Hello. I am Kenneth. As I did not hear any argument re Hedges, I cannot quote from it. However, I would like to make an observation about your own post. This is the way I see the history of the Judeo/Christian/Islamic religions. In the days of my youth when I was forced to read the Old Testament, I considered then, and I am still of the sme opinion, that it was nothing more than a war chronicle to inspire a nomadic people to rob; rape and murder their way across a continent, in the belief that some ruthless god was the Commanding Officer and they did as commanded or they too, could be penalised. To my mind, the Bible is a ruthless document which has inspired much cruelty and murder—-and still does.
Then along came the myth of Christianity which was a concoction of stories from many pre-existing myths—-Jewish and Pagan. The Old Testament had to be revered, even though it was only applicable to a foreign group of nomads, the Israeli tribes—-because the Christian farce was entirely dependent on a the mythical god producing a Messia for Isral. The Jesus farce is born. So Christianity had a ready made excuse to produce that Messia. A little later, Islam came onto the scene, and that too, was modelled on The Old Testament, so the ruhless god of the Israel tribes, found its way into Islam, so it might appear. I assume the latter from what people say, as I have never read their holy book. I have only read the Old and New Testaments (under duress), and there is no doubt about the type of character that god portrays.
I believe we can assume, that the Old Testament has produced a very arrogant attitude in people who readily use the excuse of their Biblical God, to plunder any source they wish. Of the three religions that were spawned by the Old Testament, I see Islam being the least warlike. We must also remember that Christianity brought progress to a halt, whereby Islam brought a wide variety of enlightenment to the West. History also shows that Islam was far more tolerant of other religions in the lands they ruled.
How do we fit suicide bombers into this picture? Before answering that question, I would appreciate your answer to this question. Are you against Islam because you perceive them as lawless killers—-more so than the Christian or Israli groups, or is it because you believe they are inspired to commit suicide and western soldiers are not? I would also ask you to consider that we cannot judge Islam by any fanatics that exist, as they too, are to be found in every religion and political group. Thank you. Kenneth.
First time poster, just to retaliate against Hedges. =)
What a pompous ass.
I have seen him debate Hitchens (I happen to agree with Hitchens - as an Atheist), and this is my fanatical take on it: he’s an apologist for terrorists. There’s no other way around it. He has covered those areas and has insight into their culture and has, unfortunately, gone completely native.
He’s also an idiot. 95% of suicide bombers are inspired by the Koran. I know the Tamil Tigers are also suicide bombers, but they are an exception to the rule. Most of suicide bombers are Muslim. Despair, poverty, occupation, war, lack of food and education do not make a suicide bomber. If that were so, the Congo would have more suicide bombers in the world per capita than anywhere else.
No, what makes a suicide bomber are the justifications in the Koran and Hadiths. That’s why there are no Shaheedi in the Congo, Rwanda, Burundi, Tibet, or pretty much anywhere else outside of the Muslim world. His stance is completely moronic.
I’m not saying the Koran is the only book which has inspired it, but it’s the best known for a bloody good reason. Hedges is a fool and an apologist for the other side. He apologizes for the worst atrocities perpetrated by the terrorists and it is clear why in his statements: he thinks they have good reasons for it. Well, they don’t.
He thinks the West is Imperialist. Fine. We’re just as “Imperialist” as the other side. He’s chosen his side, I’ve chosen mine. He makes it utterly clear in this interview and his other writings exactly which side he is on.
I hope he reads this: Chris Hedges, you’re an utter tool. You say you hate Islamic extremism, but you go down on all fours for them. You pimp your brand of “moderation” and “understanding” for the worst dregs of humanity. I hate people like you. You’re the sort who call Hirsi Ayaan Ali a “fundamentalist” and mean it. You hem and haw when you’re asked about the left, and you never answer the question. It’s painfully obvious why you don’t answer the question: because you can’t answer the question. There’s a damned good reason that question was asked about why the neocons are the ones sheltering her - because the neocons, by and large with few exceptions, have been the ones to stand up for secular liberalism abroad. If it were for the likes of you, Hirsi would be dead, you’d point your finger and say “she did it to herself”, and for that I can’t help but virtually spit in your face.
Yeah, I’m an atheist, I’m a feminist, I’m a war hawk, and I will always defend these values to the death. Does that make me a fundamentalist? Well at least, unlike your friends, I’m not going to blow myself up in a cafeteria to justify my claims under any circumstances.
So take your righteous, pallid, subservient, tepid god to Allah and shove it where the sun doesn’t shine. It’s the place that stinks as much as your apologetics in the face of Islamic atrocity.