Benazir Bhutto

[huahinsimon]

Kelpiekiss wrote: Religion just does what it always does best. Creates hatred, bigotry, divide and war.[/quote]

I'm greatly encouraged to read all the anti-religion commentary in this thread, be it fanatical Muslims or fanatical evangelical Christians. IMHO all religion is a crutch for the feebel minded who havent the brains to figure out a world view of their own and the courage to live by it.

and thanks Roel for the Iron Law of Oligarchy on another thread.
HHS

[Wanderlust]

I've always thought of religion, from an individual's perspective, as a crutch to deal with mortality; of course from the 'keepers' of the religions and their political cohorts it is just another way of keeping the masses occupied and enslaved. I am of course thinking in particular of the Catholics and the Muslims here, but it does apply to most organised religions.

[johnnyk]

Interesting analysis of the unfolding situation in Pakistan here:

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/20 ... tto/#share

[Jaime]

I've always thought of religion, from an individual's perspective, as a crutch to deal with mortality; of course from the 'keepers' of the religions and their political cohorts it is just another way of keeping the masses occupied and enslaved. I am of course thinking in particular of the Catholics and the Muslims here, but it does apply to most organised religions.

WL, I feel neither occupied or enslaved! Bit of a sweeping statement there - most Catholics live in the 21st century, not the 12th!

[Farang]

I can't understand why others want to follow other religions when I have it on good authority only catholics can get into the kingdom of heaven.

Little doest thee know, thee infidel dog. The first thing Ye Supreme Thingy does at Ye Pearlie Gates is to
take a shuft on your Schlong. It it is not Properly Cut, it's Hades for thee. So, on entrance, prepare to whip it out .

[Chas]

It is not so much whether I think religion is a good or a bad thing or whether I feel we ought to have them or not, but in discussing human history, speaking of and looking closely at all religions is a given. As a teacher I feel obliged to treat them all openly and fairly and equally and my point was, it is much more difficult to consider Islam fairly.

My own spirituality/religion/belief system is not the issue here at all. (Long ago I worked out "my own world view" and though nominally Catholic, the Catholic church I was born into no longer exists on this earth. As I often tell students, my spiritual life is none of the Church's business!)

I certainly have no love for fundamentalist Christians. I have them in my family and can not abide their ways, but none of them has blown up an airplane lately or carried out a suicide bombing.

What I meant is that especially since 9/11, but even before, we have all been been affected by Islamic terrorism in major ways. I can remember getting on a plane without going through metal detectors, I can remember a time without the daily security hassles, the costs of security passed on to us all, the fears, the risks. . .and the killing of people like Bhutto.

[johnnyk]

It is not so much whether I think religion is a good or a bad thing or whether I feel we ought to have them or not, but in discussing human history, speaking of and looking closely at all religions is a given. As a teacher I feel obliged to treat them all openly and fairly and equally and my point was, it is much more difficult to consider Islam fairly.

My own spirituality/religion/belief system is not the issue here at all. (Long ago I worked out "my own world view" and though nominally Catholic, the Catholic church I was born into no longer exists on this earth. As I often tell students, my spiritual life is none of the Church's business!)

I certainly have no love for fundamentalist Christians. I have them in my family and can not abide their ways, but none of them has blown up an airplane lately or carried out a suicide bombing.
What I meant is that especially since 9/11, but even before, we have all been been affected by Islamic terrorism in major ways. I can remember getting on a plane without going through metal detectors, I can remember a time without the daily security hassles, the costs of security passed on to us all, the fears, the risks. . .and the killing of people like Bhutto.

Chas,
Bush is a fundamentalist Christian and he has destroyed an entire country with no reason. Much more than an airplane....

[Wanderlust]

I've always thought of religion, from an individual's perspective, as a crutch to deal with mortality; of course from the 'keepers' of the religions and their political cohorts it is just another way of keeping the masses occupied and enslaved. I am of course thinking in particular of the Catholics and the Muslims here, but it does apply to most organised religions.

WL, I feel neither occupied or enslaved! Bit of a sweeping statement there - most Catholics live in the 21st century, not the 12th!

Jaime,
I think you have taken my comment in the wrong way, and are also doing yourself an injustice by regarding yourself as one of the masses. However what i meant by 'occupied and enslaved' is that religious and political leaders will use religion to try and make people abide by certain things (e.g. certain moral stances) and also to behave in certain predictable ways (e.g. attending church/mosque). Whether or not they are successful in these attempts is another matter but religion has been used in these ways, and also as an excuse for persecution for as long as it has been around. I am not saying that any particular religion is wrong or that someone should not be religious as that is their own personal choice, but it is without doubt not for me, partly for the reasons I have put here.

[KelpieKiss]

I thought some of the people in this discussion might be interested in this film: http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/

There's a bit about religion at the start that goes along with some of the peoples views on this forum.

Before I get lots of come backs, yes I know the film is maybe not the most thorough piece of documentary ever made but it makes some interesting points.

Let it buffer and ye shall be rewardith with uninterrupted playback.

[KelpieKiss]

I feel obliged to treat them all openly and fairly and equally and my point was, it is much more difficult to consider Islam fairly.

Why? Because fundamentalist 'Christian' Bush, who's actually a member of Bohemian Grove and the Skull and Crossbones society, 2 clubs dedicated to old pagan religions, told you that Muslims were bad men. The way you feel right now is exactly how they want you to feel so that you shout 'yee haa!' when the bombs drop on Muslim heads.

I know it's hard to look beyond the media that's pumped hard down your throat every day but just because we're told this crap by the Rupert Murdoch media whores, doesn't make it any more true. Yes there are lots of crazy Muslims who want to blow themselves up but who wound them up so much that they feel the need to do this? I'm sure even crazed Muslims don't enjoy being human bombs. Are the Jews in Israel any better when they murder Palestinians or is this ok because they use Tanks and missiles like civilized religious freaks?

[klikster]

Chas,
Bush is a fundamentalist Christian and he has destroyed an entire country with no reason. Much more than an airplane....

I'm certainly no fan of Bush .. nor any sort of fundamentalism .. but what Bush has destroyed has been as a politician, not as a fundamentalist Christian.

[KelpieKiss]

I'm certainly no fan of Bush .. nor any sort of fundamentalism .. but what Bush has destroyed has been as a politician, not as a fundamentalist Christian.

Under the guise of a politician more like. Bush said he would launch a 'Crusade'. The word crusade conjures up quite a few religious connotations does it not? Politicians are not supposed to ignore the UN, ignore the evidence that there were no WOMD, wage an illegal war that is basically colonization to establish power in the oil rich region, lie about everything, get found out to be a lier, not give a shit that everyone knows you lied, take huge amounts of funding from education in their own country to fund their personal crusade.

If this is what is done under the title of a politician then what's the difference?

[Randy Cornhole]

Latest update -

The interior ministry said at a press conference that video of Ms Bhutto's last moments and an examination by doctors had shown that Ms Bhutto died apparently accidentally, as a suicide bomb blast went off at her political rally in Rawalpindi last night, killing around 20 people. No full post mortem examination had been carried out at the request of Ms Bhutto's husband, it was reported.

Brigadier Javed Cheema, a ministry spokesman, said Ms Bhutto had died from a head wound after smashing against the sunroof’s lever as she tried to shelter inside her car. "There is no evidence of any foreign element in her body," Brigadier Cheema said. "No bullet hit her, nor any splinters hit her. Unfortunately, it was to be that way.

"I wish she had not come out of the roof top of her vehicle."

But Ms Bhutto's lawyer and a senior official in the PPP, Farooq Naik, rejected the Government's claim as "baseless".

"It is a pack of lies," he said.

"Two bullets hit her, one in the abdomen and one in the head.

"It was a serious security lapse."

Looks like this one will drag on and on.......

[caller]

She was killed, if the guy hadn't turned up and did what he did, she'd still be here (for now). I don't think the precise details matter, or are we heading for another freeking conspiracy with GWB to blame - huh?

Kelpiepuss - your posts are pathetic and insulting. How dare you assume the media and Bush are responsible for my views on Islamists and the Muslim faith in general?

Some of us have brains and can make our own minds up.

This started as a thread about Bhutto but all the usual crap is spouted by the dumb-asses who just absorb only the info that feeds their prejudices and end up as rants here.

[klikster]

I'm certainly no fan of Bush .. nor any sort of fundamentalism .. but what Bush has destroyed has been as a politician, not as a fundamentalist Christian.

Under the guise of a politician more like. Bush said he would launch a 'Crusade'. The word crusade conjures up quite a few religious connotations does it not? Politicians are not supposed to ignore the UN, ignore the evidence that there were no WOMD, wage an illegal war that is basically colonization to establish power in the oil rich region, lie about everything, get found out to be a lier, not give a shit that everyone knows you lied, take huge amounts of funding from education in their own country to fund their personal crusade.

Do you simply not want to see the fact that few fundamentalists have the resources to do what Bush had done?

If this is what is done under the title of a politician then what's the difference?

The primary difference is that very few fundamentalists christians have destroyed nations.

This thread is getting out of hand, so I'll leave it .