|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 11:09 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| rapier wrote: |
Ah, I see.. But you thought it was fine for blacks to do to whites in Africa.
|
Putting words in my mouth?
Nice try, but you must be confusing me with one of your strawmen. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 1:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Do you know how many women are forced to go to a shelter (like the YWCA) on a weekly basis to hide from their abusive partners? |
I suggest you do some research. Talk to some people that run battered women's homes in France, the UK and the Netherlands, and they will tell you that a grossly disproportionate number of women in such homes are Muslims. |
show me. Anyways, I wasn't comparing until the end, and didn't compare the number. Rapier basically said there was none back home, and there most definitely is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaganath69
Joined: 17 Jul 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rapier, I asked you not to invoke my wife in this. Say what you like about my motives, but marrying her didn't change me one jot. I had these views long before I met her. Congrats, you've now made my sh*tlist.
As for all your other bumpf and banter, you've not only gone on the record stating terrorism against property and people is OK, but you continue to hold the line that domestic violence is something that happens only in Islamic societies, exposing you as a fool of the highest order. I am fully aware of honor killings and the other horrible things that happen in Muslim countries. They are wrong. I have stated that a hundred times or more. But you made claims of a statistical trend, something that you need figures to back up. You can't pull a Verne here, whip out a few articles and claim its indicative of a broader trend. Again, you have shown that at best your knowledge of social science methodology is sadly wanting. That and you're a crank, pretty much on the same level as a deranged right wing nut as Dulouz. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:23 pm Post subject: Re: ... |
|
|
| Nowhere Man wrote: |
Um, in order to be nationalist, you need to have a nation.
It's hard to be faschist without that.
You repeatedly cite the Caliphate. I assume you mean the Ottoman Empire.
What is your source on this?
Who says bin Laden is trying to re-establih the Ottoman Empire?
And, honestly, let's do this in one thread, who wants to re-establsh the Caliphate?
I DO believe you respect me in a way, but your statements about a caliphate trying to regain power are tantamount to your assaults on conspiracy theorists.
Gopher doesn't cite the Caliphate.
Why not? |
I would like you for the chance to show you some info that you have not seen.
This is why Al Qaeda fights.
| Quote: |
al-Qa'ida (The Base)
Qa��idat al-Jihad
Islamic Army for the Liberation of the Holy Places
World Islamic Front for Jihad Against Jews and Crusaders
Islamic Salvation Foundation
Usama bin Laden Network
Al-Qa'ida is multi-national, with members from numerous countries and with a worldwide presence. Senior leaders in the organization are also senior leaders in other terrorist organizations, including those designated by the Department of State as foreign terrorist organizations, such as the Egyptian al-Gama'at al-Islamiyya and the Egyptian al-Jihad. Al-Qa'ida seeks a global radicalization of existing Islamic groups and the creation of radical Islamic groups where none exist.
Al-Qa'ida supports Muslim fighters in Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, Tajikistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Kosovo. It also trains members of terrorist organizations from such diverse countries as the Philippines, Algeria, and Eritrea.
Al-Qa'ida's goal is to "unite all Muslims and to establish a government which follows the rule of the Caliphs." Bin Laden has stated that the only way to establish the Caliphate is by force. Al-Qa'ida's goal, therefore, is to overthrow nearly all Muslim governments, which are viewed as corrupt, to drive Western influence from those countries, and eventually to abolish state boundaries.
Description
Established by Usama Bin Ladin in the late 1980s to bring together Arabs who fought in Afghanistan against the Soviet Union. Helped finance, recruit, transport, and train Sunni Islamic extremists for the Afghan resistance. Current goal is to establish a pan-Islamic Caliphate throughout the world by working with allied Islamic extremist groups to overthrow regimes it deems ��non-Islamic�� and expelling Westerners and non-Muslims from Muslim countries–particularly Saudi Arabia. Issued statement under banner of ��the World Islamic Front for Jihad Against the Jews and Crusaders�� in February 1998, saying it was the duty of all Muslims to kill US citizens—civilian or military—and their allies everywhere. Merged with Egyptian Islamic Jihad (Al-Jihad) in June 2001.
Activities |
http://www.fas.org/irp/world/para/ladin.htm
| Quote: |
Osama bin Laden's Scary Vision of a Grand Muslim Super State
By Juan Cole
Mr. Cole is Professor of Modern Middle Eastern and South Asian History at the University of Michigan. His website is http://www.juancole.com/.
In order to evaluate the aftermath of September 11, we first must understand that event. What did al-Qaeda intend to achieve? Only if we understand that can we gauge their success or failure.
From the point of view of al-Qaeda, the Muslim world can and should be united into a single country. They believe that it once had this political unity, under the early caliphs. Even as late as the outbreak of World War I, the Ottoman state ruled much of the Middle East, and the Ottoman sultans had begun making claims to be caliphs (Muslim popes) from about 1880. In the below map, blue indicates heavy Muslim populations, green means medium, and yellow means the Muslims are a significant minority. |
NWM
| Quote: |
| You repeatedly cite the Caliphate. I assume you mean the Ottoman Empire. |
No it would be much bigger than that
| Quote: |
Al-Zawahiri then hit upon the idea of attacking the "far enemy" first. That is, since the United States was propping up the governments of Egypt, Israel, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, etc., all of which al-Qaeda wanted to overthrow so as to meld them into a single, Islamic super-state, then it would hit the United States first.
The attack on the World Trade Center was exactly analogous to Pearl Harbor. The Japanese generals had to neutralize the U.S. fleet so that they could sweep into Southeast Asia and appropriate Indonesian petroleum. The U.S. was going to cut off imperial Japan from petroleum, and without fuel the Japanese could not maintain their empire in China and Korea. So they pushed the U.S. out of the way and took an alternative source of petroleum away from the Dutch (which then ruled what later became Indonesia).
Likewise, al-Qaeda was attempting to push the United States out of the Middle East so that Egypt, Jordan, Israel and Saudi Arabia would become more vulnerable to overthrow, lacking a superpower patron. Secondarily, the attack was conceived as revenge on the United States and American Jews for supporting Israel and the severe oppression of the Palestinians. Bin Laden wanted to move the timing of the operation up to spring of 2001 so as to "punish" the Israelis for their actions against the Palestinians in the second Intifadah. Khalid Shaikh Muhammad was mainly driven in planning the attack by his rage at Israel over the Palestinian issue. Another goal is to destroy the U.S. economy, so weakening it that it cannot prevent the emergence of the Islamic superpower.
Al-Qaeda wanted to build enthusiasm for the Islamic superstate among the Muslim populace, to convince ordinary Muslims that the U.S. could be defeated and they did not have to accept the small, largely secular, and powerless Middle Eastern states erected in the wake of colonialism. Jordan's population, e.g. is 5.6 million. Tunisia, a former French colony, is 10 million, less than Michigan. Most Muslims have been convinced of the naturalness of the nation-state model and are proud of their new nations, however small and weak. Bin Laden had to do a big demonstration project to convince them that another model is possible.
Bin Laden hoped the U.S. would timidly withdraw from the Middle East. But he appears to have been aware that an aggressive U.S. response to 9/11 was entirely possible. In that case, he had a Plan B: al-Qaeda hoped to draw the U.S. into a debilitating guerrilla war in Afghanistan and do to the U.S. military what they had earlier done to the Soviets. Al-Zawahiri's recent message shows that he still has faith in that strategy.
The U.S. cleverly outfoxed al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, using air power and local Afghan allies (the Northern Alliance) to destroy the Taliban without many American boots on the ground. |
http://hnn.us/articles/7378.html
| Quote: |
Al Qaeda Has a Plan and Here It Is
by James Dunnigan
September 24, 2005
Al Qaeda has a plan, and it's been published in a book (Al-Zarqawi: al Qaeda's Second Generation) by Jordanian journalist, Fouad Hussein. Several al Qaeda leaders were interviewed for the book, including al Qaeda뭩 man in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. The book is only available in Arabic, but it does lay out a very straightforward strategy for world conquest. Actually, it sounds a lot like what the nazis and communists had in mind last century. The only difference is that, while the nazis killed you for who you were, and the communists killed you for what you believed,al Qaeda kills you for religious differences. No matter which zealot gets you, you're still dead.
According to Fouad Hussein, al Qaeda has a seven phase plan for world conquest. It goes like this.
Phase 1, the 뱖akeup call.?Spectacular terrorist attacks on the West (like September 11, 2001) get the infidels (non-Moslems) to make war on Islamic nations. This arouses Moslems, and causes them to flock to al Qaedas banner. This phase is considered complete.
Phase 2, the 밻ye opening.?This is the phase we are in, where al Qaeda does battle with the infidels, and shows over a billion Moslems how it뭩 done. This phase is supposed to be completed by next year.
Phase 3, 뱓he rising.?Millions of aroused (in a terrorist sense) Moslems go to war against Islam뭩 enemies for the rest of the decade. Especially heavy attacks are made against Israel. It is believed that major damage in Israel will force the world to acknowledge al Qaeda as a major power, and negotiate with it.
Phase 4, 뱓he downfall.?By 2013, al Qaeda will control the Persian Gulf, and all its oil, as well as most of the Middle East. This will enable al Qaeda to cripple the American economy, and American military power.
Phase 5, 뱓he Caliphate.?By 2016, the Caliphate (one government for all Moslem nations) will be established. At this point, nearly all Western cultural influences will be eliminated from Islamic nations. The Caliphate will organize a mighty army for the next phase.
Phase 6, 뱖orld conquest.?By 2022, the rest of the world will be conquered by the righteous and unstoppable armies of Islam. This is the phase that Osama bin Laden has been talking about for years.
Phase 7, 밼inal victory.?All the world뭩 inhabitants will be forced to either convert to Islam, or submit (as second class citizens) to Islamic rule. This will be completed by 2025 or thereabouts.
Nothing really new in all this. Al Qaeda has been talking openly about this (the global Islamic state) for years. These Islamic terrorists are true believers. God is on their side, and they believe all obstacles will be swept aside by the power of the Lord. Will al Qaeda뭩 plan work? Ask the nazis and communists. |
http://www.strategypage.com/dls/articles/20059240226.asp
Also see think again Al Qaeda by Jason Burke in the Economist
http://www2.gol.com/users/coynerhm/think_again_al_qaeda.htm
So what do you think now NWM?
Last edited by Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee on Thu Mar 30, 2006 9:58 pm; edited 4 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:34 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I don't care whether Osama bin Laden wants to rule the entire world or just one country; either way he and his organization have to be stopped and dismantled- completely and permanently. But of course that doesn't mean I think invading Iraq was a good idea either. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Summer Wine
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Location: Next to a River
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 9:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
You repeatedly cite the Caliphate. I assume you mean the Ottoman Empire.
|
Actually the Ottoman empire was the most recent example of the Caliphate, not the best example of what the caliphate would entail. The caliphate is more about the existance of a single unified Islamic body/nation not a particular body in past history. The caliphate as an idea of Islamic family/nation will never die out so long as it is part of Islamic belief.
The belief in Christ dying on the cross and being resurected has been around for 2000 yrs give or take, why should it be a surprise that Muslims still believe in uniting the Islamic world into 1 state?
Aristotle, Plato, Socrates, etc their beliefs are still being promoted today, Greecian ideas of democracy, ogliarchy are being put into practice on a daily basis, even though their bones have laid in the earth for many years.
Ideas while ending for a time are never dead until they are lost for all memory. Its not possible to say that yet about the caliphate and one day our decendents may live with that as a daily way. We really don't know. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 12:29 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| Say what you like about my motives, but marrying her didn't change me one jot. |
Apart from that small matter of you converting to Islam.
And don't start getting touchy again. You spent a number of posts analysing my motives, so it's fair game to look into your's. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaganath69
Joined: 17 Jul 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 5:43 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Say what you like about my motives, but marrying her didn't change me one jot. |
Apart from that small matter of you converting to Islam.
And don't start getting touchy again. You spent a number of posts analysing my motives, so it's fair game to look into your's. |
You can say what you like, I've already said that my beliefs on the matter preceded my marriage. I had a great many Muslim friends before that, hell even two girlfriends who were of the faith, but it's all irrelavent. I don't think its fair to point out the actions of some members of a group and extrapolate that to a wider majority. If someone says 'all Americans are thick' or 'all Canadians are w@nkers' I would respond the same way. I remain critical of my adopted faith and anyone who knows me well enough would tell you that I am anything but pious. Feel free to think otherwise if you wish. Anyhow, I'd like to ask you something, what is it that makes you post constantly on this single issue? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jaganath69 wrote: |
| bigverne wrote: |
| Quote: |
| Say what you like about my motives, but marrying her didn't change me one jot. |
Apart from that small matter of you converting to Islam.
And don't start getting touchy again. You spent a number of posts analysing my motives, so it's fair game to look into your's. |
You can say what you like, I've already said that my beliefs on the matter preceded my marriage. I had a great many Muslim friends before that, hell even two girlfriends who were of the faith, but it's all irrelavent. I don't think its fair to point out the actions of some members of a group and extrapolate that to a wider majority. If someone says 'all Americans are thick' or 'all Canadians are w@nkers' I would respond the same way. I remain critical of my adopted faith and anyone who knows me well enough would tell you that I am anything but pious. Feel free to think otherwise if you wish. Anyhow, I'd like to ask you something, what is it that makes you post constantly on this single issue? |
Actually, he is a American programmed internet AI from the Department of Homeland Security. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Fri Mar 31, 2006 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
Actually, he is a American programmed internet AI from the Department of Homeland Security. |
Oh, cut it out, you're going to make Porter jealeous and IGTG stimulated...
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bigverne
Joined: 12 May 2004
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 1:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| If someone says 'all Americans are thick' or 'all Canadians are w@nkers' |
Of course, if I had ever said something so simplistic about Muslims you would be right to respond. But I never have, and I doubt you could find a single post where I have said 'all muslims.....'.
I may have criticised Islam as an inherently intolerant faith, or questioned the widely stated assertion that 'the vast majority of Muslims are moderate', but I have never made such sweeping generalisations about Muslims in the fashion you suggest. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
[quote="jaganath69"]
| Quote: |
| you've not only gone on the record stating terrorism against property and people is OK |
Misquote/exxageration. I never said terrorism against people is Ok.
| Quote: |
| you continue to hold the line that domestic violence is something that happens only in Islamic societies |
Putting words in my mouth again? Of course it happens worldwide. However in Islamic societies it is more prevalent, socially acceptable and recommended by their religion.
| Quote: |
| But you made claims of a statistical trend, something that you need figures to back up. |
Well, Ok- lets go into this. Its an interesting topic. Lets begin with Bangladesh- a country you formerly held up as a paragon of modernsociety embracing equal rights. The following is from the University of London, written by a muslim, and sourcing from the Bangladesh bureau of statistics. Good enough link for you? or do you require sattelite images as evidence?
WOMEN, ISLAM, AND THE STATE:
SUBORDINATION AND RESISTANCE
http://www.lib.uchicago.edu/e/su/southasia/Tazeen.html
After a period of political oblivion, the religious right in Bangladesh has not only made electoral gains but also successfully engaged in political alliances which allowed it to campaign virtually unopposed for an Islamic state where women could step outdoors only at their own peril.
Women's subordination is also ensured by the policies of the patriarchal, post-colonial state of Bangladesh which is not fully committed to female equality. On the contrary, it has endorsed violence and injustices against women, both in the private and public spheres.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=15590385&dopt=Abstract
Of about 1,200 women surveyed, 67% had ever experienced domestic violence, and 35% had done so in the past year.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/entrez/query.fcgi?cmd=Retrieve&db=PubMed&list_uids=12751674&dopt=Abstract
50.5% of the women were reported to be battered by their husbands and 2.1% by other family members.
http://www.icddrb.org/pub/publication.jsp?classificationID=0&pubID=3965
Sporadic studies and media reports indicate that domestic violence against women (DVAW) is a serious problem in Bangladesh. 39% in Dhaka and 41% in Matlab reported being physically assaulted by their husbands. Thirty-seven percent of women in Dhaka and 50% of women in Matlab reported being sexually assaulted by their husbands. Sixty-nine percent of married women in Dhaka and 81% in Matlab reported psychological abuse by their husbands.
http://72.14.203.104/search?q=cache:FYLVr7a360UJ:www.onlinewomeninpolitics.org/NewsFolder_OBDec2/ViolenceAgianstYoungerWomen.doc+Domestic+violence+statistics+Bangladesh&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=4
Younger women, aged between 15 to 19, are the main victims of domestic violence in Bangladesh, according to a recent report of World Health Organisation (WHO).Domestic violence against women is common and serious.In urban Bangladesh, the rate of domestic violence against younger women is 48 percent while against those aged 45 to 49 the rate is 10 percent.
So there you have it: poor benighted Bangladesh: a cesspit, where 67% of women have been battered by a muslim thug, revelling in his institutionalized and divinely sanctioned reign of terror over the opposite sex.
Are you ready to gloss over this one and move on to the next Islamic basket case yet?
Jag..get real.. Jag.. jag...hello? wake up! Anybody home?     |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Bulsajo
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 7:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rapier wrote: |
I never said terrorism against people is Ok.
|
Not true.
Most of us were around for it, It wasn't so long ago.
Gopher, Nowhere Man and TUM remember, I'd be willing to bet.
Apologize for it now if you'd like, but just because time has passed you can't suddenly come back here claiming black is white, red is green, up is down.
Although, I can't say I'm surprised that you would try, that's the level of honesty we've come to expect from you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jaganath69
Joined: 17 Jul 2003
|
| Posted: Sat Apr 01, 2006 5:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Rapier,
Again we have to deal with your absolutist, black and white views of the world from your Christian fundamentalist and Eco-warrior-terrorist perspective. I never claimed that Bangladesh could be put on a level with western countries. I have never denied the existance of violence against women in that country either. The two claims I made were that it was a democracy and one where womens' participation in the economy were increasing. The success of microcredit schemes in that country are well known to anyone who has a background in development economics. But don't take it from me, here is what the world bank has to say about it.
http://lnweb18.worldbank.org/sar/sa.nsf/a22044d0c4877a3e852567de0052e0fa/450fc8a2fad5479885256865007197cf?OpenDocument
Although highlighting this alone would be remiss of me. Using as an example that all is peachy keen in that country would not only be poor research, but more akin to something that you would do. Bangladesh fails miserably in its responsibility to protect women from violence and abuse. I'll stand side by side with you on that one. However, this one single statistic fails to show a complete story. For example where do you think Bangladesh would rate in terms of its access for females to primary school education? Let's see what nationmaster.com has to say
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph-T/edu_fem_enr_sha_pri_lev
It ranks 30th at 48.8%. Now there are all sorts of demographic trends that could explain this as an anomoly, but given that close to 50% of primary school enrolments are female, I'd say access is fairly equitable there.
I'd like to return to the issue of violence against women. It seems to be the crux of your argument linking Islam to backwardness. I've been doing some looking around on the internet as well. In looking at one country only then extrapolating back you've failed one very important test. Comparison. Your research begs the question, "if violence is endemic against women in Bangladesh is endemic, what could cause it?". You've chosen the easy route and said its religion, specifically Islam. Well, I came across a report from the UN that highlights specific forms of violence against women in neighboring India, a mostly Hindu nation
www.un.org/womenwatch/daw/egm/vaw-stat-2005/docs/expert-papers/basu.pdf
Also this one from Amnesty, highlighting much the same kind of concerns.
web.amnesty.org/ai.nsf/Index/ASA200162001?OpenDocument&of=COUNTRIES%5CINDIA
We could take this fairly broad brush stroke and begin to detect a pattern. Poverty and violence against women seem to go hand in hand. If it were merely a case of religion, we could see that violence against women was merely prominent in Muslim countries. It would be a big stretch for your tiny mind which sees the world merely in terms of black and white to go any further and look for any more sources. In the hope you would do just that, I'm prepared to give you something to get you started.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=poverty+and+violence+against+women&btnG=Search
So to summize in case you have started drooling down your shirt and are no longer paying attention.
1. Violence against women in Bangladesh is a serious issue.
2. Despite this, other indicators can be found that show womens' lives are improving. Its all relative of course, but it has serious rammifications when you consider that you believe there is no hope for women in Islamic societies.
3. Violence against women occurs across religious lines.
4. There is a correlation between violence against women and poverty.
5. You are still a nitwit who sees the world on his own terms.
6. You are prepared to use violent means to acheive your political agenda
7. Most of what you say on this forum is ill-informed, hypocritical or just sheer whacky. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rapier
Joined: 16 Feb 2003
|
| Posted: Sun Apr 02, 2006 8:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
Actually Jag.. I don't really enjoy arguing. Which is why I tend to be scarce on here.
To be honest...I don't hate anyone, I believe all people were made equal in the sight of God.
I do think Islam is a terrible scourge on the planet though, and I pity those locked, born into it, and those oppressed by it. I see it as entirely incompatible with the Christianity which the west has in places largely deserted ( eg Europe). Muslims will not only replace Europeans demographically there, but force a new "spirituality" on them now they have become weak and forsaken the one true, living God. It has been their choice perhaps all along. When Christianity, the foundation of the western values, was strong, Islam cowered. No longer.
But, I entirely allow a persons choice to be muslim if they wish (although most are given no option in that culture). I wonder, do they respect a persons right to choose Christ rather than Islam? I highly doubt it.
Good day to you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
