egafd.com

"You do know that most Iraqi deaths were Muslims killing other Muslims based on what type of Muslim you were, right? It's not the big bad 'ole Americans that are planting bombs outside Shia Mosques, primed to go off just after afternoon prayers. But ignore that big nugget because it doesn't fit in with your agenda."

This strikes me as a bit of a simplistic reply. The US and its allies invaded in an illegal war and destroyed the Iraqi government, its army and its infrastructure. What you need to do is ask yourself how many of these sectarian killings would have taken place had the government infrastructure and army remained in place during the three or four years when the bloodshed was at its worst?

I could make exactly the same point about India. If some western country invaded India, removed the government, army and infrastructure and effectively created a complete power vacuum, I would predict that very soon there would be wholesale slaughter as Hindu, Muslim and Sikh mobs roamed the poorest parts of the countryside looking to wipe each other out.

"But ignore that big nugget because it doesn't fit in with your agenda."

I'm not ignoring it. I am just looking for a less simplistic analysis.

Porn Baron wrote:

>
>
> This guy is dangerous and we should make his life
> uncomfortable.
>
Much as I hate to admit it, he probably has a point. If we didn't have troops stationed in Afghanistan, if we had not invaded Iraq and if there were no US troops in Saudi Arabia would yesterday's killing have happened?

Sam Slater wrote:


As for Tarot cards and astrology.......I'm not sure a
> belief in these things increases as a belief in God decreases.

Very few newspapers and magazines have a religion column (and many used to) but they all have an astrology one.

I'm glad you're all for one sidedness but the irony is that while your advocating this the very same religion that your defending if allowed to continue in the way it is now wouldn't be shaking you by the hand and saying thank you.

I know there's the argument and quote about defending that which you don't agree with but a point of view can always be met with compromance and tolerance but a vile ideology based on the subjection and institutional ignorance cannot ever be defended.

At some point the rest of the Muslim community will have to face up to what their religion is as they won't be able to sit on the fence.

I think your views are even more simplistic:

If Islamists fight with anybody, even themselves, it's always the fault of somebody else.

I don't like or believe we are achieving anything in Afganistan or Iraq either. Protest and use your democratic vote if you don't like it. That's what we all do. But we don't murder people. Nor do real muslims.

I am sure this guy is behind lots of this hatred. Follow him everywhere

But no one takes horoscopes seriously and those that do do not get the same respect as religious people.

Take the coverage of the Woolwich murder, yesterday. It didn't take long before the news guy at the scene had a Vicar and a Bishop stood side by side as spokesmen for the 'community' and how the 'community' was feeling. Despite this part of London being very multi-cultural and with people of many faiths, and despite half of people in the UK's last census saying they belong to no religion at all, it was deemed quite normal for the local Vicar and Bishop to speak on everyone's behalf. They didn't ask the local medium as far as I'm aware.

Sam Slater wrote:

> But no one takes horoscopes seriously and those that do do not
> get the same respect as religious people.

Sadly, I don't think that's true. LOTS of women take horoscopes seriously ? Nancy Reagan for one.

>
> Take the coverage of the Woolwich murder, yesterday. It didn't
> take long before the news guy at the scene had a Vicar and a
> Bishop stood side by side as spokesmen for the 'community' and
> how the 'community' was feeling. Despite this part of London
> being very multi-cultural and with people of many faiths, and
> despite half of people in the UK's last census saying they
> belong to no religion at all, it was deemed quite normal for
> the local Vicar and Bishop to speak on everyone's behalf.

Yes because many people cling to religion in times of need. As the old saying goes there are no atheists on fox holes.

They
> didn't ask the local medium as far as I'm aware.
>
Give it time and I'm sure it won't be long before Derek Acorah appears on Sky News.

On a more serious note your two points are not related. Horoscopes have nothing to do with mediums.

Ah........so if Muslims fight with Hindus it's the Hindus' fault.

Muslims fight with Buddhists it's the Buddhists that are the instigators.

Muslims fight with secularists waddaya know? Bloody secularists acting up again.

Muslims fight with Christians and.......well......the Christians were asking for it.

And you must be right because Islam is a religion of peace.

Sam Slater wrote:

> But no one takes horoscopes seriously and those that do do not
> get the same respect as religious people.

From me they do. I despise their beliefs equally.
I'm an atheist.