[ExI] riots again

[Mirco Romanato]

Il 01/10/2012 18:55, Stefano Vaj ha scritto:

> Indeed. Heck, for Hiroshima bombing US media did not refrain to
> provide stuff to the general public, even though the mid-term
> consequences were more horrifying than Allied or German bombing in
> Europe during WWII.

What mid-term consequences?
Anyway, the near-term consequences of the A-bombs used was to spare
two-millions lives of US soldiers AND a greater number of Japanese lives.
Without A-bombs Japan would not surrender, the Japan occupied
territories would continue for months to be occupied, with much more
people dead by famine or killed. The Soviets would enter in the war
against Japan and occupy a large part of East Asia.

Luckily, the Japaneses didn't know the US had used all of the three
A-bombs they had and none would be available before late 1946.

> What I find puzzling is that there is a truly legitimate
> protest-worthy practice happening on a regular basis, the
> robo-bombing, and yet they get all tangled up protesting that which
> is really harmless as a kitten, some silly boring video that no one
> saw until they called attention to it.

> I think this is actually a "modern" distortion. The Koran does not
> say that killing the children of the faithful in their bed is a minor
> sin in comparison with blasphemy,

What part of this is not clear?

"for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter" by Yusuf Ali
or
"The sin of disbelief in God is greater than committing murder." by Sarwar
or
"Though killing is bad, creating mischief is worse than killing."
or
"for temptation to idolatry is more grievous than slaughter"
or
"for civil discord is worse than carnage"

These are some translation of the same part from different translators 
(some Islamic, some western, some Arabs, some not).

http://www.internetmosque.net/read/english_translation_of_the_quran_meaning/2/191/index.htm

They appear clear enough that killing is not the worse thing a Muslim 
can do. This came after an injunction to kill the unbelievers and offer 
a good justification to kill them (and other Muslims causing 
mischief/tumult/siding with the unbelievers/whatever).

In fact, this part give a justification for doing near everything needed 
to stop anyone (Muslim or not) from menacing the ideology.
Menacing Islam (the memeset) is worse than killing people, so if you 
need to kill people to protect Islam, you are absolved for doing so.


> and indeed the Arab nationalists of
> the 70s, while sometimes engaging in "terrorist" acts, were pretty
> secular, and were not much fonder of their traditional than they were
> of, say, their alphabet or gastronomic traditions...

Well, they are gone. There are any Arab Nationalist (read Arab National 
Socialists) left in the Middle East? Syria is the left-over and it is 
not sure it will last long.

Mirco