No explanation is possible, nor is the cartoon defensible. The Sacramento News has shown they stand foursquare with terrorism, defamation, and anti-Semitism. When do they plan on running the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as a Sunday serial?
Second thought Sol.
It is very hard for me to think of my son and my nephew in harms way, defending the right of a newspaper to spew this kind of hatred. Very hard indeed.
First it's monkeys being offensive, now a cartoon commentary on how the US is left vulnerable to international criticism due to unconditional support of Israel.
Although in the meantime (that ridiculous "it's not yet time" comment by the US) there's been plenty of US made bombs, hellfire missiles, aircraft, apache helicopters getting a workout on the many dead.
The egg/tomato stains on the wall are because that said support has further damaged an already battered US international image. But stick to watching fox news if you don't like to hear that sort of thing..
The previous comment says as much as the cartoon. Of course nothing is said about the vulnerability of the tiny state in question, nor the value of the 7 million lives its soldiers must defend, decade after decade, war after war; nor its unstinting loyalty as an ally.
There's absolutely no defense either to the cartoon or to the implication that it's anything but a shameful display of bigotry.
"now a cartoon commentary on how the US is left vulnerable to international criticism due to unconditional support of Israel."
I see the cartoon as depicting how the US is under the control of Israel (or the Jews as a whole--same thing nowadays), but that's just me.
"there's been plenty of US made bombs, hellfire missiles, aircraft, apache helicopters getting a workout on the many dead."
Anything Mainstream Media says. Don't question it, that's a thinkcrime and it's doubleplus ungood.
"The egg/tomato stains on the wall are because that said support has further damaged an already battered US international image."
Yes, I admit it's obstructing the left's Grand Plan of making peace by winning the "hearts and minds" of the Muslims. Though it is beyond me why, in the light of said Muslims beheading schoolgirls in Thailand, you still think those Muslims have hearts and minds for anything other than world domination. But then you're "reality-based", as we all know.
ChillWinston seems to like to get everyone's dander up who is pro-Israel. He/she is all over the Internet with nasty comments.
I think that response to the cartoon should be muted, or even non-existent. We don't want a situation where anyone who wants to can make us Jews jump. It's also a way of saying to the paper that they don't matter very much.
If we don't respond, there is a risk that cartoons like these, and their prose equivalents, will become more acceptable as a norm. But I don't think that will happen. These cartoonists or writers will be puzzled disappointed at the lack of reaction, but the rest of the public will still be horrified. And if readers see what journalists or cartoonists can sometimes get away with, maybe they'll understand that the Jews don't control or terrorize everyone in the media. They'll understand that bigots do exist out there who disguise themselves as mere critics of Israeli policies. This is a question of giving these journalists and cartoonists enough rope to hang themselves.
The "progressive" Sacramento News and Review can freely publish this smear knowing that Jews will never riot or burn down their offices. Cartoonist / propagandist John Kloss knows that no rabbi will put a fatwa on his head for his "Klossketch."
I think the reason noone will burn down their offices is because you are in a developed nation.
Sofia: "Of course nothing is said about the vulnerability of the tiny state in question, nor the value of the 7 million lives its soldiers must defend, decade after decade, war after war; nor its unstinting loyalty as an ally."
Nor is there anything in the cartoon about the vulnerability of the palestinians currently getting bombed/killed.. Nor for that matter the name of the first man to walk on the moon or the secret ingredient of Coca Cola. This is because it was a comment on a specific aspect of the situation, that is that the US is in the town stocks over support of Israel.
As for loyalty as an ally: who has gotten most out of that exactly? How many vetos to protect violations of human rights is loyalty worth? How many billion dollars a year in aid and military purchases versus spending money on the truly needy in Africa and the rest of the world? Do you really think that the amount of money poured into Israel's miliary is saving more lives than say condoms, education and malaria treatment in the developing world?
ZionistYoungster: "Yes, I admit it's obstructing the left's Grand Plan of making peace by winning the "hearts and minds" of the Muslims."
Well let's face it the only way there's going to be lasting peace is via winning hearts and minds. You simply can't kill everyone, so diplomacy, understanding and compromise is the only way.
Or we can just continue with the middle east being the warlike feuding part of the world it has been for so long.
"Well let's face it the only way there's going to be lasting peace is via winning hearts and minds."
That's the only way? Then why didn't we do it 70 years ago? Why did we go on a senseless war against Hitler, complete with the use of "disproportionate force" (Dresden), instead of trying to win the Nazis' hearts and minds?
I wonder... could it be because... that option had been tried first, and was subsequently found to fail?
"You simply can't kill everyone, so diplomacy, understanding and compromise is the only way."
Wow. You win the Bifurcation Fallacy Award big time. Again, what we did 70 years ago:
1) The allies won the battlefield.
2) They executed the Nazi leadership (not the people themselves).
3) They took over the education system to weed Nazism out of the people's hearts and minds (denazification).
It worked. We should do the same now. Ann Coulter suggested it, but the Left pooh-poohs anything Coulter says just because it's Coulter. She may be a sensationalist, but those ideas of hers on 9/12 were just the Allied policy adapted to our times. Compare:
1) "Invade their countries" (winning the battlefield).
2) "Kill their leaders" (executing their leadership).
3) "Convert them to Christianity" (denazify).
"Or we can just continue with the middle east being the warlike feuding part of the world it has been for so long."
No, that won't work. Let's appease them with more land and more shariah law. That's working just great.
ZionistYoungster:
What are you talking about with respect to WWII? The US stayed out of the war until Pearl Harbour was attacked. Is that the "we" you refer to?
WWII was not the same as this "war" which is Israel bombing the crap out of a neighbouring country in response to the occasional rocket launched by a millitant group. Hitler's expansion plans were the fuel for a widespread war.
You said: "They executed the Nazi leadership (not the people themselves)."
Well actually the civilian casualty figures say something different.. "Razed to the ground" is an expression that tends to apply with war. Of the 62 million or so who died, the majority were civilians. Sure there were a handful of war criminals after the war who were hanged/shot etc, but the vast majority of the impact of the war was not on those top handful, but on the people of the world.
"They took over the education system to weed Nazism out of the people's hearts and minds (denazification)."
Huh? Germany plunged into a depression after the war. Who exactly took over the education system? Last I checked it was split up amongst the victors..
As for stamping out nazi ideology: Germany has laws banning nazi stuff, it also is acutely aware of what happened during the war not only during the war, but the impact upon the people of Germany as a result of the country's support of Hitlers war efforts. THAT is why, not some crap about taking over the education system by the US..
I'm really not sure what version of history you're talking about.
"1) "Invade their countries" (winning the battlefield).
2) "Kill their leaders" (executing their leadership).
3) "Convert them to Christianity" (denazify)."
Well, that's just replacing one bunch of irrational beliefs with another. If people are educated enough to realise that organised religion doesn't make any sense then perhaps there's hope.
Whilever you still have millions of people exhibiting signs that were they about anything except "god" they would be locked up.
Also, as with anything based around assasination, killing or torture: this just ensures the cause is morally bankrupt.
Another history lesson: look up "witch burning", "the crusades" and you'll see how your 3 step plan works. As we're talking nazi policies, I believe they had a plan to rid the world of undesirables like homosexuals, gypsies, polish people, jews and other religions they disagreed with. So that plan is in such fine company..
Eddie: still nothing intelligent or correct to add?
"The US stayed out of the war until Pearl Harbour was attacked."
You got a Pearl Harbor on 9/11/2001. Why are you behaving as if it never happened?
"WWII was not the same as this"
In the sense that an official, no-holds-barred war between Islam and the West has not yet erupted, I agree. However, the Leftist-driven actions of appeasement and mindset of Political Correctness are bringing that moment as we speak.
"which is Israel bombing the crap out of a neighbouring country in response to the occasional rocket launched by a millitant group."
Well, if you're content in living somewhere with the knowledge that a rocket could land on you any second, then I have no argument with you, nor can I help you.
If I said this once to all you Eurodhimmis and American Dhimmicrats, I said it a thousand times: stop preaching at us from the comfort of your armchair!
"Hitler's expansion plans were the fuel for a widespread war."
Ahmadinejad's expansion plans are a fuel for a widespread war. There might still be time to stop it. But you're so bent on repeating history.
"Huh? Germany plunged into a depression after the war. Who exactly took over the education system? Last I checked it was split up amongst the victors.."
The victors did, each in their own territory. They each had a different focus, but all of them stamped out the ideology of Nazism through education.
"As for stamping out nazi ideology: Germany has laws banning nazi stuff, it also is acutely aware of what happened during the war not only during the war, but the impact upon the people of Germany as a result of the country's support of Hitlers war efforts."
Back in the day, the people of Germany saw Hitler as a hero. Further back in the day, they elected him in the first place because they wanted to right the perceived wrong of the 1918 defeat and the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. Then, in 1945, the Allies took care not to repeat that mistake (of leaving room for the German people to feel wronged and seeking revenge again) and educated Nazism out of them. Had they not done that, Germany might have pushed for yet another World War.
"THAT is why, not some crap about taking over the education system by the US.."
History doesn't disappear because you want it to, nor by whispering an incantation of "crap" on it.
"Well, that's just replacing one bunch of irrational beliefs with another."
The day Christians don suicide vests and bomb themselves with nonbelievers, give me a call. But you won't ever. The Torah leaves no room for such things. The Koran, which comes from a source other than the Torah, does.
"If people are educated enough to realise that organised religion doesn't make any sense then perhaps there's hope."
It's already happened in Europe. Europe is secular. The result: demographic decline, nihilism and embrace of destructive movements like anarchism, primitivism, Marxism and Islam. Europe is lying down devoid of life-energy and ready to dhimmify itself to the grave under the Islamic onslaught.
As for de-Islamization (I gave "convert them to Christianity" because I was quoting Coulter, and because it looks like only the Christian world is up to that task; and Judaism isn't a proselytizing religion, so it's out of that effort), never did I suggest it ought to be by force; the denazification of Germany wasn't by force either (in the sense of holding guns to schoolchildren's heads). The only force that needs to be employed is to obstruct the execution of apostates, which is what currently maintains the greenhouse effect of Islam (you can get in but you can't get out).
Islam is a bigger threat than Nazism, because Nazism had just one state at its disposal while Islam can have tens of them. The threat can't be taken lightly, it can't be kumbaya'd or any form of "heart-and-minded" out of existence, and it can't be solved by blaming Bush and saying it's all a conspiracy. You can look and come to that conclusion by yourself, or failing that, you will learn it the hard way.
ChillWinston, you hypocritical OCCUPIER of Aborigine land in the "Land Down Under",
You are lucky that the Aborigines are more civilized than the followers of "peaceful Islam" who are at war with their non-Muslim neighbors and their FELLOW Muslims all over the world.
Ask Hindus, Buddhists, ethnic Chinese of Indonesia, Coptic Christians of Egypt what they think of "peaceful Islam".
July was the deadliest month in Iraq - Muslims killing Muslims. Sad.
ZionistYoungster:
"You got a Pearl Harbor on 9/11/2001."
Well, you had a terrorist attack in which a lot of people died. That it has been used to justify any number of things as "the world changed after 911".
Not donning suicide vests doth not a virtuous religion make. Christians have a pretty bloody history (witch burnings, the crusades etc) and continue to kill in the name of religion too. How many islamic people have bombed abortion clinics in the US or killed doctors who dared to provide family planning services??
Or how about a radical christian world leader who receives direction from god who has instigated an illegal war in Iraq and afghanistan which has at minimum killed over 40,000 civilians? Oh and justifies imprisonment without charge, torture and violations of the geneva convention.
WWII division of Germany: well you had communism drummed into part of it, which was then un-drummed later. If you're talking about "education" it was more name and punish via courts and taking out "offenders". The soviet bloc was more harsh if I recall correctly and it dumped 'em in camps. It was the laws banning Nazi stuff and the society's witnessing of what the Nazis had done to the country i.e. since the reparations/forced labour/destroyed infrastructure from the war meant the post war period was very harsh on the german people. I don't think that the german people needed to be told that nazis were bad, they witnessed that and paid the price after the war.
As for whether the Torah leaves no room for it, well it also states a lot of silly things and can be used by "believers" to justify lots of nasty things like every religion. Orthodox jews follow these things to the letter (gays are evil, women should be avoided while on their period, slavery is fine so long as it is from another nation). It leaves no room for a lot of stuff.. The trouble with any religious text is that people form their own belief structure around it whether that's good or bad. Radical fundamentalists truly believe they are doing gods work whether that be keepin' the women folk in line (usually in the kitchen or popping out babies) or killing those who don't share the same view. Religion is just another word for "superstition" and as such comes with an inherent irrationality.
I look at a lot of what you say about Islam and I think that yes, I reckon if Islamic law is forced via the state it is a threat to freedom. If someone tried to put sharia law in place in Australia I'd be out on the streets with everyone else making sure that didn't happen. I also think this about Christians too. Look at all the Christians trying to batter the laws back to their moral values. Abortion, contraception, sex before marriage, stem cell research etc etc. Fortunately these things are usually given the distain they deserve in Australia. But if somehow one day someone magically banned sex before marriage, using the lord's name in vain, no working on the sabbath etc etc I'd be out protesting too.
Although Judism generally quite liberal on a lot of things (because generally Jewish people are educated and not living in developing nations.. if that's not too much of a generalisation) compared to say Islam (excluding Orthodox Jewish old fossils of course). If Jewish law were implemented then I would be upset too (I like my various foods, working whatever day I like, sinning away etc etc).
ANY religion infecting laws and the running of a state is a bad idea in my book. Given the choice of strict adherance to religious decrees I wouldn't willingly choose any of the religions. I'd pick jewish and christian over muslim though. Between christian and jewish.. Hrmm.. Tough call. But then that's the sort of problem you have with assuming that moral standards and civilisation is unchanged since "biblical times".
So if you're after a threat it is the spread of all religions into state politics. Science, engineering, rights and civilisation have been hamstrung and battered by religion since the first zealout yelled "blasphemy" or whatever the equivalent was and the mob then bullied or killed that person for daring to question the religion.
It is the harbouring of fundamentalism by religious moderates who at some level share the same belief structure and who give weight to any attempt to move towards infecting laws with religious commandments.
Islam is scary I agree (what sane male would WANT women covered up at all times!! seriously insane on that point alone!!), but so is garbage like banning teaching of evolution because it causes some awkward questions for religious types.
Eddie:
Aboriginal beliefs are hardly peaceful. Tribal law is pretty similar to the nastier parts of Islam/Judism/Christianity (things like group spearings instead of stonings). Near sanctioned rape and paedophillia coupled with a group retributions for any that speak out against said rapists/pedophiles.
But the good news is that the rainbow serpant (part of the belief by the way) created a pretty nice and varied countryside and a lot of it makes a lot more sense than all that stuff from the middle east.
Peaceful Islam exists, as does fundamentalist islam. Liberal/tolerant Judaism exists as does Strict/Intolerant Orthodox Judaism. Liberal/Peaceful christians exist as to radical violent fundamentalist christians.
Common theme? Religions have a range of types of believers. Common theme among them : they all think they're doing what their religion demands.
It's no coincidence that the higher level of education and better society you have, the less religious the place tends to be.
"Well, you had a terrorist attack in which a lot of people died."
You forgot to add the "ho hum" at the end of that sentence. It can't sound genuinely trivial without that addition.
"Not donning suicide vests doth not a virtuous religion make."
Suicide vests are an epitome. They epitomize a culture of death.
"How many islamic people have bombed abortion clinics in the US or killed doctors who dared to provide family planning services??"
I don't condone such actions, but they pose far less of a danger to world peace than Islamic imperialism.
"WWII division of Germany: well you had communism drummed into part of it, which was then un-drummed later."
Yes, but you're insisting on missing my point: the Allies each had a different ideology and method, but all of them were agreed on not leaving the Nazi ideology itself intact.
"Orthodox jews follow these things to the letter (gays are evil, women should be avoided while on their period, slavery is fine so long as it is from another nation)."
Our sages have, through the ages, taken away all those things which you see as stings to the moral body. For example, "an eye for an eye" is interpreted as monetary compensation, not as actually gouging an eye of the one who did that to the other. And most halachic laws pertaining to the state have been put on hold 'til the Messianic age.
"Religion is just another word for 'superstition' and as such comes with an inherent irrationality."
Do you hold to the view that there'd be very few wars if religion were to disappear? You could be excused for holding such a view if you hadn't lived to see the 20th century. You can't be excused for that now: both World Wars were not caused by religion. Communist massacres of millions were not caused by religion. I'm afraid freedom from religion isn't synonymous with freedom from irrationality.
"If someone tried to put sharia law in place in Australia I'd be out on the streets with everyone else making sure that didn't happen."
That's good. Yet you have the audacity to demand that Israel stop doing the same (what do Hamas and Hizbullah want but the replacement of the Jewish state with an Islamic shariah one?).
"ANY religion infecting laws and the running of a state is a bad idea in my book."
I agree. Separation of religion and state should be defended and encouraged. But here's the problem with Islam: separation of religion and state in Islam can't be defended, because it doesn't even exist conceptually, nor can it be encouraged, because mainstream Islamic jurisprudence considers it treason.
"Peaceful Islam exists,"
I'll believe it when I see it. When I see Muslims coming in droves to protest all jihad, all moves to implement shariah law in a Western host country and the entire doctrine of "Islam will dominate the world", and educating their children against all these.
911 was a terrorist attack in which people died. That's it. If you expect me to say that it was the most horrific event in human kind I'm sorry but it wasn't (although what followed will not be kindly looked back on in the future as Orwell's 1984 appeared to be a typo for 2004). Look at Iraq: 40 THOUSAND people dead. HIV/AIDS affects 40million + in the world and it has killed 25million people since the 80s. Israel just blew away 1/3 of the WTC attack in the space of a month or so. So 3000 odd people, although a horrific loss of life was pretty small in the scale of "large numbers of casualties". Each day 3000 people die from malaria. 3 million kids die from Diarrhoeal causes a year. Smoking (a stupid and preventable habit) kills 3 million a year (est. rising to 10million by 2010)
You said: "Suicide vests are an epitome. They epitomize a culture of death."
Agreed, like pretty much every religious text death, suffering and hypocracy are rife. The heaven's gate cult did a mass suicide under the guise of a christian based radical belief system.
Perhaps the orthodox jewish leader who called for death penalty for families of suicide bombers is onto something? http://www.rense.com/general25/tap.htm
Isn't there a bit of talk of suicide in the first testament? Samson, Saul?
My comment about religion being superstition and irrational has nothing to do with whether wars will exist or not. WWI, WWII, vietnam and cambodia are proof enough of that ability we have to wage war on each other.
As for "interpretation" well that's just being slack with your religion. That's the scary bit: fundamentalists are quite accurate about their religion. They do not temper what's written with common sense, they take a literal meaning to be evident in those teachings. Everyone's scared of fundamentalists, but what's the real scary thing: the belief structure that permits fundamentalists to develop..
Quite why religion gets so many allowances made for it when if it was anything else there'd be a man in a white coat coming for you.
That someone as a Jew has probably never enjoyed an greasy egg and bacon sandwich after a night out drinking for no REAL reason other than a superstition that it is somehow bad to eat pork. (believe me, you're missing out! hehe)
About Sharia law.
I said "protest" and related to if my country was to implement it. I would do the same thing if ANY religion tried to jam itself into the state. Israeli government is quite infected by jewish law, just as other countries in the middle east are infected with Islam. When the irrational superstition is enforced by government you have issues. The US is currently quite infected with christian idiology (so much so that it exports it whenever delivering aid).
I do not have the audacity to demand Israel stop protesting about their government being infected by religion, I would encourage it.
Though I somehow don't expect many Jewish people will be protesting to de-judaify their government. Just like not many muslims would want their government de-islamified or the biblebelt calling for George W to stop blathering on about god and (his only) vetoing things on religious grounds.
I am though against the military action of Israel and other opression of the palestinians.. It's a separate issue to church in state, it's about killing people and invading a neighbour.
You: "Separation of religion and state should be defended and encouraged. But here's the problem with Islam: separation of religion and state in Islam can't be defended, because it doesn't even exist conceptually, nor can it be encouraged, because mainstream Islamic jurisprudence considers it treason."
That is true of pretty much all religions: they fundamentally disagree that there is any other religion allowed. Most religious supserstitions are rather intolerant of other relgions. Islam has some very angry language, but looking through the other ones they are no less intolerant (non believers = sinners = headed for eternal damnation or some sort of roasting).
"Peaceful islam":
Well, careful you're not tarring everyone with the same brush. There are a lot of whacko muslims out there (hell, Australia is right next door to the biggest muslim population in the world.. Indonesia. So which "western" nation is in more danger of a mass islamic movement??)
I know a handful of people back in Oz who are muslim. They're pretty relaxed about it, will come to the pub for a beer or two.. They do that crazy fasting thing once or twice a year (another silly superstition).. But on the whole I don't see 'em doing anything violent. So they're ignoring the violent parts of the bible, just like most jews/christians ignore the incest/murder/slavery/vengance/contradictions spread throughout their book.
"911 was a terrorist attack in which people died. That's it. If you expect me to say that it was the most horrific event in human kind I'm sorry but it wasn't [...]"
Did I suggest it was? Neither was Pearl Harbor. But as Pearl Harbor was Japan's declaration of intent to inflict more on America back then, so was 9/11 the Muslims' such declaration. You ignore that at your peril.
"The heaven's gate cult did a mass suicide under the guise of a christian based radical belief system."
When you first hear about other Christians accepting Heaven's Gate as mainstream, or even acquiescing to them, give me a call.
"Perhaps the orthodox jewish leader who called for death penalty for families of suicide bombers is onto something?"
First: Rense = conspiracy theories. Lots of them. Alien abductions and the like. To be taken with enough salt as to put people with high blood pressure at grave risk.
Second, supposing it's true: you'll note (in the link itself) many other Jewish leaders are not in agreement with him. You won't find anything comparable to this in Islam. The few Islamic leaders who would condemn suicide bombings had better go into hiding if they ever plan on publicizing their opinion.
"Isn't there a bit of talk of suicide in the first testament? Samson, Saul?"
Samson yes, but he's not a role model (quite the opposite, in fact: he was brought to suicide killing by his misdeeds, and the story is a lesson not to reach such a state. His end was the sorry one of a disobedient man). Saul's suicide was like a Japanese seppuku, not a Muslim shaheed's "martyrdom" (the suicide of desperation and dishonor, killing only oneself, not a combat operation taking down enemies with you).
"That's the scary bit: fundamentalists are quite accurate about their religion. They do not temper what's written with common sense, they take a literal meaning to be evident in those teachings."
Nah, even fundamentalists employ a mixture of literalism and allegorical interpretation.
"Everyone's scared of fundamentalists, but what's the real scary thing: the belief structure that permits fundamentalists to develop.."
So you'd wish to wage an all-out war on religion, even its liberal manifestations? So you're not so grayscale-viewing as one would believe...
"Quite why religion gets so many allowances made for it when if it was anything else there'd be a man in a white coat coming for you."
What do you mean? Let me guess: you're suggesting all people who hear G-d talking to them ought to be in a mental institution, and only religion is preventing from that being carried out, right?
"That someone as a Jew has probably never enjoyed an greasy egg and bacon sandwich after a night out drinking for no REAL reason other than a superstition that it is somehow bad to eat pork. (believe me, you're missing out! hehe)"
Missing out? There could be much worse. Like the joke about the talk between the rabbi and the priest. The priest coaxed an admission from the rabbi that he'd once eaten pork. Then, the rabbi yanked an admission from the priest that he'd once had sex with a woman. So the rabbi said, "Better than pork, isn't it?" :-D
"Israeli government is quite infected by jewish law, just as other countries in the middle east are infected with Islam."
Not comparable at all. If you want a fair comparison, compare Israel to Turkey: lots of religious believers, often angry about blatant secularism, but religion isn't the law.
"The US is currently quite infected with christian idiology"
Again: Christianity isn't the law of the USA. Islamic shariah is the law in a lot of Islamic states.
Secularism proper isn't about emptying nations from religion, it's about separation of religion from state governance.
"I am though against the military action of Israel"
The military action of Israel is for the purpose that Israel continue to exist, that it not be overrun by its enemies, that a second Holocaust not occur. If you oppose that, you oppose not only the state of Israel but also all the Jews.
"and other opression of the palestinians.."
The Palestinians are not oppressed, except by their own refusal to accept the existence of the Jewish state. They were given, a year ago, some land to build their state on (the Gaza Strip, with the West Bank to follow, if things hadn't gone as I describe next). Instead, they chose to destroy the evacuated buildings, to loot the greenhouses and to use the now barren ground as a base to launch Kassam rockets from, at cities within Israel's internationally recognized borders.
Because of those actions, I now see the "Palestinian" narrative of "wanting a homeland just like the Jews did and got" as nothing but a sham, a ruse along the way to the eradication of the Jewish state (G-d forbid). The "Palestinians" aren't fighting for the independence of their state, they're fighting against the independence of the Jewish state. They're the oppressors, and they cry they're oppressed whenever Israel doesn't let them carry out their grand plan. As indeed with the Muslim world as a whole: "oppression" in Islamspeak is resistance against the implementation of shariah rule over the whole world, and "peace" in Islamspeak is the cessation of all resistance to Islamic rule.
"That is true of pretty much all religions: they fundamentally disagree that there is any other religion allowed. Most religious supserstitions are rather intolerant of other relgions."
Actually, most religions are tolerant of all others. Judaism itself doesn't mind much what non-Jews believe and practice--one of the few requirements for non-Jews is that they uphold courts of law (justice, not religious belief and practice, is at the center).
"Well, careful you're not tarring everyone with the same brush."
It doesn't have to be the case I'm tarring everyone with the same brush; it may be the case they really are the same, no tarring with any brush required. Back in the day, the Nazis weren't "tarred with the same brush", they really were the same.
"(hell, Australia is right next door to the biggest muslim population in the world.. Indonesia. So which "western" nation is in more danger of a mass islamic movement??)"
Good insight. Though, it's not a question of who is more in danger and who is less. All non-Islamic countries are.
"I know a handful of people back in Oz who are muslim. They're pretty relaxed about it, will come to the pub for a beer or two.. They do that crazy fasting thing once or twice a year (another silly superstition).. But on the whole I don't see 'em doing anything violent. So they're ignoring the violent parts of the bible, just like most jews/christians ignore the incest/murder/slavery/vengance/contradictions spread throughout their book."
A lax religious person has a potential to turn hardcore one day. This is true of all religions. The difference is, when a Jew turns hardcore he puts on black clothes and buys at special stores, and when a Christian turns hardcore he goes out on a mission, preaching to natives, but when a Muslim turns hardcore, he dons a suicide vest. That's what's different, what's dangerous about Islamic religiosity.
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
No explanation is possible, nor is the cartoon defensible. The Sacramento News has shown they stand foursquare with terrorism, defamation, and anti-Semitism. When do they plan on running the "Protocols of the Elders of Zion" as a Sunday serial?
Second thought Sol.
It is very hard for me to think of my son and my nephew in harms way, defending the right of a newspaper to spew this kind of hatred. Very hard indeed.
Once again outrage over a cartoon. :)
First it's monkeys being offensive, now a cartoon commentary on how the US is left vulnerable to international criticism due to unconditional support of Israel.
Although in the meantime (that ridiculous "it's not yet time" comment by the US) there's been plenty of US made bombs, hellfire missiles, aircraft, apache helicopters getting a workout on the many dead.
The egg/tomato stains on the wall are because that said support has further damaged an already battered US international image. But stick to watching fox news if you don't like to hear that sort of thing..
The previous comment says as much as the cartoon. Of course nothing is said about the vulnerability of the tiny state in question, nor the value of the 7 million lives its soldiers must defend, decade after decade, war after war; nor its unstinting loyalty as an ally.
There's absolutely no defense either to the cartoon or to the implication that it's anything but a shameful display of bigotry.
"Once again outrage over a cartoon. :)"
Yes. Fire from the embassies to come soon.
/sarc
"now a cartoon commentary on how the US is left vulnerable to international criticism due to unconditional support of Israel."
I see the cartoon as depicting how the US is under the control of Israel (or the Jews as a whole--same thing nowadays), but that's just me.
"there's been plenty of US made bombs, hellfire missiles, aircraft, apache helicopters getting a workout on the many dead."
Anything Mainstream Media says. Don't question it, that's a thinkcrime and it's doubleplus ungood.
"The egg/tomato stains on the wall are because that said support has further damaged an already battered US international image."
Yes, I admit it's obstructing the left's Grand Plan of making peace by winning the "hearts and minds" of the Muslims. Though it is beyond me why, in the light of said Muslims beheading schoolgirls in Thailand, you still think those Muslims have hearts and minds for anything other than world domination. But then you're "reality-based", as we all know.
ChillWinston seems to like to get everyone's dander up who is pro-Israel. He/she is all over the Internet with nasty comments.
I think that response to the cartoon should be muted, or even non-existent. We don't want a situation where anyone who wants to can make us Jews jump. It's also a way of saying to the paper that they don't matter very much.
If we don't respond, there is a risk that cartoons like these, and their prose equivalents, will become more acceptable as a norm. But I don't think that will happen. These cartoonists or writers will be puzzled disappointed at the lack of reaction, but the rest of the public will still be horrified. And if readers see what journalists or cartoonists can sometimes get away with, maybe they'll understand that the Jews don't control or terrorize everyone in the media. They'll understand that bigots do exist out there who disguise themselves as mere critics of Israeli policies. This is a question of giving these journalists and cartoonists enough rope to hang themselves.
"Once again outrage over a cartoon. :)"
Not quite.
The "progressive" Sacramento News and Review can freely publish this smear knowing that Jews will never riot or burn down their offices. Cartoonist / propagandist John Kloss knows that no rabbi will put a fatwa on his head for his "Klossketch."
I think the reason noone will burn down their offices is because you are in a developed nation.
Sofia: "Of course nothing is said about the vulnerability of the tiny state in question, nor the value of the 7 million lives its soldiers must defend, decade after decade, war after war; nor its unstinting loyalty as an ally."
Nor is there anything in the cartoon about the vulnerability of the palestinians currently getting bombed/killed.. Nor for that matter the name of the first man to walk on the moon or the secret ingredient of Coca Cola. This is because it was a comment on a specific aspect of the situation, that is that the US is in the town stocks over support of Israel.
As for loyalty as an ally: who has gotten most out of that exactly? How many vetos to protect violations of human rights is loyalty worth? How many billion dollars a year in aid and military purchases versus spending money on the truly needy in Africa and the rest of the world? Do you really think that the amount of money poured into Israel's miliary is saving more lives than say condoms, education and malaria treatment in the developing world?
ZionistYoungster: "Yes, I admit it's obstructing the left's Grand Plan of making peace by winning the "hearts and minds" of the Muslims."
Well let's face it the only way there's going to be lasting peace is via winning hearts and minds. You simply can't kill everyone, so diplomacy, understanding and compromise is the only way.
Or we can just continue with the middle east being the warlike feuding part of the world it has been for so long.
"Well let's face it the only way there's going to be lasting peace is via winning hearts and minds."
That's the only way? Then why didn't we do it 70 years ago? Why did we go on a senseless war against Hitler, complete with the use of "disproportionate force" (Dresden), instead of trying to win the Nazis' hearts and minds?
I wonder... could it be because... that option had been tried first, and was subsequently found to fail?
"You simply can't kill everyone, so diplomacy, understanding and compromise is the only way."
Wow. You win the Bifurcation Fallacy Award big time. Again, what we did 70 years ago:
1) The allies won the battlefield.
2) They executed the Nazi leadership (not the people themselves).
3) They took over the education system to weed Nazism out of the people's hearts and minds (denazification).
It worked. We should do the same now. Ann Coulter suggested it, but the Left pooh-poohs anything Coulter says just because it's Coulter. She may be a sensationalist, but those ideas of hers on 9/12 were just the Allied policy adapted to our times. Compare:
1) "Invade their countries" (winning the battlefield).
2) "Kill their leaders" (executing their leadership).
3) "Convert them to Christianity" (denazify).
"Or we can just continue with the middle east being the warlike feuding part of the world it has been for so long."
No, that won't work. Let's appease them with more land and more shariah law. That's working just great.
/sarc
chillwinston, a hypocritical exiled Brit Twit Aushole OCCUPIER of Aborigine land of the "Land Down Under".
ZionistYoungster:
What are you talking about with respect to WWII? The US stayed out of the war until Pearl Harbour was attacked. Is that the "we" you refer to?
WWII was not the same as this "war" which is Israel bombing the crap out of a neighbouring country in response to the occasional rocket launched by a millitant group. Hitler's expansion plans were the fuel for a widespread war.
You said: "They executed the Nazi leadership (not the people themselves)."
Well actually the civilian casualty figures say something different.. "Razed to the ground" is an expression that tends to apply with war. Of the 62 million or so who died, the majority were civilians. Sure there were a handful of war criminals after the war who were hanged/shot etc, but the vast majority of the impact of the war was not on those top handful, but on the people of the world.
"They took over the education system to weed Nazism out of the people's hearts and minds (denazification)."
Huh? Germany plunged into a depression after the war. Who exactly took over the education system? Last I checked it was split up amongst the victors..
As for stamping out nazi ideology: Germany has laws banning nazi stuff, it also is acutely aware of what happened during the war not only during the war, but the impact upon the people of Germany as a result of the country's support of Hitlers war efforts. THAT is why, not some crap about taking over the education system by the US..
I'm really not sure what version of history you're talking about.
"1) "Invade their countries" (winning the battlefield).
2) "Kill their leaders" (executing their leadership).
3) "Convert them to Christianity" (denazify)."
Well, that's just replacing one bunch of irrational beliefs with another. If people are educated enough to realise that organised religion doesn't make any sense then perhaps there's hope.
Whilever you still have millions of people exhibiting signs that were they about anything except "god" they would be locked up.
Also, as with anything based around assasination, killing or torture: this just ensures the cause is morally bankrupt.
Another history lesson: look up "witch burning", "the crusades" and you'll see how your 3 step plan works. As we're talking nazi policies, I believe they had a plan to rid the world of undesirables like homosexuals, gypsies, polish people, jews and other religions they disagreed with. So that plan is in such fine company..
Eddie: still nothing intelligent or correct to add?
"The US stayed out of the war until Pearl Harbour was attacked."
You got a Pearl Harbor on 9/11/2001. Why are you behaving as if it never happened?
"WWII was not the same as this"
In the sense that an official, no-holds-barred war between Islam and the West has not yet erupted, I agree. However, the Leftist-driven actions of appeasement and mindset of Political Correctness are bringing that moment as we speak.
"which is Israel bombing the crap out of a neighbouring country in response to the occasional rocket launched by a millitant group."
Well, if you're content in living somewhere with the knowledge that a rocket could land on you any second, then I have no argument with you, nor can I help you.
If I said this once to all you Eurodhimmis and American Dhimmicrats, I said it a thousand times: stop preaching at us from the comfort of your armchair!
"Hitler's expansion plans were the fuel for a widespread war."
Ahmadinejad's expansion plans are a fuel for a widespread war. There might still be time to stop it. But you're so bent on repeating history.
"Huh? Germany plunged into a depression after the war. Who exactly took over the education system? Last I checked it was split up amongst the victors.."
The victors did, each in their own territory. They each had a different focus, but all of them stamped out the ideology of Nazism through education.
"As for stamping out nazi ideology: Germany has laws banning nazi stuff, it also is acutely aware of what happened during the war not only during the war, but the impact upon the people of Germany as a result of the country's support of Hitlers war efforts."
Back in the day, the people of Germany saw Hitler as a hero. Further back in the day, they elected him in the first place because they wanted to right the perceived wrong of the 1918 defeat and the 1919 Treaty of Versailles. Then, in 1945, the Allies took care not to repeat that mistake (of leaving room for the German people to feel wronged and seeking revenge again) and educated Nazism out of them. Had they not done that, Germany might have pushed for yet another World War.
"THAT is why, not some crap about taking over the education system by the US.."
History doesn't disappear because you want it to, nor by whispering an incantation of "crap" on it.
"Well, that's just replacing one bunch of irrational beliefs with another."
The day Christians don suicide vests and bomb themselves with nonbelievers, give me a call. But you won't ever. The Torah leaves no room for such things. The Koran, which comes from a source other than the Torah, does.
"If people are educated enough to realise that organised religion doesn't make any sense then perhaps there's hope."
It's already happened in Europe. Europe is secular. The result: demographic decline, nihilism and embrace of destructive movements like anarchism, primitivism, Marxism and Islam. Europe is lying down devoid of life-energy and ready to dhimmify itself to the grave under the Islamic onslaught.
As for de-Islamization (I gave "convert them to Christianity" because I was quoting Coulter, and because it looks like only the Christian world is up to that task; and Judaism isn't a proselytizing religion, so it's out of that effort), never did I suggest it ought to be by force; the denazification of Germany wasn't by force either (in the sense of holding guns to schoolchildren's heads). The only force that needs to be employed is to obstruct the execution of apostates, which is what currently maintains the greenhouse effect of Islam (you can get in but you can't get out).
Islam is a bigger threat than Nazism, because Nazism had just one state at its disposal while Islam can have tens of them. The threat can't be taken lightly, it can't be kumbaya'd or any form of "heart-and-minded" out of existence, and it can't be solved by blaming Bush and saying it's all a conspiracy. You can look and come to that conclusion by yourself, or failing that, you will learn it the hard way.
ChillWinston, you hypocritical OCCUPIER of Aborigine land in the "Land Down Under",
You are lucky that the Aborigines are more civilized than the followers of "peaceful Islam" who are at war with their non-Muslim neighbors and their FELLOW Muslims all over the world.
Ask Hindus, Buddhists, ethnic Chinese of Indonesia, Coptic Christians of Egypt what they think of "peaceful Islam".
July was the deadliest month in Iraq - Muslims killing Muslims. Sad.
ZionistYoungster:
"You got a Pearl Harbor on 9/11/2001."
Well, you had a terrorist attack in which a lot of people died. That it has been used to justify any number of things as "the world changed after 911".
Not donning suicide vests doth not a virtuous religion make. Christians have a pretty bloody history (witch burnings, the crusades etc) and continue to kill in the name of religion too. How many islamic people have bombed abortion clinics in the US or killed doctors who dared to provide family planning services??
Or how about a radical christian world leader who receives direction from god who has instigated an illegal war in Iraq and afghanistan which has at minimum killed over 40,000 civilians? Oh and justifies imprisonment without charge, torture and violations of the geneva convention.
WWII division of Germany: well you had communism drummed into part of it, which was then un-drummed later. If you're talking about "education" it was more name and punish via courts and taking out "offenders". The soviet bloc was more harsh if I recall correctly and it dumped 'em in camps. It was the laws banning Nazi stuff and the society's witnessing of what the Nazis had done to the country i.e. since the reparations/forced labour/destroyed infrastructure from the war meant the post war period was very harsh on the german people. I don't think that the german people needed to be told that nazis were bad, they witnessed that and paid the price after the war.
As for whether the Torah leaves no room for it, well it also states a lot of silly things and can be used by "believers" to justify lots of nasty things like every religion. Orthodox jews follow these things to the letter (gays are evil, women should be avoided while on their period, slavery is fine so long as it is from another nation). It leaves no room for a lot of stuff.. The trouble with any religious text is that people form their own belief structure around it whether that's good or bad. Radical fundamentalists truly believe they are doing gods work whether that be keepin' the women folk in line (usually in the kitchen or popping out babies) or killing those who don't share the same view. Religion is just another word for "superstition" and as such comes with an inherent irrationality.
I look at a lot of what you say about Islam and I think that yes, I reckon if Islamic law is forced via the state it is a threat to freedom. If someone tried to put sharia law in place in Australia I'd be out on the streets with everyone else making sure that didn't happen. I also think this about Christians too. Look at all the Christians trying to batter the laws back to their moral values. Abortion, contraception, sex before marriage, stem cell research etc etc. Fortunately these things are usually given the distain they deserve in Australia. But if somehow one day someone magically banned sex before marriage, using the lord's name in vain, no working on the sabbath etc etc I'd be out protesting too.
Although Judism generally quite liberal on a lot of things (because generally Jewish people are educated and not living in developing nations.. if that's not too much of a generalisation) compared to say Islam (excluding Orthodox Jewish old fossils of course). If Jewish law were implemented then I would be upset too (I like my various foods, working whatever day I like, sinning away etc etc).
ANY religion infecting laws and the running of a state is a bad idea in my book. Given the choice of strict adherance to religious decrees I wouldn't willingly choose any of the religions. I'd pick jewish and christian over muslim though. Between christian and jewish.. Hrmm.. Tough call. But then that's the sort of problem you have with assuming that moral standards and civilisation is unchanged since "biblical times".
So if you're after a threat it is the spread of all religions into state politics. Science, engineering, rights and civilisation have been hamstrung and battered by religion since the first zealout yelled "blasphemy" or whatever the equivalent was and the mob then bullied or killed that person for daring to question the religion.
It is the harbouring of fundamentalism by religious moderates who at some level share the same belief structure and who give weight to any attempt to move towards infecting laws with religious commandments.
Islam is scary I agree (what sane male would WANT women covered up at all times!! seriously insane on that point alone!!), but so is garbage like banning teaching of evolution because it causes some awkward questions for religious types.
Eddie:
Aboriginal beliefs are hardly peaceful. Tribal law is pretty similar to the nastier parts of Islam/Judism/Christianity (things like group spearings instead of stonings). Near sanctioned rape and paedophillia coupled with a group retributions for any that speak out against said rapists/pedophiles.
But the good news is that the rainbow serpant (part of the belief by the way) created a pretty nice and varied countryside and a lot of it makes a lot more sense than all that stuff from the middle east.
Peaceful Islam exists, as does fundamentalist islam. Liberal/tolerant Judaism exists as does Strict/Intolerant Orthodox Judaism. Liberal/Peaceful christians exist as to radical violent fundamentalist christians.
Common theme? Religions have a range of types of believers. Common theme among them : they all think they're doing what their religion demands.
It's no coincidence that the higher level of education and better society you have, the less religious the place tends to be.
ChillWinston,
"Well, you had a terrorist attack in which a lot of people died."
You forgot to add the "ho hum" at the end of that sentence. It can't sound genuinely trivial without that addition.
"Not donning suicide vests doth not a virtuous religion make."
Suicide vests are an epitome. They epitomize a culture of death.
"How many islamic people have bombed abortion clinics in the US or killed doctors who dared to provide family planning services??"
I don't condone such actions, but they pose far less of a danger to world peace than Islamic imperialism.
"WWII division of Germany: well you had communism drummed into part of it, which was then un-drummed later."
Yes, but you're insisting on missing my point: the Allies each had a different ideology and method, but all of them were agreed on not leaving the Nazi ideology itself intact.
"Orthodox jews follow these things to the letter (gays are evil, women should be avoided while on their period, slavery is fine so long as it is from another nation)."
Our sages have, through the ages, taken away all those things which you see as stings to the moral body. For example, "an eye for an eye" is interpreted as monetary compensation, not as actually gouging an eye of the one who did that to the other. And most halachic laws pertaining to the state have been put on hold 'til the Messianic age.
"Religion is just another word for 'superstition' and as such comes with an inherent irrationality."
Do you hold to the view that there'd be very few wars if religion were to disappear? You could be excused for holding such a view if you hadn't lived to see the 20th century. You can't be excused for that now: both World Wars were not caused by religion. Communist massacres of millions were not caused by religion. I'm afraid freedom from religion isn't synonymous with freedom from irrationality.
"If someone tried to put sharia law in place in Australia I'd be out on the streets with everyone else making sure that didn't happen."
That's good. Yet you have the audacity to demand that Israel stop doing the same (what do Hamas and Hizbullah want but the replacement of the Jewish state with an Islamic shariah one?).
"ANY religion infecting laws and the running of a state is a bad idea in my book."
I agree. Separation of religion and state should be defended and encouraged. But here's the problem with Islam: separation of religion and state in Islam can't be defended, because it doesn't even exist conceptually, nor can it be encouraged, because mainstream Islamic jurisprudence considers it treason.
"Peaceful Islam exists,"
I'll believe it when I see it. When I see Muslims coming in droves to protest all jihad, all moves to implement shariah law in a Western host country and the entire doctrine of "Islam will dominate the world", and educating their children against all these.
ZionistYoungster:
911 was a terrorist attack in which people died. That's it. If you expect me to say that it was the most horrific event in human kind I'm sorry but it wasn't (although what followed will not be kindly looked back on in the future as Orwell's 1984 appeared to be a typo for 2004). Look at Iraq: 40 THOUSAND people dead. HIV/AIDS affects 40million + in the world and it has killed 25million people since the 80s. Israel just blew away 1/3 of the WTC attack in the space of a month or so. So 3000 odd people, although a horrific loss of life was pretty small in the scale of "large numbers of casualties". Each day 3000 people die from malaria. 3 million kids die from Diarrhoeal causes a year. Smoking (a stupid and preventable habit) kills 3 million a year (est. rising to 10million by 2010)
You said: "Suicide vests are an epitome. They epitomize a culture of death."
Agreed, like pretty much every religious text death, suffering and hypocracy are rife. The heaven's gate cult did a mass suicide under the guise of a christian based radical belief system.
Perhaps the orthodox jewish leader who called for death penalty for families of suicide bombers is onto something?
http://www.rense.com/general25/tap.htm
Isn't there a bit of talk of suicide in the first testament? Samson, Saul?
My comment about religion being superstition and irrational has nothing to do with whether wars will exist or not. WWI, WWII, vietnam and cambodia are proof enough of that ability we have to wage war on each other.
As for "interpretation" well that's just being slack with your religion. That's the scary bit: fundamentalists are quite accurate about their religion. They do not temper what's written with common sense, they take a literal meaning to be evident in those teachings. Everyone's scared of fundamentalists, but what's the real scary thing: the belief structure that permits fundamentalists to develop..
Quite why religion gets so many allowances made for it when if it was anything else there'd be a man in a white coat coming for you.
That someone as a Jew has probably never enjoyed an greasy egg and bacon sandwich after a night out drinking for no REAL reason other than a superstition that it is somehow bad to eat pork. (believe me, you're missing out! hehe)
About Sharia law.
I said "protest" and related to if my country was to implement it. I would do the same thing if ANY religion tried to jam itself into the state. Israeli government is quite infected by jewish law, just as other countries in the middle east are infected with Islam. When the irrational superstition is enforced by government you have issues. The US is currently quite infected with christian idiology (so much so that it exports it whenever delivering aid).
I do not have the audacity to demand Israel stop protesting about their government being infected by religion, I would encourage it.
Though I somehow don't expect many Jewish people will be protesting to de-judaify their government. Just like not many muslims would want their government de-islamified or the biblebelt calling for George W to stop blathering on about god and (his only) vetoing things on religious grounds.
I am though against the military action of Israel and other opression of the palestinians.. It's a separate issue to church in state, it's about killing people and invading a neighbour.
You: "Separation of religion and state should be defended and encouraged. But here's the problem with Islam: separation of religion and state in Islam can't be defended, because it doesn't even exist conceptually, nor can it be encouraged, because mainstream Islamic jurisprudence considers it treason."
That is true of pretty much all religions: they fundamentally disagree that there is any other religion allowed. Most religious supserstitions are rather intolerant of other relgions. Islam has some very angry language, but looking through the other ones they are no less intolerant (non believers = sinners = headed for eternal damnation or some sort of roasting).
"Peaceful islam":
Well, careful you're not tarring everyone with the same brush. There are a lot of whacko muslims out there (hell, Australia is right next door to the biggest muslim population in the world.. Indonesia. So which "western" nation is in more danger of a mass islamic movement??)
I know a handful of people back in Oz who are muslim. They're pretty relaxed about it, will come to the pub for a beer or two.. They do that crazy fasting thing once or twice a year (another silly superstition).. But on the whole I don't see 'em doing anything violent. So they're ignoring the violent parts of the bible, just like most jews/christians ignore the incest/murder/slavery/vengance/contradictions spread throughout their book.
ChillWinston,
"911 was a terrorist attack in which people died. That's it. If you expect me to say that it was the most horrific event in human kind I'm sorry but it wasn't [...]"
Did I suggest it was? Neither was Pearl Harbor. But as Pearl Harbor was Japan's declaration of intent to inflict more on America back then, so was 9/11 the Muslims' such declaration. You ignore that at your peril.
"The heaven's gate cult did a mass suicide under the guise of a christian based radical belief system."
When you first hear about other Christians accepting Heaven's Gate as mainstream, or even acquiescing to them, give me a call.
"Perhaps the orthodox jewish leader who called for death penalty for families of suicide bombers is onto something?"
First: Rense = conspiracy theories. Lots of them. Alien abductions and the like. To be taken with enough salt as to put people with high blood pressure at grave risk.
Second, supposing it's true: you'll note (in the link itself) many other Jewish leaders are not in agreement with him. You won't find anything comparable to this in Islam. The few Islamic leaders who would condemn suicide bombings had better go into hiding if they ever plan on publicizing their opinion.
"Isn't there a bit of talk of suicide in the first testament? Samson, Saul?"
Samson yes, but he's not a role model (quite the opposite, in fact: he was brought to suicide killing by his misdeeds, and the story is a lesson not to reach such a state. His end was the sorry one of a disobedient man). Saul's suicide was like a Japanese seppuku, not a Muslim shaheed's "martyrdom" (the suicide of desperation and dishonor, killing only oneself, not a combat operation taking down enemies with you).
"That's the scary bit: fundamentalists are quite accurate about their religion. They do not temper what's written with common sense, they take a literal meaning to be evident in those teachings."
Nah, even fundamentalists employ a mixture of literalism and allegorical interpretation.
"Everyone's scared of fundamentalists, but what's the real scary thing: the belief structure that permits fundamentalists to develop.."
So you'd wish to wage an all-out war on religion, even its liberal manifestations? So you're not so grayscale-viewing as one would believe...
"Quite why religion gets so many allowances made for it when if it was anything else there'd be a man in a white coat coming for you."
What do you mean? Let me guess: you're suggesting all people who hear G-d talking to them ought to be in a mental institution, and only religion is preventing from that being carried out, right?
"That someone as a Jew has probably never enjoyed an greasy egg and bacon sandwich after a night out drinking for no REAL reason other than a superstition that it is somehow bad to eat pork. (believe me, you're missing out! hehe)"
Missing out? There could be much worse. Like the joke about the talk between the rabbi and the priest. The priest coaxed an admission from the rabbi that he'd once eaten pork. Then, the rabbi yanked an admission from the priest that he'd once had sex with a woman. So the rabbi said, "Better than pork, isn't it?" :-D
"Israeli government is quite infected by jewish law, just as other countries in the middle east are infected with Islam."
Not comparable at all. If you want a fair comparison, compare Israel to Turkey: lots of religious believers, often angry about blatant secularism, but religion isn't the law.
"The US is currently quite infected with christian idiology"
Again: Christianity isn't the law of the USA. Islamic shariah is the law in a lot of Islamic states.
Secularism proper isn't about emptying nations from religion, it's about separation of religion from state governance.
"I am though against the military action of Israel"
The military action of Israel is for the purpose that Israel continue to exist, that it not be overrun by its enemies, that a second Holocaust not occur. If you oppose that, you oppose not only the state of Israel but also all the Jews.
"and other opression of the palestinians.."
The Palestinians are not oppressed, except by their own refusal to accept the existence of the Jewish state. They were given, a year ago, some land to build their state on (the Gaza Strip, with the West Bank to follow, if things hadn't gone as I describe next). Instead, they chose to destroy the evacuated buildings, to loot the greenhouses and to use the now barren ground as a base to launch Kassam rockets from, at cities within Israel's internationally recognized borders.
Because of those actions, I now see the "Palestinian" narrative of "wanting a homeland just like the Jews did and got" as nothing but a sham, a ruse along the way to the eradication of the Jewish state (G-d forbid). The "Palestinians" aren't fighting for the independence of their state, they're fighting against the independence of the Jewish state. They're the oppressors, and they cry they're oppressed whenever Israel doesn't let them carry out their grand plan. As indeed with the Muslim world as a whole: "oppression" in Islamspeak is resistance against the implementation of shariah rule over the whole world, and "peace" in Islamspeak is the cessation of all resistance to Islamic rule.
"That is true of pretty much all religions: they fundamentally disagree that there is any other religion allowed. Most religious supserstitions are rather intolerant of other relgions."
Actually, most religions are tolerant of all others. Judaism itself doesn't mind much what non-Jews believe and practice--one of the few requirements for non-Jews is that they uphold courts of law (justice, not religious belief and practice, is at the center).
"Well, careful you're not tarring everyone with the same brush."
It doesn't have to be the case I'm tarring everyone with the same brush; it may be the case they really are the same, no tarring with any brush required. Back in the day, the Nazis weren't "tarred with the same brush", they really were the same.
"(hell, Australia is right next door to the biggest muslim population in the world.. Indonesia. So which "western" nation is in more danger of a mass islamic movement??)"
Good insight. Though, it's not a question of who is more in danger and who is less. All non-Islamic countries are.
"I know a handful of people back in Oz who are muslim. They're pretty relaxed about it, will come to the pub for a beer or two.. They do that crazy fasting thing once or twice a year (another silly superstition).. But on the whole I don't see 'em doing anything violent. So they're ignoring the violent parts of the bible, just like most jews/christians ignore the incest/murder/slavery/vengance/contradictions spread throughout their book."
A lax religious person has a potential to turn hardcore one day. This is true of all religions. The difference is, when a Jew turns hardcore he puts on black clothes and buys at special stores, and when a Christian turns hardcore he goes out on a mission, preaching to natives, but when a Muslim turns hardcore, he dons a suicide vest. That's what's different, what's dangerous about Islamic religiosity.