I think it is you who have your fruit mixed up. That cruise missile you mention was fired by the US government, a secular organization. My comments were in response to your post that made an equivalence between Islamic and Christian fundamentalism.
And it wasn't so long ago (1998 or 1999) that the US military was bombing the hell out of a Christian country (Serbia) in defense of Muslims (in Kosovo). ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote : Apples and oranges. Oh, and remind me, did that recent cruise missile strike in Fairfield kill anyone, or simply level a bunch of buildings? I admire your peaceful attitude in the face of such military might. So, when did we become aware of radical Islam? Did we learn about it in schools as part of the world history lesson, or perhaps read all of those books written about it, back in the 60's, 70's and 80's (there weren't any)? Oh, wait, I remember, it was after we had invaded their countries and began slaughtering their families, that radical Islam emerged in a big way, and they began hitting back. Prior to that communism was the big evil - no one gave a shit about Islam as a current political force, including the Muslims. I am aware that no one wants to see this obvious connection, but truly, had the occupants of Iraq and Iran been Mormons, we'd find excuses to hate them just as much. It is much harder to kill your enemies unless you demonize them. Military 101. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <no_re...@yahoogroups.com> wrote : Ollie says: "Make no mistake, the fundamentalist Christians are as scary and unhinged as their fundamentalist Muslim brethren. Different book cover is all." This is sheer nonsense. Were I a peace-loving Muslim living in the US, it would not bother me if there were several fundamentalist Christian churches nearby. I would be more concerned about being harassed on the street by ignorant American louts who have no religion in them. But if I were a peace-loving Christian, and there was a Muslim mosque nearby preaching fundamentalist, radical Islam, I would be worried. The difference is simple: the propensity to use deadly violence against innocent people. Christians neither advocate it nor do it; some Muslims, unfortunately, do. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <olliesedwuz@...> wrote : Right, we didn't invade "Islam". No, it was sovereign nations we invaded. No bigee, right? Yep, I would expect this intemperate reaction from you, Mike. As I said, and you are proving, the mindset between the fundamentalist Christians and the fundamentalist Muslims, is EXACTLY THE SAME. Of course you would see all bad in them, and all good on your side. Identical to the way they feel. Make no mistake, the fundamentalist Christians are as scary and unhinged as their fundamentalist Muslim brethren. Different book cover is all. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <mdixon.6569@...> wrote : We didn't invade *Islam*. Secondly, Islam's history is one of violence, conversion by the sword, nearly everywhere it has spread. Apostasy from Islam is punishable by death according to Sharia which is observed in many Islamic nations. no... it's not violent! From: "olliesedwuz@... [FairfieldLife]" <FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com> To: FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com Sent: Monday, June 6, 2016 7:34 AM Subject: [FairfieldLife] Re: Religion of peace? It is a BS argument to begin with, the crap about Islam being an innately violent religion. For one thing, WE invaded THEM. Imagine this scenario - A well trained force of overwhelming military might begins bombing Britain, landing ground forces, and exterminating the populace. Martial law is declared, and freedom along with any civil rights vanishes. Then when you strike back, the occupying army blames your religion for your "emotional" reaction. Pretty f'ing sick, if you ask me. Demonic even. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <s3raphita@...> wrote : Suppose I were to say to you: "If you see a group of Germans you should a toss a grenade into their midst and let them share it out between them." Would not that be a vile piece of advice? But if you were a G.I. about to land on a Normandy beach in 1944 could that not be just the sort of advice to perk you up before the attack? A lot of Mo's sayings could be (possibly) excused on the grounds that Muslims were engaged in a war with Jews and infidels. The problem is that we are talking about a struggle a long, long time ago and many Muslims don't seem to realise that the connected world we now live in is nothing like seventh-century Arabia. ---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, <hepa7@...> wrote : The Quran's Verses of Violence http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx The Quran's Verses of Violence http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx A sampling of violence in the Quran. View on www.thereligionofpeace.com http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx Preview by Yahoo The reasons are obvious and begin with the Quran. Few verses of Islam's most sacred text can be construed to fit the contemporary virtues of religious tolerance and universal brotherhood. Those that do are earlier "Meccan" verses which are obviously abrogated by later ones. The example of Muhammad is that Islam is a religion of peace when Muslims do not have the power and numbers on their side. Once they do, things change.
