sda2.jpg

September 24, 2006

In other news: Pope calls "Peace Train" "self-indulgent, second rate"

"In an interview with BBC television, [Cat Stevens] said that he went to a Catholic school, 'so at one point I used to believe that the Pope was infallible.'

"But he added that the pope's comments on Islam showed he was fallible, 'because of the kind of interpretation he had of Islam, he should read Gandhi and find out what he said about Islam,' the singer said, adding that the Indian leader had a more peaceful interpretation of the faith."

***
Wow, that must've been some craptastic Catholic school, because, as everyone else learned in, like, grade 4, the Pope is only infallible when speaking ex cathedra on matters of faith and morals.

But I guess those big words confounded the man behind such profound compositions as "Wild World".

As for Gandhi, I for one have always been way more interested in what he said about daily enemas as the path to enlightenment, sleeping with naked teenage girls, and how Jews should let Hitler kill them.

But I'm funny like that.

Posted by KShaidle at September 24, 2006 9:00 AM
Comments

Actually, the pope was quite right in his interpretation of Islam. Indeed, you don't have to go back to the 13th century to realize this.

Islam is not simply a religious ideology; it is above all, a social and political system, which dictates in great detail how to live a lifestyle functional in the 7th century, entirely unsuited to modernity. There can be no debate, no dissent about this belief or behaviour.

Anyone who does not follow this lifestyle has 'turned away from Islam'. He is an 'apostate' and must be killed. What are they against? Democracy, for one, because it gives authority to make decisions about one's belief and behaviour to individuals. According to Islam, all decisions belong to god. Anyone who votes is an apostate and must be killed. Kindly remember the bravery of the Afghans and Iraqi who voted.

Zahawiri preaches that Islams must publicly renounce constitutions and man-made laws. Got that? They must renounce democracy, elections and parliament. No human being has the right to make any laws, to vote, to decide on any belief or behaviour. They must all live, as dictated in the Koran, a document written in the 7th c, and suitable for a pastoral nomadic people.

Anyone who doesn't agree to the tenets of Islam is an apostate and must be killed. And since they consider that all humanity must embrace Islam, or be killed - then, the pope was quite right in his questions of this basic axiom of violence and 'conversion by force'.

Posted by: ET at September 24, 2006 9:51 AM

ET is perfectly correct, but in the end these issues come down to some simple issues which I guess libby/sven and taliban jack do not want to think about;
Do we want our civilization to end after hundreds of years of painful and difficult progress.and,
Do we want our loved ones governed by mob rule and fanatical Mullahs.
It's not complicated after the rhetoric is swept aside.
two simple questions that need to be answered by us all.
some peace train!

Posted by: melwilde at September 24, 2006 10:10 AM

The strange thing that the Islamic fascists don't seem to consider is that they have absolutely no understanding of the direct relationship between population size, the economy and the political system.

Essentially, a political system that rejects the individual, rejects reason. Groups don't think; only individuals think. That means that the ability to adapt, to come up with better solutions to environmental realities, rests within thought.

Now, if your population is stable, it can maintain itself within a simple basic agricultural economy that has adapted over centuries to the local environment. But, if your population increases beyond what's called 'the carrying capacity' of your current environment and your current technology, then, famine, disease etc move in. An ideology that rejects thought cannot deal with any changes.

The Islamic fascist insistence on rejecting modernism, which privileges the individual and free thought, means that they can only live within a small population that makes no demands on the environment, that exists within a local peasant agriculture, that doesn't have to develop techniques to increase food, increase water supplies, develop new medicines to deal with new diseases.

But the ME population has grown exponentially since the 1950s, the beginning of Islamic fascism. It can't support that population within a primitive agriculturalism. It requires innovative technology. But, if you reject thought, then..?

That's what I find so astonishing about Islamic fascism. They seem to have no clue, not a glimmer, about economics. No clue about population size and economics. Incredible. It's a utopian ideology totally divorced from reality, living in a fictional self-defined world.

Their leaders certainly accept the results of free thought - such as planes, guns, roads, cars, medicines and etc. But they don't understand that these results require freedom of thought and a lifestyle that is not a primitive village agriculturalism, but is 'high technology'.

They are only able to operate because they are funded by the results of technology - ie, Bin Laden's father made his billions installing roads and buildings during the modernization of Saudi Arabia after oil was discovered in the 1950s.

Posted by: ET at September 24, 2006 10:26 AM

ET, who benefits from theocratic Islam? Ask yourself if they care about the economy as long as it is sufficient to deliver the environment that supports their own needs.

History is littered with despots that find various schemes by which they can control, and therefore leverage their own power through others willing to surrender theirs. For those less willing to surrender, there is apostacy and its inherent intimidation.

The Koran is unique in this regard, being a template for despotism. Most other tin-pots down through time find their initial rallying cause, and then make it up as they go along. Just like Mohammed did. Today, fascist Islamic regimes can be churned out on an assembly line. It's a system - a system that concentrates power into the hands of a few men that are ruthless in its application.

Posted by: Shaken at September 24, 2006 10:37 AM

The Pope spoke the truth which is difficult for the Muslims to accept.
Islam is an all-encompassing faith, those within it risk their lives to question any part of it.
Those who are not of the Islamic faith who critize or poke fun at it, i.e. Danish cartoon uproar, are also in danger of being killed.
Trying to dwell in the modern world of the 21st century is next to impossible,so the fight will continue until they face their own demons, at this stage, they're hopeless.

Posted by: Liz J at September 24, 2006 10:46 AM

My view of Islam is that it emerged in the 6th, 7th century, as a reaction to the expansion of intensive agriculturalism in the ME, which was settling the previously unsettled lands of the nomadic peoples.

Intensive agriculturalism had taken as its ideology, Christianity, which is a set of moral and metaphysical beliefs that not only enable individualism -because you choose Christianity rather than being born into the tribe as in Judaism - but also, served to unite small villages and towns with the Christian insistence on 'love of the neighbour'.

The population at this time was increasing, and so, an ideology that could provide more food and services, and prevent inter-tribal warfare, was important. That's Christianity.

But, by the 7th c, the population growth and agricultural expansion was moving into the unsettled lands of the nomadic economies - and these people developed Islam as a reaction. Islam is an ideology that says, you are either US, ie, Islamic and live our specific way of life, or we'll subdue you or kill you.

I suggest that this was a direct reaction to the expansion of settled agriculture at the time.

What enables the Koran to be a template for despotism is its complete and total rejection of reason. That's what Benedict was talking about. It rejects reason because it rejects the individual, and only the individual can think. As an ideology that insists that its axioms must be accepted in full, without debate, or you are an apostate and must be killed, it suits a fascist agenda perfectly.

Can it be changed? With such a template, it seems impossible, but at the same time, the massive populations of the ME, of Africa, etc, can't survive within a peasant economy which rejects reason and rejects their rights to change their lifestyle to adapt to the population size and environmental problems.

Posted by: ET at September 24, 2006 10:54 AM

They may also be cruising to Isolation. The Islamic world has survived through Western medicine and technologies, they may wish to be cut off, and we should grant them that wish.Give them a time-out to get a grip on reality.
They may have second thoughts about forcing the Nomadic lifestyle on their people, living in cesspools of squalor and suffering.
It surely must be against the Islamic faith to accept help from Infidels, which all but Islamists are, according to their Book, unless they are a sham.
There is scant evidence that Islam is a religion of peace as claimed, either within or without.

Posted by: Liz J at September 24, 2006 11:28 AM

Well said, Shaken. Islamic leadership will never willingly allow the veil to be lowered. It's all about holding onto power at all costs.

Any prospective muslim Martin Luther's had better protect the neck's of themselves, family, friends and neighbours. The Islamo-maniac despots won't just stop for the head of one courageous "monk". The Koran comes with it's own built-in perpetual inquisition.

Posted by: Martin B. at September 24, 2006 11:36 AM

ET, (10:26) Is there a connection between Islam and some in the West that seem to apologize for the Terrorists ?? David Suzuki recently sang the praises for Cuban farmers, horse and plow. Maurice Strong's One World Governance idea ?? If the UNELECTED United Nations were to rule, individuals would not even have to think about anything ? Not even who to vote for ??
Can this explain why Layton, Libby, Sven act in such strange, strange ways ??
Do some, Martin, Clinton, think that the masses are better off having someone with "superior ideas" look after them ?? State chid care. Their Motto; "Leave the thinking to us !!??"

If only half of the above is true, we are in big trouble.

Posted by: B. HOAX AWARE at September 24, 2006 12:54 PM

Martin B.'s comment--"Islamic leadership will never willingly allow the veil to be lowered. It's all about holding onto power at all costs"--put me in mind of the Librano$, and goes a long way to explaining the 40 Liberal no-shows in Parliament for Prime Minister Karzai's speech about Canada's military contribution in Afghanistan.

The Islamofascists' modus operandi is pretty much identical to the Librano "policy" of hoodwinking the public and holding onto power at all costs, though the Librano$ don't murder people who disagree with them. They just ridicule, ad hominem, and demean them, using their buddies in the MSM and the PPG, for good measure.

The Librano$ understand the Islamofascists' motivations, and that's why they seem loathe to come down really hard on them. That's why they don't fully support our men and women in uniform over in Af'stan.

It all begins to make sense...

Posted by: 'been around the block at September 24, 2006 1:03 PM

I'm having a tough time with the sarcasm and outward bias of the guests in bringing us this information. You're undermining the credibility of this site by the way your presenting it, the same way stories in 'The Weekly World News' tabloid are immediately assumed as false because of the fact that they are in the 'Weekly World News'.

Posted by: ken Melrose at September 24, 2006 1:10 PM

I've noticed in the Toronto sun this morning that both the columnists that deal with religious matters have both stated that we (in the west?)have a lot to learn about Islam,and that they are misunderstood, the Pope had a brain collapse, yada,yada.yada.Pathetic.

Posted by: conmoto666 at September 24, 2006 1:41 PM

Cat Stevens is a Death Cult convert. What a bonehead. I'm hard pressed to remember any of his greatest hits. Anyone seeking out the opinion of this C list hack is just advancing the lame journalism we've all come to despise.

Ghandi would have been annihilated by today's Islamofascist in a historical replay of India's partition if it happened today. And Martin Luther King, if he lived in Darfur, would be murdered by now.

You've got to be an absolute moron when in your life's experience you've been exposed to the teachings of Christ and you choose illiterate tribal Mohammed the pedaphile, polygamist, thief, jihadi, and self-professed liar.

His one dumb song will come to me. I think.

Posted by: penny at September 24, 2006 1:43 PM

What would happen to the muslim countries is all non muslims left and took their money and expertise. Have they or their supporters in the west ever thought about that. These talibanjacks think they could go in there and take over all the oil production and get rich. Funny that they want infedils out but want us to buy their oil. What would happen if Bush said, ok, you don't want us, we will no longer buy your oil because you don't want infedil money. Of course to do this, all muslims that have never protested the violence of the terrorists must be immediately deported. They don't want us, we don't want them. Lets have a jhiad agains muslims in our land. Lets have a jhiad against multiculturism. Lets play their game and see how they like it. After a year or so taliban jack can go negotiate, with canadians, as to how he will apoligize to us for his stupidity. How come the muslim counries have to send their students to the west for an education if they are so superior. Of course with no oil the latte drinking environuts might have to practise what they preach.

Posted by: mary at September 24, 2006 1:59 PM

Ghandi drank his own urine. Maybe Cat S. can follow that up by eating his own feces.

Posted by: missing link at September 24, 2006 2:03 PM

mary asks: "What would happen to the muslim countries is all non muslims left and took their money and expertise. Have they or their supporters in the west ever thought about that".

In late 1980's Saudi, someone had the bright idea of taxing expats, (people whose SOLE motivation for being in-Kingdom is monetary). The Brits & Americans, (pilots/doctors, etc), said "Oh Yeah....See ya".

Within a couple days there was an announcement that, "for compassionate reasons" the King had decided to drop the idea.......the papers printed a couple letters, purportedly from grateful expats, praising the King's generous decision, (and thus saving a little face), and that was that.

Posted by: Nemo2 at September 24, 2006 2:18 PM

In reply to B. Hoax, yes, the socialist ideology and the Islamic fascist ideology has great similarities. The fact that one is secular and the other is theocratic is irrelevant; both ideologies claim the ownership of the Ultimate Truth and the Pure Society. That's their basic commonality.

To achieve the actualization of this Ultimate Truth and Pure Society, both insist on the denigration of the individual and privileging the group. Both insist on a homogeneity of the group in that dissent is not allowed; if you dissent, then you are in Islam, an apostate and must be killed. In socialism, you are pathologically mentally ill and must be silenced.

The govt of both is top-down authoritarian and centralist. There is One True Way.

Elections in both are irrelevant, for the belief in One True Way means that options are untenable. The fact that socialists live within democracies is, for them, a misfortune and usually they move to dictatorships as rapidly as they can (Soviet Union, Cuba, N. Korea).

The notion of Purity expands to a Rousseau-like Back to Pure Nature, which is somehow envisaged as Closer to Truth than the machine and technology.

The idea of this essentialist Pure Truth means that both the fascist and the socialist are utopians; they both believe in a world that has reached a Final State of Purity. In the case of the fascists, this is a return to an Original Purity; in the case of the socialists, this is a progressive movt to a future of Future Purity. Same thing.

The two modes are both very authoritarian, rejecting dissent and dialogue. Note how, for example. Belinda Stronach says that only pro-abortion women's groups should receive gov't funding; that's a rejection of dissent.

Note how Taliban Jack says that Karzai 'agrees' with him that a military solution is not the only answer; Taliban Jack is informing us that this is HIS, Jack the Nipper's thought, when Karzai himself has repeatedly said that the recovery of Afghanistan isn't only a military operation. That's Jack's authoritarian nature, where he tells the primitives how to live The Right Way.

Posted by: ET at September 24, 2006 2:40 PM

Pathetic.

Gandhi didnt drink his own urine. Rajendra Prasad did. Most people dont know the difference and will willingly buy the most pathetic attack on Gandhi I have ever seen. I am an Indian - and a critic of Gandhi, but I dont care much for critiques that, in their first paragraph, note that Gandhi is not Judeo-Christian, before engaging in character assasination. That the author misses the presence of a white woman in the movie, speaks volumes in itself.

The attacks are manifold - his being a Hindu is frequently listed as a weakness. And if I were to point out that our dear author is a Jew, I d be called anti-semitic.

Bash Gandhi all you want. The simple truth is, despite his anarchic concept of government and and economic system that is primal to its core, he did say enough and do enough to promote democracy and human rights. This "tyrannical reactionary" inspired ML King and Mandela. I guess that whities like the author dont like that.

Hmmm. Gandhi did just enough and said just enough to be worth remembering.

And to the topic on discussion. I m not surprised Gandhis views are the way they are. I guess most of you are self educated hacks with no real knowledge of, well, anything.

Islam in India, like Islam elsewhere, has integrated local religious beliefs making Indian muslims by far the most moderate and peaceful. Kashmir is home to only 7 million of Indians 120 million muslims, and even there, much of the fighting is imported from the hardline schools in Pakistan. Muslims in India are generally a peaceful modern lot, minus the political riots that take place every now and then that use Religion to consolidate political power. It might scare you to know that the President of India is a Muslim. The head of Infosys, one of those IT companies that is routinely taking jobs out of North America is also a muslim. In fact there are many prominent Indian muslims who give credence to Gandhi's beliefs.

Gandhi actually itneracted with Muslims, which is more than I can say for most of you jokers ... with your fancy computers, but sadly lacking brains.

Posted by: Indian at September 24, 2006 2:49 PM

penny, Cat Stevens was not a one hit wonder, he recorded at least three albums which sold in the multi-millions. From about 1969 to 1971, he was one of the biggest acts in popular music. He filled hockey rinks and football stadiums.
Two of his albums were "teaser and the Firecat", and "Tea for the Tillerman".

I don't like him either.

Posted by: dmorris at September 24, 2006 2:58 PM

My understanding is that Cat Stephens converted to Islam to distance himself from "Banapple Gas".

Posted by: EBD at September 24, 2006 2:59 PM

Mary - good question. Right after Israel packed up its toys, slapped up their wall and left Gaza, the Palestinians were immediately without bread. Basic bread. They next screamed bloody murder that they were cut off from modern medical services. It's got to be a really desperate sewer of their own making by now.

Jesus divided the loaves and fishes, everyone ate, a simple message that people should have the basics. With Mohammed's followers...., well, he would have stolen the bread from them to begin with.

Muslims in the ME would have starved by now if petrodollars weren't subsidizing the rot. It's all they've got going on except the jihad industry.

Posted by: penny at September 24, 2006 3:00 PM

Kathy, your link to "Gandhi" has defiled the name of a Hollywood saint. You may never get your hand or footprints on the Sidewalk of Fame.

Posted by: dmorris at September 24, 2006 3:01 PM

dmorris - I obviously didn't like him either. His music left no residual with me.

Indian - go back and re-read the comments. No one is bashing Ghandi. And, we now have a Pope that has basically requested an opportunity for dialogue with Muslim leadership, that was the core of his recent message, and what did he get for his efforts? I'll stand by my comment that Ghandi's message is lost on the Islamofascist louts.

You are making assumptions about our individual interactions with Muslims that are entirely that. Too bad that the Muslims in Pakistan aren't as benevalent toward India as the local Muslims are. But, then, Islam isn't the state religion in secular, democratic India. Aren't you lucky.

Posted by: penny at September 24, 2006 3:17 PM

Indian said "Gandhi didnt drink his own urine. Rajendra Prasad did."

I stand corrected.
Your post started off reasonably enough but you wandered into the patented Muslim(and now apparently Indian) retreat of victimization and 'its not or fault it's someone elses fault' sindrome.

Posted by: missing link at September 24, 2006 3:54 PM

This is descending fast.....

If you are looking for allies in an Anybody but Mohammed alliance you might not want to go around ticking off Hindu's and Sikh's.

Cat Stevens, used to like his stuff. Still do but wont buy any more of it since his support for the Salman Rushdie fatwa....I know he has said that was a mistake. But until he actually denounces the other way I have a hard time believeing him.

So what was this all about again.

Oh yeah it is supposed to be about the fact that the problems with extremist Isalm is that it is intolerant.....

Posted by: Stephen at September 24, 2006 4:14 PM

Today cbc had a piece on the musicians returning to N.O., and yesterday CNN had a similar piece. Cat Stevens was sort of the star. Only time I heard about him before was his conversion to Islam a few years ago, and I remember something about some incident in an airport started it. His conversion saved him from going to jail or such. Don't do drugs in the mid east was the message I got. Today, in our Church bulletin there is a paragraph asking us to pray for muslims during this month of whatever for better understanding. Sorry Bishop, I will pray for them when they pray for us during Lent. Lets see how the muslim terrorists act for this month, if they attack, they are not following their religion.

Posted by: mary at September 24, 2006 4:17 PM

Indian is obviously a Muslim. Most Hindu's I know would vehemently disagree with him/her. They remember the early 70's genocide in Pakistan and Bangaladash. They remember centuries of oppression, forced conversion and outright slaughter brought by the muslim invaders. Oh, I guess they must also remember the recent train bombings in Mumbai?

"...sadly lacking brains." Hmm, this from a moron who calls a mass-murdering (Battle of the Trench, etc), pedophile (Aysha), a holy prophet?

Slumber in your stupidity.

Posted by: Irwin Daisy at September 24, 2006 4:41 PM

Cat Stevens went wrong when he kissed butt with those muslim radicals after all he approoved of the death of SHALMOND RUSHDE after he wrote that book THE SATAIC VURSES

Posted by: spurwing plover at September 24, 2006 4:43 PM

I blame the pope for yusuf islam. When Cat Stevens needed good authority Joe Ratzinger was determined, like Luther before him and Lucifer before him, to undermine good authority.

The only GOOD Authority is God. This of course is the Triune God - the Holy Trinity.

No monotheism please.

At the second Vtican council which gave us the new anti-Catholic religion of Vaticanism Joe Ratzinger was one of the prime movers. See him in his business suit.

The well dressed Ratzinger still means business.

God the Father, the only GOOD Authority established His Authority in His Son by becoming God Incarnate. B.C. people can try to make some excuse. We A.D. people have no excuse.

Because God established his Good Authority on earth He was free to continue his GOOD Authority in whatever way He wished.

Since the world is essentially a tower of Babel, so much so, that even when speaking the same language, people have difficulty understanding each other, it was entirely appropriate that God would, after His ascension to the Father, establish His Authority somehow.

This He did in Saint Peter- the fallible one. Not Saint John note! Saint John is too much the born Saint. John always adored Him and loved Him.

Saint Peter, had to deny Him three times -a Trinity of Times, and afterwards, in repentance , he had to three times avow his love of Him.

He then re-affirmed his love of Him by being crucified upside down.

If you want to play God, you at least, need two witnesses. I think that adds up to three.

Back to Cat. Tea for the Tillerman is still in my collection and I mostly hate it. Matthew and Son was a good song (maybe still is.)

"Morning has broken" once was passible. I now hate it with a passion. It puts me in memory of a time when I was depressed and deluded.

It is a time when the nuns took over the altar to the great consternation of the Mother of the Altar.

That is My Son up there! God was dead when Longinus lanced His heart (just to make sure He is dead.) They shall not break a bone of Him. (Not strictly true. It is, I magine, impossible to put nails through hands or scaphoids without damaging bones.

But the Truth, in True Bible fashion, will out.

They did not break his legs. (Femur/ Tib-Fib, whatever!)

He stood ,as long as possible, on those feet, nailed to a cross, which had trod and made Holy the holy land, uttering incomprehinsible words

such as "father forgive them they don't know what they're at"

It is tiring feeling compelled to write this stuff.

There are so many better people and better writers out there to give flesh and authenticity to this stuff.

God speed them all

Again, back to Cat.

After Vat 2 and the new Vaticanism the Augustinian Church here in Drogheda, Ireland, became imbued with a nwe spirit which still prevails.

De Wimmen on the altar singin dat awful song! "mornin has broken." Broken wind or something. Vatican two wind. A new spirit of "wind" for the church. Not Pentecost wind mind you!

Got to finish soon.

"Cat agreed with the fatwha against Salman Rushdie. That is proof enough of the wrongness of the religion he espouses.

God, in Jesus Christ, did not ask for the killing of the scribes who would re-write his words.

Thank God for the word. In the beginning was the word.

You cannot believe what you see.

A lot more, but good night!

Good night from me and Good night from them"

Do not say I have no sense of humour

Posted by: darcy at September 24, 2006 6:18 PM

Cat Steven's song Moonshadow

"Oh, I'm bein' followed by a moonshadow, moonshadow, moonshadow
Leapin and hoppin' on a moonshadow, moonshadow, moonshadow

And if I ever lose my hands, lose my plough, lose my land,
Oh if I ever lose my hands, Oh if.... I won't have to work no
more.
And if I ever lose my eyes, if my colours all run dry,
Yes if I ever lose my eyes, Oh if.... I won't have to cry no
more.

And if I ever lose my legs, I won't moan, and I won't beg,
Yes if I ever lose my legs, Oh if.... I won't have to walk no
more.
And if I ever lose my mouth, all my teeth, north and south,
Yes if I ever lose my mouth, Oh if.... I won't have to
talk...

Did it take long to find me? I asked the faithful light.
Did it take long to find me? And are you gonna stay the night?"

The crescent moon is the internationally recognized symbol of Islam. Moon worship has been practiced in Arabia since 2000 BC.

I hated Cat Stevens in the 70s too

Posted by: ex-liberal at September 24, 2006 6:28 PM

Kathy
Very interesting read on Gandhi.
Too many people are content to get their history lessons from Hollywood interpretations.
----
Cat Stevens was desperate, says so himself.

Another Saturday night and I ain't got nobody
I've got some money 'cause I just got paid

Now, how I wish I had someone to talk to
I'm in an awful way

Posted by: Wayne in Wetaskiwin at September 24, 2006 6:33 PM

EBD - you beat me to the 'Banapple Gas' thing. I think I saw the 'video' as a leader in a theatre before Led Zeppelin's 'The Song Remains the Same' back in the late 70's.

Anybody who is not impoverished and uneducated that converts TO Islam must have a screw loose.

My favourite irony today is Bin Laden's alleged death by typhoid. If he was blown to bits by George Dubya he would at least have martyr status.

If he really did die from a preventable and curable disease because he chose to lead the life of an 8th century warrior - well, I think that is hilarious.

Posted by: Brian M. at September 24, 2006 7:26 PM

I've been ruminating about all this like everyone else, and here are a couple of points that I think are salient.

As ET has reminded us, atheistic existentialism, post-modernism, and what have you, have caused a lot of Western thinkers to have trouble trying to figure out if they themselves have any reason to exist, let alone nations and cultures. Wasn't it Yeats who said something like, "the best lack all conviction"?

On the other hand, these Islamist nutcases are existentially authentic. They have the courage of their convictions. They are ready, willing, and able to slice your head off for the insane views that they hold.

Those of us who have the unfortunate tendency to look at thing from a metaphysical point of view automatically tend to see the "metaphysical principle" as the most important element.

As we believe that arriving at this "Principle" is the essential thing, the outgrowths of that Principle (delightful manifestations of commercial products, the workings of history, etc.) are merely incidental to the important element, which is fathoming the principle.

Regrettably, Islamic nutbars think along the same lines. They believe in their transcendental Allah as an absolute principle, and with utter and irrational faith in this principle they are willing to chop up everybody's kids. After all, as soon as they hit paradise, they'll be able to do salacious things to 72 raisins, each one dressed in a different Frederick's of Hollywood outfit.

So we have Western intellectuals who do not care whether the West is destroyed or not, because they have completely deconstructed the idea that there are metaphysical principles to be grasped, and we have Islamic nutcases who have insane metaphysical principles for which they are willing to kill everyone and die themselves.

I think that Pope Benedict addresses this dilemma when he explains to us that "violence is inconsistent with the nature of God and violence is inconsistent with the nature of the soul."

We could phrase it in metaphysical terms by saying that violence is inconsistent with the nature of absolute reality, and violene is inconsistent with the nature of absolute reality in man.

This being the case, the West is using violence to defend itself against hostile aggression, whereas radical Islam is using violence in an aggressive assault. Therefore the West is being more consistent with the metaphysical principles than Islam is.

My hope is that if the Pope can help Christendom and science reach a better accomodation, then there will be less intellectual support for a nihilistic viewpoint among Western intellectuals.

Then we might be able to have an intellectual life that is affirmative and undivided about the virtue of existence and be in accord with the view of metaphysical principles to support this notion.

Part of our problem is the legitimate division that crept up between religion and science. However, the reasons for that division have long since passed away, and now religion and science argue as much to retain power and one-upmanship as they do because of a historic gulf.

Posted by: Greg in Dallas at September 24, 2006 7:47 PM

How about his other one MORNING HAS BROKEN morning has broken like the first morning.the blackbird has spoken like the first bird

Posted by: spurwing plover at September 24, 2006 9:02 PM

As a member of the old farts that remember Cat Stevens as Cat Stevens and not a political yahoo, I liked his music and probably still do (although I haven't listened to his works lately). His songs were a great balance to the good old rock and roll. After all some of the Doors stuff was absolutely downer stuff.

Wheather it be actor, musician or some other artist decides to use their fame to push an agenda they immediatly lose standing in my mind. I actually saw a Sean Penn movie where he was actually pretty good but once he opens up his mouth on politics then he loses all credability.

Just my two bits worth...

Posted by: texas canuck at September 24, 2006 10:12 PM

Sorry, I gave my spel cheker the weekend off ;-)

Posted by: texas canuck at September 24, 2006 10:14 PM

Read an article in the Calgary Sun about mega stars not getting the huge multi million paycheques anymore. Seems movie attendance is down, DVD sales are lagging and CDs are not selling. Wonder if any of it has to do with these so called celebrities trying to be political. Seems the Dixie Chicks are still paying for that remark in England. Too bad they don't realize that people in both red and blue states were their fans, and diss on side, they quit going and buying. And why does everyone think Oprah is so smart, she is just rich. But I haven't watched her since she went hollywood in looks. I remember when she was very fat and not too beautiful. I thought gee, finally a non glamor girl has made it.

Posted by: mary at September 24, 2006 10:21 PM

New Pope Shows Spine
Islamonazi CAIR Is Not Impressed

http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/MS091506.php - video

Please Call The Vatican Embassy In Washington, DC at (202) 333-7121 to Express Your Support!

Posted by: terrorfree at September 24, 2006 10:41 PM

I wasn't a huge fan of Cat Stevens but his music was much better than a lot of the crap that was put out back then. But since he supported the fatwa against Rushde I turn off the radio when his songs come on. As for his statements, he has no credibility.

Posted by: dirtman at September 24, 2006 11:27 PM

On a lighter note (when am I ever serious?)

Ghandi: Walked barefoot everywhere, was small in stature, and was considered a noble man of God. His vegetarian diet would affect his breath is seems.

IN OTHER WORDS: a super calloused fragile mystic vexed with halitosis.

carry on..

Posted by: eastern paul at September 25, 2006 12:41 AM

I love the "indian" interpretation of Inidian Muslims....ha ha ha, what a joke! Another reason not to send jobs to India!

Posted by: S. Baker at September 25, 2006 10:41 AM

You fundamentalists are so blinkered. Islam is a political and social construct, eh? Well, get this: so is your brand of Christianity, Caesar-loving boot-licking Imperialist pig.

Posted by: Jennifer at September 25, 2006 5:28 PM

Katie, you are one frustrated woman. That must suck. Damn me for my curiosity, anyway, led to read such utter twaddle from such an utter...you know the rest.

Posted by: Jennifer at September 25, 2006 5:29 PM

The Pope is too old. It's all politics. A german pope,a polish pope they all get a say. Who could ever believe this crap. The apple doesn't fall far from the tree. He's an ex-nazi and catholic(They Backed the Nazis).

Posted by: ok4ua at September 25, 2006 6:38 PM

Jennifer, I'm not sure what got you so steamed.

I'm not a Catholic myself, but one of the things I appreciate about the Catholic Church is that it is conspicuously not fundamentalist. As you will notice, I am writing from Texas, and if you want to meet some fundamentalists, come down south and believe me, we can introduce you to them.

The Pope's latest theological discussion weaves its way in a remarkable manner through philosophy, psychology, and history with a great sophistication.

Radical Islam makes our own homegrown fundamentalists look like the Bloomsbury group. All our fire and brimstone preachers want to do is get you saved and baptised. I haven't heard of a Pentecostal preacher beheading anyone, ever.

I think you'll have to look elsewhere for fundamentalism.

Posted by: Greg in Dallas at September 25, 2006 6:44 PM

I apologise for my ignorant coyntryman above, Gandhi actuaally approved of Muslim terrorism.

"How does Mr. Gandhi like the Mopla spirit, as shown by one of the prisoners in the hospital, who was dying from asphyxiation? He asked the surgeon if he was going to die, and the surgeon answered that he feared that he would not recover. "Well, I'm glad that I killed fourteen infidels," said the Brave, God-fearing Mopla whom Mr. Gandhi so much admires, who "are fighting for what they consider religion, and in a manner they consider as religious." Men who consider it "religious" to murder, rape, loot, to kill women and children, cutting down whole families, have to be put under restrain in any civilized society."

http://www.haindavakeralam.org/PageModule.aspx?PageID=1619&SKIN=K

Talk about interecting with Muslims!

Posted by: Indian at September 25, 2006 9:58 PM

Jennifer and ok4ua,

Socialist ignorance is bliss, ain't it?

All you have to do is practice calumny, hurl insults and never present a rational argument. Must be a nice simple way of living.

Oh, BTW, Muslims were Hitlers allies in his final solution. Hell, they're still carrying it out.

Top selling books in the world of Islam: Mein Kampf and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion.

Posted by: Irwin Daisy at September 26, 2006 2:11 PM

New Pope Shows Spine
Islamonazi CAIR Is Not Impressed

http://www.terrorfreeoil.org/videos/MS091506.php - video

Please Call The Vatican Embassy In Washington, DC at (202) 333-7121 to Express Your Support!

Posted by: terrorfree at September 26, 2006 4:50 PM

what the hell good is religion?

Posted by: ok4ua at September 26, 2006 7:21 PM
Site
Meter