.

AH... what the heck are you even on about? Why did you qoute me with that response? I never said anything about that rat Arafat, and my single point is that now you got this new terrorist government in power officially and the rest of the world has to put up with it because it has been elected according to the ways, the US is forcefully ejecting into every little country in the world it's interesting in. I know you are american and all, but when will you get that things done not american way are not wrong. :roll:


If you are so fond of democracy, you need to at least open up your eyes a little to what's happening in the world (georgia, ukraine for instance). And as the poster above said, Hitler was elected democratically, by majority. This all goes to this idiotism that's going on around the world these days on how communism and fashism are the same thing (first is a form of ideology exploited by the monsters in power while the latter is a purely anti-semetic, racial, ultranationalistic and disgusting idiology). The world is a funny thing these days.

[Skybird]

"Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." (Lord Acton)

I often made the observation that a single individual may appear to be intelligent. But the more people are crowding together and building a mass, the more their signs of intelligence are fading, and the more behavior is collectively ruled by by an anonymous authority - may it come from social pressure; may it come from a hierarchy of lobbyists (mostly egoists); may it come from a believe of the individual that now he has not to take care himself about thinking, because all the others now surely would do that; may it come from the belief that when all others are doing something, the majority probably is right and so it cannot hurt to do the same oneself. The bigger a crowd, the more stupid human beeings turn out to act, it seems to me. The more isolated a human beeing is, the more he tends to make use of his own brain. --- What tells this about democratic decision finding processes...?

[TteFAboB]

Looks like the democracy won again :hmm:

Anyone else willing to defend democracy as a good government system?

I can right now remember that Hitler also reached the power through an election....

Aristhoteles said it already 2500 years ago: The democracy is the government of the majority and the majority are unfortunately the idiots. Great. :shifty:

What majority? Palestinian majority? French majority? Universal majority?

If you are so fond of democracy, you need to at least open up your eyes a little to what's happening in the world (georgia, ukraine for instance). And as the poster above said, Hitler was elected democratically, by majority. This all goes to this idiotism that's going on around the world these days on how communism and fashism are the same thing (first is a form of ideology exploited by the monsters in power while the latter is a purely anti-semetic, racial, ultranationalistic and disgusting idiology).

Elections are a vital part of Democracy, however, Democracy is not an Election, elections are commonly used to make-up or justify a government, that is a mistake.

Democracy is a process, elections are a mere tool to bond the past and future. It's the results and continuity that makes a Democracy, not a single election, not an instant in time, not a referendum, it's what comes after the election itself and what remains or changes from before that characterizes a Democracy.

To reduce an analysis of Democracy to Hitler is to give credit to minority, Hitler was alone, he gathered a bunch of little friends, a minority of nations from all over the world, and he even lost the war to the Majority, to the Major Alliance, to an Alliance of many democratically elected governments, most of the world.

What's important to remember is that a Democracy is not stuck in time, what was democratic in 1910's is no longer democratic today, and vice-versa actually, because of modern extremist proponents of direct democracy.

Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely." (Lord Acton)

I often made the observation that a single individual may appear to be intelligent. But the more people are crowding together and building a mass, the more their signs of intelligence are fading, and the more behavior is collectively ruled by by an anonymous authority - may it come from social pressure; may it come from a hierarchy of lobbyists (mostly egoists); may it come from a believe of the individual that now he has not to take care himself about thinking, because all the others now surely would do that; may it come from the belief that when all others are doing something, the majority probably is right and so it cannot hurt to do the same oneself. The bigger a crowd, the more stupid human beeings turn out to act, it seems to me. The more isolated a human beeing is, the more he tends to make use of his own brain. --- What tells this about democratic decision finding processes...?

Contradiction, this tells the democratic decision finding process serves the interest of the minority, a political elite, an economical elite, lobbyists, dumb masses won't notice corruption, dumb masses won't notice populism, dumb masses won't demand any different, hence, a majority elected government when faced by dumb masses will serve their own self minority interests.

You point the problem to be in the masses, various causes, various points, hence the problem is not Democracy, but the people who make the Democracy, I agree about the mass phenomenon, however, according to your own logic, intelligent politicians will act intelligently when isolated, I find it to be quite the contrary, when politicians are isolated from the rest of the country, they act even more to serve their own interests. To use the same example: Hitler, do you think Germans would vote for him if he told them Berlim would be torn to ashes? Do you think Germans would vote for him if they knew he would split Germany in half? Do you think Germans would vote for him if he told about the holocaust? The Nazis would.

But Hitler is a phenomenon derived from WWI, and WWI was the suicide of Europe, but what led to WWI was exactly the lack of Democracy, Democracies in turmoil, if the Democracy is made by the people, the people of 1910/20's are to blame, not their form of government.

There are many winds of lack of faith in Democracy that blow from Europe, stagnant Europe who fails to re-invent itself since the end of WW2, that's an European problem for Europeans, what is a fact is that no other form of government managed to improve the life of the developing world, don't forget the point: A Democracy is not a legitimally elected government, it's the process.

How could the dumb uneducated masses of the 3rd world progress with Democracy then? If they can, why can't the Europeans? Is there not an inversion here? Shouldn't it be the contrary?

Makes you think, where are the dumb masses afterall.

[Skybird]

Politicians most times ARE isolated from their country's realities, or ignore it intentionally, or are kept away from it by the other great player in the game: the bureaucracy and ministries (that sort the facts and infos before they ever made it to the working desk of a ministre and hereby form a stupid crowd themselves - have you ever noticed some cases when a single man stood up with some critical info, valid for public interest - and was brought down by his own ministry because he disturbed the usualy routine? I have several such stories from Germany on my mind, I see no reason why it should be different in other countries).
Politicians are more busy to twist and turn reality so that it matches their lobby's intentions (, I think of the way reality is descroibed by the German SPD now, in the great coaltion, whereas before reality was the same - but as government they made it sound something completely different; or just think of the story that I made a thread of, NASA, by command of official policy, silencing it's chief scientist on climate change, and in that article other examples of scientists beeing called back not to question the administration's official interpretation are quoted, too). That lobbyists (like politicians) make maximum use of the phenomenon of stupidity beeing the greater the bigger the crowd is, is no surprise, is it. Especially people who put blind trust in the democratic system and the personell that got elected by it are vulnerable to this manipulation. Telling them that usually is a complete useless affair.

I have a text by Bonhoeffer which I already have quoted one or two times in recent years here. I will look for it and give it again. The best analysis I have ever red on this matter, brief and right to the point.

Intelligent politicians - it's been some time since I listend to one qualifying for that description. The kind of politicians i see on TV are clever, and that is something different than intelligent. Clever in promoting their own egoism and the interests of the lobbies they are controlled by. they are not statesmen, but managers.

Nazi's vision was not to annihilate their country, but to rule the world. during the war they just folund out that they took a bigger bite than what they could swallow. I find your way of arguing confused. You take the ending for the beginning.

Immidiate treatements for symptoms are preferred to long-term and lasting solutions of problems. That'S why people vote for the same corrupt parties time and again, instead of sending them to hell.

[TteFAboB]

I agree with most of your points, I have many examples too, from more than one nation, I believe I actually hold the ultimate example to base your ideas into, I could share it, but first I'll blackmail you, and ask you to consider my 3rd World-Europe comparison which you ignored:

It was Europe who taught the world about Democracy, the world learned the lesson and now it seems it is the other way around, Europe seeks out to the world (besides from within itself, but it has been doing that for decades) to try to ask the right questions and find the right answers. :up:

If the NASA scientist got censored, it is a great example of stupidity, because the conclusion was obvious, he would go out to the media, as he was already influencial was he not? Like I said in the Google-China thread, state censorship is stupid, hence the people who censor are stupid people and you can usually get around them, the NASA scientist got around and made the fuss, if he was in Cuba or China he might've been shot, but he's alive and spreading his word, is this not a virtue of a Democracy? Is it not harder to kill dissidents in a Democracy? Is it not easier to keep a government in check in a Democracy? For the last question, consider ideal circumstances, ie. less dumb, more aware masses.

On the subject of intelligent politicians, it's possible, but difficult, if there is an intelligent politician indeed he may be clever enough too to earn a chance to rise to power, but it is not a good word because it is indeed hard for politicians in general to earn that adjective.

I can refrain and substitute intelligent for not-dumb, not necessarily bright, but not a manipulative usurper.

I mentioned the Nazis because there was even hope for them, Hitler made it clear that he was the only way, the only chance, I don't offer a revisionist alternative, I just denounce he definitely wasn't honest and didn't had the desire of the people in his heart. Which means he had his own interests, even though he was democratically elected he could give a damn to Germans as long as they enlisted in the Army and kept their heads down. Far from the ideal of a Democracy, just trying to demonstrate an election doesn't mean anything by itself.

Immidiate treatements for symptoms are preferred to long-term and lasting solutions of problems. That'S why people vote for the same corrupt parties time and again, instead of sending them to hell

I agree entirely with his, I only dispute the part about the corrupt parties being voted for time and again, because we can find contradictory examples, be it the rule or the exception, and I guess we take "the people" for the majority, then we shouldn't ignore the minority, what if the minority is large enough, not too far from the majority? This grey blend might not be necessarily bright, but not necessarily dumb either.

This is also the reason why so many dictatorships survived in the past, why they were "tolerated" by the majority, but when the minority rises, they fall. There was never so much opposition to Fidel Castro in Cuba as there is today, I thought he would fall last year, maybe he will fall this year, maybe the next year, as long as the minority is large enough, but not to the point they form a dumb mass, Democracy can shine.
:sunny:

EDIT: Or translating that to make it easier to digest: A Democracy is the government of the majority kept in check and alive by the minority.

[Skybird]

Hitler: look at his plans and concepts to change the architectural appearance of Berlin. As it is often the case with megolomaniac emperors, his wish to give his political ideas a representation in architecture as well is key to understanding. That's why his relation to Albert Speer is said to have been closer than to anyone else of his Nazi buddies.

Don't know what timeframe you mean when talking of europe and democracy. But I can clearly remember what politician it is to propagate the spreading of demcoracy even by force, and war - and that somebody is no European at all...

That NASA guy has nothing to do with Castro or China.

Claiming democracy for oneself is a perfect setting for an oligarchy to hide itself behind. when you said in the last sentence that it means the minority keeps in check the government of the majority, it is a contradiction in itself. actually, you are describing an elite oligarchy, not a democarcy. It is the minority's self-definition of beeing superior to the will of those who vote, that make this minority turning democracy into an oligarchy. And I think it is inevitable thata demcoracy turns into this, as Aristoteles also said it is. Because when crowds act silly, as I claim, they cannot escape to allow persons beeing elected that turn their beloved democarcy into oligarchies - that's why it is inevitable.

Democracy only would function with small communities, and if people made their votes basing on reason and logic, knowledge and awareness of what the previously elected people have acchieved, or failed to acchieve. These condtions are not fulfilled. Most votes given base on family tradition or habit, or a personal calculation what party promises to earn the voter higher income/advantzage, profit of whatever a kind. Hence our dilemma. In this way an election can decide only one thing: which selfish, tradition-driven egoist is the stronger one in manipulation, intimidating and/or seducing the public.

Your thoughts on what to do if the minority is large and close in size to the majority I consider to be hairsplitting or extreme thought experiment. Wasn't it you beeing amongst those attacking me when I reminded people after the last US election, that the voting was a very close call in results, roughly 51:49, voters split into two halfs almost exactly? wasn't I critizised for mentioning this, telling me that a majority is a majority - no matter how close the vote has been? If I identify you wrong here, my apology then.

http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/27/news/eu.php
A nice example how a small minority of people, actually a small group of people only, tries to work around the public opinion of at least half of Europe's residents. Those ten coiuntys that have ratified it: most of them never asked their own people. Germany has ratified it as well. but german people never got asked, although saying that they want to have a say in it (a majority of Germans appears to be against it).

[Hitman]

What majority? Palestinian majority? French majority? Universal majority?

Any majority :(

[TteFAboB]

The timeframe for Europe is today, how can Europe (France, Germany, Italy) move forward and abandon their "state capitalism" left over from the end of WW2 for a schumpeterian model, à la carte to prevent the social models from being shattered. Europe holds many advantages over the rest of the world, yet the rest of the world advances leaving Europe behind, Europe once owned the world, now the world is divided between the USA and China, Europe must rise again as a 3rd dominant force, that won't happen without drastic changes, if that means Germany needs a suicidal politician to climb to power and push through his reforms, burning himself and maybe even his party forever, so be it. And that's why Europe can learn from the rest of the world.

Argentina still exists because a few bold presidents decided to burn themselves to save the country, today the country is in terrible hands, the president does whatever suits him on each particular day, I guess when he wakes up with his left foot first, he chooses to speak against "neoliberalism", when he wakes up with his right foot first, he chooses a Nazi stance and speaks against globalization and how Argentina should shut its borders. This man is temporary, but the country was saved from extinction and social chaos by the kamikaze politicians who managed to do what needed to be done, at the time it was uncertain, would it be worth it? Would it work? Angela Merkel doesn't have the strength to do anything similar, so here we go again spend a few more years with palliative bluffs.

We fail to reach an understanding on the majority/minority deal, the point is: Without a minority, there is no Democracy, without someone to contest instead of consent, there is no Democracy, if everybody agrees on everything, there is no Democracy. I'm scared when I agree with SubSim members, I expect to disagree whole-heartedly from almost everybody, and if I agree with someone, I have to stop and check myself again, because I tend to think I'm probably wrong.

So, even if one majority elected "democratic" government is not democratic at all, but oligarchic, without a minority complaining and denouncing it there is not even a mask of Democracy, so it is the minority that keeps alive an oligarchy indeed, by action (being active, giving the impression there is opposition or freedom) or inaction (by joining in and being the oligarchy itself).

Democracy only would function with small communities, and if people made their votes basing on reason and logic, knowledge and awareness of what the previously elected people have acchieved, or failed to acchieve

I agree with what follows below these lines, to some extent, what I contest is this quote, with a small community anything works, I don't think that's fair, you have hippie anarchich or communist camps, you have kibutz, and even democracy afterall. But if we are to have a larger scale Democracy, we have to make concessions indeed, most people are not ready, informed or prepared to vote on technical or some juridical subjects, though examples would be highly regional, such as the Death Penalty, because if people are concerned and angry because of crime and they are seduced with a quick "solution", they might aswell vote for it due to what we already agreed upon, short-term magical solutions are much more appealing than long-term plans that usually require "sacrifices" or hard work.

So, a death penalty, for instance, is probably unconstitutional or illegal in most nations today, those who have it are, often, left-overs from the past decades. So the anual budget, the death penalty, immigration policies, might be better left for representative Democracy, because if you ask directly, you can get a result that represents the instant unthought desire, without further consideration into the future, or forgetting the past. These examples are only examples, and should differ significantly from nation to nation.

I don't remember attacking you on the American election, but indeed you are correct, it was split in half, a majority is still a majority, it's up to the winner to be the president of everybody or ignore half the nation. There are different electoral procedures around the globe and there isn't really one single "best" model, the American model worked for centuries, it's not the latest fellow who's going to ruin it.

I can't open the link you offer, but I believe you are speaking about the European constitution, thank you, we can go back to Castro now, did you knew some European figures travelled to South America to discuss the European constitution with people who believe they can build a socialist utopy in the 21st century? Inspired by the Cuban example, led from the backstage by Castro himself.

http://www.forumsocialmundial.org.br/

I can't find the transcripts, I spent hours translating Spanish, printed it and deleted that abomination from my hard-drive, but I remember watching the live transmission from one of the seminars and in the end some French man said he was very happy with the collaboration of the organizations to help improve the constitution, I don't remember what they added after this meeting, but they did added something and it's there in the ratified constitution, aided by the most radical self-entitled socialist organizations from South America, a gift from the new world, I suppose.

But I agree with you, I believe a constitution must be voted, if it takes 6 months for the people to learn what they're dealing with and discuss it, so be it.

[Iceman]

And who said dodos are extinct (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1137605924691&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)?! :nope:

Um yea I agree..the ole "Head in the sand" routine is getting old.Even Bush really surpirses me while trying to walk both sides of the politically correct fence. I don't really understand his approach in even considering to deal with these guys.We can hope and pray ,and wait and watch, the dice keep coming up snake eyes with these guys...

Zero humanatarian aid should go to ANY country that is controlled by ...can I say...Killers...terrorists maybe.Is there a difference?

Democracy is a process, elections are a mere tool to bond the past and future. It's the results and continuity that makes a Democracy, not a single election, not an instant in time, not a referendum, it's what comes after the election itself and what remains or changes from before that characterizes a Democracy.


Good definition in my opinion...the election is not what is important but the act of excersising a freedom...well see what is done with it.

[August]

say hello to democracy you all so much support. doesn't get more democratic that that.. Perhaps the US feked up and need to be sending in some 'opposition' who would say elections were 'not fair'. Give them all a flower and make another flower revolution. Oh wait, that won't work - they'd be shot to shxt.

Quite sad actually this whole business. Now you got terrorists in power. :shifty:

I got news for you, terrorists have always been in power in the Palestinian controlled areas, unless you think Arafat was some sort of saint, which he certainly wasn't.

Unlike you, i have no problem with democracy. Peace is never worth absolutism and tyranny.

AH... what the heck are you even on about? Why did you qoute me with that response? I never said anything about that rat Arafat, and my single point is that now you got this new terrorist government in power officially and the rest of the world has to put up with it because it has been elected according to the ways, the US is forcefully ejecting into every little country in the world it's interesting in. I know you are american and all, but when will you get that things done not american way are not wrong. :roll:


If you are so fond of democracy, you need to at least open up your eyes a little to what's happening in the world (georgia, ukraine for instance). And as the poster above said, Hitler was elected democratically, by majority. This all goes to this idiotism that's going on around the world these days on how communism and fashism are the same thing (first is a form of ideology exploited by the monsters in power while the latter is a purely anti-semetic, racial, ultranationalistic and disgusting idiology). The world is a funny thing these days.

Yeah i'm "fond" of Democracy and as an American i see things with American eyes so deal with it. Democracy, for all its flaws which are constantly bemoaned by some of the denizens of this board,, is still the best form of government that humankind has ever invented. Do you have a better way? What is it?

As for Hitler, yes he was democratically elected, but so what? That did not stop the rest of the world from removing him and his henchmen from power, now did it? Nor will it stop the rest of the world from removing Hamas from power, if it becomes necessary.

If anything that is the true essence of government by the people. The freedom to make mistakes, and the freedom to live or die by those mistakes. I personally wouldn't have it any other way.

[The Avon Lady]

And who said dodos are extinct (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1137605924691&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull)?! :nope:
C&F hit the nail on the head again.

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/4848/03pr.gif

Democracy is only as good as the people that implement it.

[The Avon Lady]

To HitMan, with love (http://www.spainherald.com/2414.html).

[Skybird]

Good one, AL.

[Hitman]

So what?

What is so remarkable about an Islamic radical group claiming to have Seville back under islamic domination?

What is remarkable about zionists claiming their right to the land of Israel?

What is remarkable about Morocco willing the territory of Ceuta and Melilla?

What would be strange is that neither radical muslims demand Al-Andalus back, zionists the land of Israel or Morocco demand Ceuta & Melilla :hmm: But it is in the nature of their respective ideology to request those things. Shall I be shocked or amazed by a terrorist saying openly that his goal is to kill people?

What we can however discuss a lot about, are the METHODS to achieve their purposes and how much they respect others who do not think equally. I do not accept Hamas methods of achieving their purposes. But I would not mind against their goal of Israel dissapearing if they achieved that through peaceful conversion of all jews to islam and voluntary elimination of Israel through democratic election. Same with Seville going under muslim domination. As long as they achieve that by peacefully converting everyone, I have nothing to argue against it.

It is not the religious or political goals or aims but the methods and lack of respect for minorities what I am against.

Note that to any palestinian the creation of the state of Israel where formely Palestinians were settled is as much a threatening political goal as it is for you the elimination of the state of Israel by Hamas. Where is the difference? I think that the methods are the difference. Israel has not always been 100% clean, but overall has acted more legally and peacefully than Palestinians in achieving their goals, f.e. obtaining UN resolutions and recognizement of their state and the legitimate character of many of their goals, plus also acting 99% of the times in self defence against a violent, terrorist agression. Thus Israel deserves some credit to my eyes, unlike Hamas.

[Skybird]

So what?

What is so remarkable about an Islamic radical group claiming to have Seville back under islamic domination?

What is remarkable about zionists claiming their right to the land of Israel?

What is remarkable about Morocco willing the territory of Ceuta and Melilla?

What would be strange is that neither radical muslims demand Al-Andalus back, zionists the land of Israel or Morocco demand Ceuta & Melilla :hmm: But it is in the nature of their respective ideology to request those things. Shall I be shocked or amazed by a terrorist saying openly that his goal is to kill people?


It is remarkable because Islam can make these claims, unhidden, in the public - and we in the West still ignore them, find excuses for them, seek reasons that let them appear as harmless symptoms that are not representative. That we still believe in our own folly, saying that Islam is about mutual tolerance, peaceful coexistance - this is what makes these claims so remarkable. Even when we get hurt by them, if our people get killed, our homes get bombed - soon after we are more concerned with moralizing that all this is not Islam, and that we let not allow anything to be said that could make Islam feel offended, and we must move even closer towards Islam to get it's sympathy for us infidels.
We really believe that we have an obligation to help them to overcome us. I am sick and tired of Islam. And I am even more sick and tired of Europe's wishful thinking and rejection to see the hard reality. This time Islam may not come with military force, trying to overcome christian Europe, as it did in the last threee attempts that it started to conquer Europe by force. This time it is coming with a smile on the face and the irresistable power of demographics and the "peaceful movement" of millions of Muslims to Europe, knowing all to qell that we cannot counter this ofgfensive without giving up some of our own precious legal values and democratic ideals and humanistic ideas. But it is a clash of two civilizations, Europe under siege, Islam attacking again for the foruth time now, trying to make it all it's own. It's a strategy that is planning with centuries, not with decades. AND IT IS INTENTIONAL, and fully known by Islam.

I said it in the past, and I say it again: Islam does not know or accept peace as long as there is anything non-Islamic left. Peace, in Islam's true inner understanding, means the unconditional, undisputed, unquestioned, invulnerable total and complete dominance of Islam over all the world. It only knows phases of cease-firing or stopped expansion, in the face of too stroing oppositon. When this opposition has been weakend, it presses on the expansion. Contemporary phases of non-expansion (no matter if violantly enbforced, or softly acchieved) are not because of tolerance, or ratio, or interest in coexistence. It only is the deep breathtaking before the effort, the concentrating before going to action, the silence before the race, the training before the new season starts.

Two weeks ago I had a private talk with a board member, and I exchanged a long letter with him. I quote one passage, describing one certain event from it, because I do not want to re-formulate it, and it holds no personal content at all (because this is so I think he will not feel offended that I bring this part of my letter to him to the public).

" [...]

The folly leads as far as that the Vatican even remains silent about the yearly mass killing of up to 150.000 christians in Muslims countries, who get murdered in local progroms each year. That says the Vatican’s own secret service, three or four years ago. To say that is considered to be politically uncorrect. It threatens the folly one is trying hard to keep alive: that there is interest for dialogue and tolerance on the other side.

When Paul II visited Sudan in 1983, or was it 86, he also met Hasan Al-Turabi, a known radical, whom he embraced and praised him as a great man, stressing the mutual tolernace and similiarities between both religions – the very same man that in the twelve months before had slaughtered one million christians in southern Sudan by sending Muslim marauders, and a man who just waited until the pope was back to Rome and then spend another year or so with murdering another two million Christians there – this time by using more efficient massbombardement from bombers and fighter planes, until he fell out of favour himself.

[...]

Later Pope II. said that „if we allow women for priesthood, this will block our ecumenical contact to Islam“, and explained that for the latter reason the first shall not be. If that is not revealing.

What is acchieved by this? A new form of monologue is created, that labels itself a dialogue, that by renunciation of analysis and reason uses highly irrational criterias, illusions and wishful thinking, nevertheless searches for a truth that nevertheless it already has limited in advance (dialogue with Islam MUST be successful), this is enforced with highly dogmatic power inside the church, and at the same time accepting massive deformation of the church’s spiritual contents that already were hollowed out before and have lost so much attractiveness that churches today are empty and young generations are driven away – while mosques are crowded and their numbers almost exploded in the last three decades. Today, Islam in europe just needs to pick up those people that were driven away from the churches, that felt disgusted, and saw no convincing orientation in Christian religion, as interpreted by corrupted churches, anymore. Some fall victim to spiritual mass-tourism. Some fall victim to Buddhist sects that have not adopted their teachings to Western living surroundings. Some fall victim to islam that promsies them to be striuct and strong in giving them orientation by total regulation of all levels of life. Most people fall victim to materialism and nihilism, beeing no thrwad to Islmaic expansion into the West anymore – they are weak.

During the bishop’s synode 1999 in Rome the Bishop of Izmir risked open confrontation with the Vatican when ignoring orders to shut up, and gave the assembly a report on the massive discriminations Christians in his diocese are facing, and I quote from one of my books here (my translation):

„During an official meeting about the ‚dialogue‘ between Christians and Muslims, a high representatives of the Muslim community raised and adressed the Christian participants of that assembly, saying: ‚Thanks to your own democratic laws we will overcome you, thanks to your own religious rules we will rule you.‘ Their rulership already has begun with the petrodollars, that are not used to fight poverty in the poor countries of Northern Africa or to create jobs in the middle east, but to raise mosques and ‚culture centers‘ within Christian countries with a very high quota of Muslim immigrants beeing send to the construction sites. How can we fail to see a clear intentional program in this, that is directed at expansion, taking over, and ultimate ruling...?“

The Bishop continued to describe that all the intercultural meetings always, always are organized and created by Christians, never initiated by Muslims, and he described how another high ranking Muslim representative was asked why this was so, that Muslims never initiated cultural exchange and interreligious meetings. That Muslim representative answered, and I quote again:

„ Why should we do that...? You cannot teach us anything, and we DO NOT NEED TOM LEARN ANYTHING.“

The Bishop continued:

„It is a fact, that terms like dialogue, justice, mutuality (Gegenseitigkeit), or terms like human rights and democracy have a completely different meaning and understanding for Muslims than for us. But it is absolutely inevitable that we are united in our understanding of these principles. We may never again offer a Christian church to a muslim community for celebrating a Muslim religious festivity in there, because for them it is a most convincing signal for our own apostasy.“ "

[tycho102]

Democracy is only as good as the people that implement it.


As President, Jimmy Carter was a very competent nuclear engineer.



Unfortunately, not many Americans remember that he is a nuclear engineer...

[STEED]

The Middle East has got a whole lot more dangerous.

[Hitman]

@Skybird: All religions I know about, specially the catholic, try that their followers have as many sons as possible. It is a form of brutal demographic expansion and thus hopefully an equal expansion of their religion. When Spain was governed by Franco, and the Opus Dei was able to rule the public life, population was continually encouraged to have more sons, resulting in what we know here as the "Baby Boom" generation in the late 60s and early 70s. There are still various religious ultracatholic organizations in Spain and latinamerica that still operate like that and try that their followers act accordingly. The Islam tries that, as well as the chritians and jews, so this is still something way usual in our lifes already.

You have set a premise you won't be willing to change: That there is no possible peaceful and tolerant interpretation of Islam. And as long as you start from that argument and it remains unchanged, obviously it does determine the result of any other argument constructed upon it. Same as the Avon Lady did before, you are confusing the methods with the pursued result. Radical Islam is not doing anything different than what other religions do in terms of will to expand and dominate. If it would depend on Rome's will, I can assure you that many things would change in the world RE public and private life. Those of us who have lived under the national-catholicism of Franco know well that. There were rules about how women should dress, what they should do in their life (Be loyal housewifes and have sons like rabbits) and much more. All this blessed by Rome, who labelled our country as the perfect catholic estate.

What is different in Islam is that it also has groups of radical terrorists that draw all atention.

I can agree with you in that currently there is no will to make a tolerant interpretation of Islam in most of Islamic ruled countries like Arabia, Iran, etc. But I can't agree in that there is no chance of doing a tolerant interpretation of Islam. Millions of muslims in Europe show daily that it is certainly possible, even if other millions don't want to. It depends upon us to mark the limits and allow those who respect them to cohexist with us. Otherwise we would be acting as the radical muslims we critisize so much.

Today, Islam in europe just needs to pick up those people that were driven away from the churches, that felt disgusted, and saw no convincing orientation in Christian religion, as interpreted by corrupted churches, anymore. Some fall victim to spiritual mass-tourism. Some fall victim to Buddhist sects that have not adopted their teachings to Western living surroundings. Some fall victim to islam that promsies them to be striuct and strong in giving them orientation by total regulation of all levels of life. Most people fall victim to materialism and nihilism, beeing no thrwad to Islmaic expansion into the West anymore – they are weak.


I couldn't agree more with that, Skybird!

It is obvious that the human being has a terrible tendency to deny his dignity and allow others to set the rules for him. Probably since thinking is the most energy consuming activity of the body, it is sistematically refused. Dostojewsky prtrayed this beautifully in the Karamazov's brothers, through the parabole or monologue about Christ meeting the general Inquisitor in Seville.

People who throw themselves in the arms of any religion are many times people who have refused to asume the responsability of their actions and want someone to take it for them. Since you are following a set of rules created by another or by God, you are free of the moral responsability. If those rules also do legitimate your hate and the explosion of violence acumulated in your interior, the better for many.

The only thing that can save Europe and the whole world from radicalisms is the education and teaching the people to think. This is a huge effort, and I understand that it looks easier to cut any attempt of a "foreign" religion to get those disenchanted people who step out of the church. But the alternative to radical Islam in our lifes today is only consumism and lack of morality, and that ends up burning a human sould sooner or later. We can't pretend that this alternative is much better than radical Islam, Skybird.

Cheers :up:

[August]

@Skybird: All religions I know about, specially the catholic, try that their followers have as many sons as possible.

I've been a Catholic all my life and i have never been told that.

The only reason i could guess for the Spanish roman catholic church to recommend such a thing would be to provide more soldiers for its armies.

Personal reasons for having large numbers of children would i'd think be to ensure the bloodline survives and to provide care givers for the parents old age.

[The Avon Lady]

You'll never catch on, will you, Hitman?

The penny will never drop?

Islam is NOT simply different because there are groups of radical terrorists that draw all the attention, who by coincidence also happen to be Muslims.

Islam is different because those terrorists can legitimately base everything they do on Islamic texts new and ancient, their history, legal edicts and precedents and examples straight from the life of Allah's "only true prophet".

It is the non-Radical Muslims who have much less to stand on theologically the more "moderate" they are.

And Allah knows best.

[Hitman]

Islam is different because those terrorists can legitimately base everything they do on Islamic texts new and ancient, their history, legal edicts and precedents and examples straight from the life of Allah's "only true prophet".


texts? history? examples from the prophet's life?

Ahem....

Shall I remember how Moses managed to free the jews from Egypt? Unless I remember wrong, the jew G*d killed the first son of all egyptian families, and sent several plagues to destroy Egypt.

Shall I remember how the jew G*d ended up with corruption and vice in Sodoma & Gomorra? I happen to remember that he wiped them out of the face of the earth.

What if we were to apply the same methods to those who do not respect the 12 laws from Moses, which came straight from God? God did it...it's written.

And my spanish ancestors had a good time "christianizing" millions of indians in America and showing them the real faith, accompanied by catholic preachers & monks who blessed left and right all agonizing indians :roll:

But yes, Islam is different, it is perverse, it does not admit any tolerant interpretation. Right.

[Skybird]

Hitman,

I base on
- Islam's scriptures, that I red myself for a minor part, and red about in academcial literature by more competent authors,
- Islam'S history
- the historcially true biography of Muhammad (which is not necessarily identical with the one Islam is claiming to be the tue one).

I also base on my own perceptions when having lived in Muslim places for many, many months.

What needs to be said to counter your opinion i already have said, here , in other threads, in the last weeks and months. If you think there are so many similarities between Christianity and Islam that they outnumber the differences, then I know it better and must tell you that you are simply wrong. Judging by history. Judging by Muhammad. Judging by scirptures. Such misperceptions are very popular at present. they are also intentionally enforced by according lobbies. but they remain to be false by facts.I also said a lot about the Western misperception of Islam, in recent months.

Please understand that I do not repeat every time and again all that sermon whenever the same questions get asked again. I alreeady have adressed what you said, and several times so.

The chatholic church's position towards Islam is irresponsible, a treachery towards their own followers, short: it is completly messed up and queer. a level of having lost any sense for reality that it finds my psychologist's interest for psychopathology. The damage that has been done by John Paul II. can hardly be overestimated. But this is another long chapter, a very long chapter. Don't get me started :) Whole books alreday have been written about that. If you need recommendations and are fluid in German, let me know.

I have given some examples in my last long reply above. I could give you many, many more, if you need, I have books filled with such stuff. Think about the stories above, the yearly progroms, the massacre in Sudan, the synode 1999. And then try to counter it. Don't tell me these are isolated single events. they are not - they are the rule. Fact.

It's a harsh reality, I agree. Nevertheless it is the only reality you ever will get. You don't like it, and thus close your eyes. I don't like it, too, but I try to make people open their eyes nevertheless. pink-red illusions will not help us a bit.

Tolerant interpretation of Islam? How should that be possible with THAT founding figure, and with that bunch of opportunistic, contradictive scriptures, and with such an absurd and obscure theology at center? You need to know how the scriptures of Islam emerged over three cneturies, that is quite revealing. you need to link their form and shape to the biography of muhammad, then you better understand why they are what they are. It has nothing to do with devine revelations falling from sky to earth.

Islam has fought more wars against it's own faith, and against foreign religions as well than any other religion. It has more expansive drive than any other religion. And it's ethical and philosophical developement is stuck in the medieval. Look at the inferior national structures they have. The high rate of unemployment. the inferior industry. what there is in science and industry - they need to import, sometimes steal from the West. They are not creative, constructive. they are consuming only. And now tell me that all this only is by random, or becasue they misinterpreted the basics of their culture. It is because they perfectly represent the basics of their culture, and Islam's teachings. Islam is the problem, and it's distorted self-perception, not my "false" perception of it.

Nevertheless they keep on looking down on us, claiming to have the right to make us submit to Islam. they are turning the ammount of tolerance you have displayed ion your last sentence against us. Our own democratic rules work for them, against us. You idnicate we have an obligation to accept them and their faith in our middle, if they follow our rules. They will always try to overcome our rules.

"Thanks to your own democratic laws we will overcome you, thanks to your own religious rules we will rule you.‘" - "Why should we do that...? You cannot teach us anything, and we DO NOT NEED TOM LEARN ANYTHING.“ - you better start believing that this atittude is at the heart and core of Islam, according to Muhammad, scriptures, and displayed in all 14 centuries of it's history.

[August]

What if we were to apply the same methods to those who do not respect the 12 laws from Moses, which came straight from God? God did it...it's written.

A couple nits, it was 10 commandments, not 12 laws and violating them was cause for GOD to send the transgressor to hell, not beheaded by ones fellow MAN on video.

[The Avon Lady]

Islam is different because those terrorists can legitimately base everything they do on Islamic texts new and ancient, their history, legal edicts and precedents and examples straight from the life of Allah's "only true prophet".


texts? history? examples from the prophet's life?

Ahem....

Shall I remember how Moses managed to free the jews from Egypt? Unless I remember wrong, the jew G*d killed the first son of all egyptian families, and sent several plagues to destroy Egypt.
First of all you've got it backards. The 10 plagues ended - not started - with the divine death of Egypt's first-born.

Second, what Jewish legal law is derived from this? What Jewish living-through-example has been passed on from generation to generation from our exodus from Egypt?

Third, you wish to argue with G-d's actions? Go ahead. Why blame me?! :P

Where's the comparison? Oh, there isn't one. Whadayaknow!
Shall I remember how the jew G*d ended up with corruption and vice in Sodoma & Gomorra? I happen to remember that he wiped them out of the face of the earth.
Same questions follow. What practical legal or ethical Jewish rules are derived from this episode?
What if we were to apply the same methods to those who do not respect the 12 laws from Moses, which came straight from God? God did it...it's written.
12? I thought it was 10! As they say: Jesus saves. Moses invests. We've made a 20% prophet - er - profit.
And my spanish ancestors had a good time "christianizing" millions of indians in America and showing them the real faith, accompanied by catholic preachers & monks who blessed left and right all agonizing indians :roll:
The point being?
But yes, Islam is different, it is perverse, it does not admit any tolerant interpretation. Right.
Of course there are such interpretations. You just have to close your eyes to the contradictions to live with those interpretations.

[STEED]

The Middle East has always been volatile and this new situation well we shall see it’s potentially more unstable very worrying events are unfolding.