Gaza Mayhem

[northumbrian66]

As a person who spent more than 30 years living and working in the Middle East, I am an inveterate Middle East watcher. Today I watched the news of the battle between Hamas and an extreme sect calling themselves Jund Ansar Allah - 'The Companions (or Helpers) of God' during Friday prayers at a mosque in Gaza (can anyone be more extreme than Hamas - apparently so). The story can be read on the BBC, the Los Angelles Time, the Boston Globe and the Irish Times websites so I wont go into the very bloody details. In reality I think the battle was between suni based islamic belief and that of the shias. The cleric who sparked it all off, Abdel Latif Mousa had declared an islamic emirate against the orders of Hamas not to do so. I suspect that this nutcase (Abdel) was perhaps backed by the Saudi Wahabi sect of islam which is violently opposed to shia islam and preaches that all shias should be killed (so much for the bullshit about muslim botherhood!!) while Hamas is backed by Iran, a staunchly shia state. There is also the likelihood that Abdel was Al Qaeda inspired, which is violently anti shia. This bloody and sordid incident highlights just how much religion has lead to so much evil in this region. Apparently, although Hamas appears to have crushed and killed Abdel and his band of lunatics - sorry fanatics, Jund Ansar Allah has promised revenge against Hamas. So we can probably look forward to more extreme violence.
We Atheists are sick and tired of hearing muslims claim that all they want is a world caliphate because only then will there be world peace. One has only has to look at the way muslims are killing each other over which version of islam is correct, to realise that if a caliphate were ever established we would probably have even more killing not less.

[Edwardo Piet]

It would obviously be better if they stopped fighting...I'm not sure if that will happen though (sadly), although of course it would be ideal.

As for world peace, well it's a wonderful idea that I can't help but believe will never happen. Unless we invent some kind of super technological advice that makes everyone on the planet super uber mellow (but even then there would still be fights if only over territory I think! Although hopefully it would be 'less violent'), or something like that I guess (trying to use my imagination here lol).

Fighting for world peace...kind of misses the point me thinks! Because, even if a horrible battle or two can end a nasty war...it's not going to stay that way!!

EvF

[Dotard]

Peace thru superior fire power I say.

[fr0d0]

Gene Roddenberry's vision is right. When the communication works equally well for everyone and wealth is shared there will be world peace. Live long and prosper |..|

[Kyuuketsuki]

We Atheists are sick and tired of hearing muslims claim that all they want is a world caliphate because only then will there be world peace. One has only has to look at the way muslims are killing each other over which version of islam is correct, to realise that if a caliphate were ever established we would probably have even more killing not less.

I'm sorry Brian but "we atheists"? I've no love for Islam or indeed any other religion but I am curious to know who exactly it was that made you our spokesman?

Kyu

[Dotard]

Kyu,

You didn't get the memo?

Elections were held two weeks ago! I personally didn't vote for north, but he is our elected spokesperson.

Try to keep up.

[Tiberius]

I spoilt my ballot paper and voted for Jesus.

[leo-rcc]

Okay, now that we have that of of our chests, how about delving into the subject matter itself?

The division between Shia and Sunni dates back to the death of Muhammad, and the question of who was to take over the leadership of the Muslim nation.

The differences between the two fractions started out therefore not religious, but political. The Sunni elected a person they thought best suited for the task, while the Shia felt that only direct family of Muhammad would be eligible for the job. From this dispute over political leadership, some aspects of spiritual life have been affected and now differ between the two groups of Muslims. So now it is fair to say that these two fractions do share the same heritage, but they are no longer the same religion. Perhaps in name, but not in practice.

The vast majority of Muslims in the world is Sunni, with a few countries being Shia (such as Iran and Iraq), and having some large minorities in predominantly Sunni countries like Yemen and Syria.

It has been and will continue to be long hard battle between these two fractions, and if they are not focusing on killing of Israeli's they are busy killing each other.

To be honest I don't see any way of improving matters except dropping a load of daisy cutters over the whole territory.

[northumbrian66]

We Atheists are sick and tired of hearing muslims claim that all they want is a world caliphate because only then will there be world peace. One has only has to look at the way muslims are killing each other over which version of islam is correct, to realise that if a caliphate were ever established we would probably have even more killing not less.

I'm sorry Brian but "we atheists"? I've no love for Islam or indeed any other religion but I am curious to know who exactly it was that made you our spokesman?

Kyu

I apologise. It was a generalisation. I dont claim to be appointed by anyone or to speak on behalf of others. However, I would think that any true Athiest would agree with the sentiment. Are not we all sick to death of hearing them prattle on with their false sense of hurt and insult over the slightest criticism and their demand for 'respect' especially islam.

---

Okay, now that we have that of of our chests, how about delving into the subject matter itself?

The division between Shia and Sunni dates back to the death of Muhammad, and the question of who was to take over the leadership of the Muslim nation.

The differences between the two fractions started out therefore not religious, but political. The Sunni elected a person they thought best suited for the task, while the Shia felt that only direct family of Muhammad would be eligible for the job. From this dispute over political leadership, some aspects of spiritual life have been affected and now differ between the two groups of Muslims. So now it is fair to say that these two fractions do share the same heritage, but they are no longer the same religion. Perhaps in name, but not in practice.


It has been and will continue to be long hard battle between these two fractions, and if they are not focusing on killing of Israeli's they are busy killing each other.

To be honest I don't see any way of improving matters except dropping a load of daisy cutters over the whole territory.

I agree with what you write. We should all get to know everything about these two sects. 'Know your enemy' is a sound principal. The fact is that they are both as mad as hatters and are hell bent on attaining nuclear weapons. I personally believe they will have no hesitation in using them on everyone who doesnt agree with their brand of islam. As Osama Bin Laden has stated 'in defence of muslims' meaning the ones who follow his version I suppose. The prospect of nutty islamic ghouls having the power of these weapons at their disposal is extremely frightening - as it is with nutty christian ghouls. At least during the cold war there was MAD (an apt name) or mutally assured destruction. With these people however, and I apply this to all religions, they look forward to armageddon, or the rapture, or end of days rubbish. So lobbing nuclear weapons about could be a good way of initiating these events and thereby hastening the chosen ones fast track to heaven. How can they believe in such absolute shite?!
Daisy cutting might prove to be the only sound principal to save the planet!

[Edwardo Piet]

However, I would think that any true Athiest would agree with the sentiment.

Any true atheist? So you've gotta then define 'true atheist'. Because doesn't 'any true atheist would agree'= 'no true athiest would disagree'? In which case, since atheists are just those who don't believe in God, unless you can define preciesly what a 'true atheist' is (and, for the record - I don't see how you can!), aren't you, perhaps, implicity comitting the No True Scotsman fallacy?

EvF