Saturday, February 25, 2012

Koran burning in Afghanistan

I was shocked to hear that US soldiers had accidentally burned a couple copies of the Koran that were accidentally placed in an incinerator. I realize that the Koran is a holy book just like the Bible. Burning it intentionally is offensive. Just like burning a country's flag is.

When that wacko false preacher in the States sent out press releases about his intent to intentionally burn a copy of the Koran, that was offensive. That is not something a Christian is supposed to do. Yet to kill someone over the burning of a holy book is in itself the epitome of hypocrisy.

The Koran and the Bible both teach thou shalt not kill. Historically, Jerusalem and Belfast have both misunderstood the old law of an eye for an eye. That primitive law meant that if you commit murder, you were to be put to death. It did not mean if someone commits murder that you randomly take some innocent person from the same race, religion or country and execute them. That would be another murder. That is what Martin Luther King meant when he said the old law of an eye for an eye leaves everyone blind.

The BBC is reporting 20 people have died since the protests began. The whole idea of murdering an innocent person because someone burned a holy books is disturbingly hypocritical. I don't think that is something the Dalai Lama or a Buddhist would do. Although burning a Bible is also sacrilegious to a Christian, I don't think you'll find many Christians who will murder someone, especially murder some innocent person, just because someone burnt a Bible. I think that says a lot about the two different religions.

The "activists" in Pakistan foaming at the mouth while they burn an effigy of the US look like crazed animals. They don't look like inspired holy men to me. So what does an enlightened sage really look like? Like Gandhi, the Dalai Lama, Mother Teresa or Martin Luther King perhaps. Someone who's life is evidence of a peaceful enlightened mind. Not a crazed lunatic foaming at the mouth in a drunken rage of vengeance.

The whole mission in Afghanistan was tainted from the beginning. Bin Laden was found in Pakistan not Afghanistan and there is a huge amount of evidence questioning his involvement in 9/11. Osama and Colonel Gadaffi were both executed without a fair trial. Something a democratic society promises.

Three months before 9/11 the Texas oil barons were wining and dining the Taliban trying to win the contract for the oil pipeline. As soon as the contract for the oil pipeline was taken from UNOCAL and given to an Argentina firm named Bridas, Afghanistan was invaded and that decision was reversed.

Canada has been significantly involved in the Afghanistan mission. We have lost many good soldiers who went there to help the people of Afghanistan and gave their lives in their service. One name stands out in my mind. He was a reservist from Edmonton named Bill Turner. He was involved with the kites for kids program there. At his eulogy they said he was the type of soldier who would say "Hi, my name is Bill. I'm here to help." That was a good soldier. Just like the soldier who took his helmet off as a sign of trust meeting with some local elders and a crazed assailant attacked him from behind with an axe. That was a good soldier. He had also written about the missing women from the DTES.

Burning any holy book is disrespectful just like burning any country's flag is. Yet killing someone for doing so is shamefully hypocritical. We need to aspire to something higher.


  1. No one burned them accidentally. Bad guys in detention were using them to pass messages around. They were tossed in the trash. Guess how trash on base is disposed of? That's right, burning. By LN laborers. Who actually did the burning. Then recovered them when someone noticed what they were. Whereupon "Muslim outrage", known to occur as a response to any "insult" real, imagined, or made up to further their ends, boiled over, with predictable results.

  2. Although I think historically many would ague the crusades were about Christians killing Muslims I agree that it really has nothing to do with religion.

  3. It's obvious that you didn't look at the wiki, or you'd have seen that it's more than tenth century scholars who inhabit the list. Nobel prize winners and stuff, but you already know the truth, so the facts mean little.

    A few tours in Afghan doesn't qualify you as a cultural expert on Islam. Afghanistan is a shit hole. The entire country had five thousand phones for thirty million people before the war. When the bulk of a country's GDP is heroin money and natural resources are scarce, it stands to reason that it's going to be a cultural backwater. Thanks to a few Talib hardliners, sheep shagging and Thursday night man/boy festivities are their cultural pastimes. If given the choice, Afghans would rather be fucking their women and learning more than how to recite the Qu'ran, I'm sure.

    And don't start in with the idea that Muslims are one nationality separate from the countries they inhabit. Almost everyone over there is Muslim. The biggest distinction between them is that there are liberal, moderate, and conservative Muslims. It's western foreign policy that supports corrupt oligarchies and monarchies over there, and at the expense of moderate and liberal Muslims. We send our soldiers over to defend totalitarian regimes so that we can secure oil for our cheap and irresponsible consumption. Fuck a bunch of Saudi. Fuck Kuwait. We should have let Iraq bomb those cunts back to the stone age, since their leaders are accustomed to neolithic politics. At least Iraq was religiously and socially progressive by comparison.

    It isn't Islam that stifles creativity and keeps a boot on the throat of the people. It's dogma. Name any religion or political mode of thinking, and it's been used to long dick the population so that the leaders can benefit from spoils of war. Dogma is what teaches you that the so-called enemy are less than human. It lends justification for soldiers to commit atrocities against foreign populations, and for populations to feel right in their government's decision to enact such policies. You’re a poster boy for dogmatic thinking. Why the fuck would I take your word for anything? Because you’ve been a part of an invading force and been righteously hated by the locals? Does that validate your opinion? I believe you wrote something about shooting home invaders in a previous post. I guess you can thank your ass that all Afghans didn’t feel the same way as you, or you wouldn’t be able to express your opinion.

    If you want to know who's responsible for the state the middle east is in, look at our leaders. They're the reason Africa's a clusterfuck too. When resources can be taken on the cheap, it makes sense to keep these places destabilised. Whenever a country tries to nationalise the management of their resources, bad things happen to them. Sanctions are imposed, or they're invaded, or the IMF cuts off loans that have no hope of being paid back without nationalisation. Read up on Zambia or Venezuela, and you'll see it's true.

  4. Never been to Afghanistan. Wasn't in on the invasion. Your track record for ASSuming things and being wrong is pretty good, I'd like to subscribe to your newsletter..... :rolleyes:

    My experience is with Kuwait and Iraq. Especially Iraq. But I like how you still attempt to educate me as to the reality of things when you've never been there let alone spent time there measured in years. And I actually work side by side with locals on my team every day I'm over there.

    You and the rest of the apologists need to wake up and realize one simple truth. The instructions to do all this shit ARE in the Koran. And the dynamics of a third world Muslim nation are different than you think they are. You truly have no clue, and your response to me telling you this is something along the lines of "Yes I do."

    [QUOTE]At least Iraq was religiously and socially progressive by comparison.{UNQUOTE]

    Your ignorance is abysmal. I hardly know where to start. You do realize that the key word here is WAS, and even that egregious misrepresentation of reality occurred under a dictator who son used to kidnap women off the street for his sexual amusement and practice birth control by afterwards feeding them to a lion he kept in a cage in the backyard. Ever been to that compound? I have.

    I try to avoid name calling but you have just self identified as a Grade A oxygen thief douche bag. What the FUCK.

    Trust me it is not like you thought is was now. There are DOZENS of sectarian killings EVERY WEEK there, and those are the ones you hear about. Since you are so frightfully well informed, you no doubt realize that self appointed "religious police" in Iraq have stoned to death an estimated 90-100 young men in the last 10 days for the offense against Islam of doing the "Emo" thing. (Apparently that had become a popular method of expressing individuality as well as belonging to a group other than the one at the local mosque.)Except stoning isn't really accurate as they prefer to use concrete blocks to crush arms and legs for a few minutes of terror and pain on the victims part before crushing head with same.

    But you didn't know any of that shit. Because you get your info from what you watch and read of the MSM. They, and you, don't know WTF you're talking about.

    1. Oh no. You've pulled the caps lock out. This shit is serious.

      No, I do read the news, I know about the emo thing, which is disgusting, and am also well aware of sectarian violence.

      Aren't you everybody's hero! I never misrepresented Saddam Hussein. I never even mentioned him. I mentioned that his country was progressive comparatively, to Saudi. Which is true. Saudi is raw horseshit, but because of oil, we defend them. When the planes flew into the buildings and the majority of hijackers were Saudi, we hit Iraq and Afghan instead.

      Are you American? I'm sure if you are, you're taking into account the hundreds of death row prisoners currently incarcerated stateside.

      And sorry I assumed you toured Afghanistan. All you'd made prior were nebulous allusions to having traveled in the Middle East, and I was forced to assume the very minimum, since your outlook on things there seem a little small town. Like maybe you like a good donkey to fuck every now and again.

      With all the caps lock, and all the name calling, you've managed to skirt passed the issue of dogma, past the issue that US & other forces are in the Middle East helping to maintain status quo for pretty fucked up people. I wouldn't expect much more from you. I imagine your first response to having your bullshit called bullshit was to get your gun.

      The fact that you pulled out the 'MSM' tag just outs you as a right wing troll. Am I supposed to get my news from infowars and gun nut magazine?

      Eat a bowl of cocks. You know you love em. Military guys are almost always closeted, and the more macho, chest pounding they are, the more likely they're wearing pink silk underneath.

    2. "Eat a bowl of cocks?" Now now, roosters have feelings too.

  5. Shaun: "Do some fucking research."

    Maybe YOU need to, Shaun; (Wiki. c&p is NOT considered research, BTW) I hold an Honours History degree from UBC, ya got one...?

    Do you know where all that mathematical & science knowledge (which NEVER spread to the general Pop., or helped out those countries in any way) came from? The GREEKS, that's who! The Arabs just ripped off & busily translated all their scrolls, while the Euros were in the Dark Ages. Just re-engineering Archimedes is NOT considered original research. The maths are Greek, that's just the way she rolls. Greek geniuses had it all figured out long before anyone else, including us in the west, the Arabs can pass it off as their own, but I know better.

    Here's some wiki. Shaun carefully missed:

    "Islamic Golden Age (c.750 CE – c.1258 CE). During this time, Indian, Asyriac, Iranian and especially Greek knowledge was translated into Arabic. These translations became the wellspring for scientific advances, by scientists from the Islamic civilization..."

    'Nuff said.

    1. Also, Freddy.

      Asyriac and Iranian don't sound middle eastern to you?

      I'm at a computer. Should I fly to my university's library to provide a paper and bibliographical info to some dumb cock who's not really going to read it, or should I use the simplest, most available resource?

      An honour's in history (whose history?)... I'm sure that qualifies you to teach all manner of high school classes, if you bothered to top it off with a B.Ed.

      Tuum Est

    2. Hahaha, a history degree?? Wow, those BA's are sure tough to get!!! That's cute!!

  6. Freddy:

    Don't you mean "Islamic Golden Age (c.DCCL CE – c.MCCLVIII CE). ?

    1. Shaun;

      Fine, but your retort does not address my basic point; that none of what you inferred was original Arab Islamic *science* was indeed that. I said it was mainly Greek & you just kinda slid by that one with no response.

      You can't get away with such, in high-level Uni. debating seminars, where I score my GPA points. If I had been facing you down in front of that crowd; with what you just inferred; I could've sliced you up publicly...

    2. You're scoring GPA points?

      When did averages get replaced by debate seminar results? When did the Debate Society get boosted from extracurricular activity to accredited status?

      When did you go to UBC, and are you talking about University of British Columbia, or the prestigious U BIN CONNED school of internet bullshit?

      Wow. You're rill smart mister. Honours degree with lotsa them words all stuck together to make long strings of more words. And getting full credits with the GPA points. I bet your kinfolk are proud of all that fancy book learning.

      You're a clown buddy. You've just illustrated that better than a red rubber nose and size 70 shoes could ever do.

      Thanks for the laugh.

  7. You didn't mention shit about Saudi, now claim that it's what you meant. Convenient.

    Iraq was "progressive" under Saddam? Really. Here's a heads up. No, it wasn't. Iraq and Saudi are both shit sandwiches. Whole wheat vs. Rye doesn't change that. And trying to say there's some kind of meaningful difference just illustrates how clueless you really are.

    "Am I supposed to get my news from infowars and gun nut magazine?"

    Well, I get mine from a daily SITREP generated in-country but I do understand how you can't do that, so no, you should be getting your info from someone who has been there, instead of sucking up that Marxist drivel that Mommy and Daddy are paying for. (I'll bet you have to wear a fucking Che T-shirt to get laid.) Journalists don't count, they spend their time in the bar or trying to get camera time with people like me in the background so they look like they're out in the Red Zone instead of the UN compound parking lot.

    Do you realize how thoroughly your doubt in your own manhood comes through in that post? Your girlfriend (if you had one) would cheat on you with me if she had a chance, even though if you're in college I'm old enough to be her father. You know why? Apart from the daddy thing, it's because even the ones who eat tofu and save whales in the named of whirled pea's are slaves to biology. When faced with a choice between rutting with a buff guy their dad's age who spends a couple hours a day in the gym and makes 6 figures plus facing danger in foreign lands with an M4 in his hands vs. some sensitive little lemming in search of a cliff like you who'd be living at home with his parents if he wasn't in college who imagines that he could be a warrior if he wanted to, they go for the manhood every time. I know your type, think you know all about it until an IED goes off down the block, then you've got shepherds pie in your knickers.

    Stay home and mock better men than you, it's all you're good for. If you're lucky someday a semi good looking female will suffer a massive judgement 'fail' and give you the opportunity to reproduce.

    1. Buddy, you don't know how wrong you are about me.

      Your SITREP is shit. Not exactly the balanced, unbiased media that you've been advising me to read, is it? It's just some shit to feed the groundpounders to make you all feel like you're there for a purpose that doesn't involve being bumboys for corporate interests.

      Just because conjuring up the mental image of some gung ho douche bag gives you a raging chubby doesn't mean that other ladies are gonna like it. Even if you tack on the bullshit six-figure salary.

      We're never going to meet an agreement here, and I'm fine with that. You're going to have your incorrect ideas about me, and I'll continue making assumptions about you. It's the way it works, I guess.

      For what it's worth, I'm sorry that I played a part in letting this devolve into name calling, because despite the differences of opinion, we may have learned something from each other. Still, lots of fun to dig in, and man, you're an easier target than fifteen unarmed Iraqis.

  8. Replies
    1. It's like reading the Enquirer. If you can do so without worrying that BatBoy is really out there, it's harmless.

      Not my blogs, and not even anyone I know, but local to BC, and entertaining. I read these when I'm not pressing my Che t-shirts or writing protest songs in my Woody Guthrie moleskine:

  9. You're a dumb ass who mistakes the sound of his own voice for knowledge pouring forth.

    SITREPS are the facts as best they are known. There is no spin, people are relying on the info contained therein to avoid assuming room temperature.

    There are no ground pounders here anymore, they all went home. Apparently you are not on the distro list for the memo that went around. Call CBC/CNN/whomever, they'll fill you in on the whole withdrawal thing.

    Where did I advise you to read ANYTHING? I didn't. Wrong again.

    I don't conjure anything to produce that image. If I needed to see it, I'd look in the mirror in the bathroom of my CHU, but like a lot of other things in this country, it's busted too.

    No bullshit, junior. Just fact, and fairly common knowledge at that. On both counts. The NGO/civilian guys hate to socialize around us because the few attractive women (and even the unattractive ones) available tend to trade up when they have the chance. It's just an "Arabian Vacation", after all, no one back home will ever find out what they do over here. Much. :D

    You would not know shit about target interdiction or ROE to begin with, and less than that about the current situation here. You think that this is not obvious. You make what you believe to be clever references not realizing that all they do is further showcase the fact that you have ZERO personal experience with any of this, and that even your shallowly considered analysis of what "knowledge" is publicly available is a slave to your obvious and very common brand of "outlook" on the world. The fact that it's a popular one is likely a great part of the reason you hold it, and you are under the impression that expressing it marks you as erudite. You are mistaken.

    Telling me I'm wrong about you doesn't dispel this whatsoever.

    Freddy is absolutely right about one thing. If you and he were on a stage doing the debate thing, it would be ugly. No woman who saw it would ever grace you with her favors.

    1. But you are wrong about me.

      Okay. I'll concede, you may be partly right about me in some ways. But brother (I'm calling you brother because I'm a dirty tam wearing, never washing, Che pushing, stick it to the man, hippie, and us hippies do brotherhood the way freddy makes his GPA points watching basketball games after debate club, which is to say: the hippie ideal of brotherhood is as fictitious as freddy's imaginary degree, but as real as his inability to use reference material to craft a natural sounding sentence, if you can dig my vibe, brother) whew! but brother, you really don't know the half. Just like I'm unable to fathom your way of thinking, or to give two shits about how attractive or abhorrent people may find you, you are wrong about me. For one, I've slammed more boxes than a UPS lifer. And without a manly M4 to impress with. That's because real women (the kind who breathe and occupy three dimensions and don't require cash payment) prefer actual penis to detachable penis, and intellect rather than robotic repetition (well, some of them like a little of that).

      I know what I've learned about the world and how I see things is a result of exposure to different influences. The same goes for you. I'm quite respectfully willing to listen to what you have to say, and I don't even ask that you try and understand me.

      What I do take issue with, and what I failed spectacularly at saying with my first response in this comment was: It isn't okay to paint a few billion people with the same brush. The fact that you feel free to demonize so many people so openly, using nothing but false statements as evidence of their alleged inferiority is disgusting, and it's not language which a person who's implied to hold high ranking military would use. In fact, aren't there measures taken by military organisations to prevent that sort of thing from going public? Now I gotta wonder if you're not living in some Chuck Norris inspired Delta Force flashback, one of freddy's debate team members, or just another fucking internet crank with fuck all else going on.

      It does seem odd to me that you refer to being 'over here', when all communications made by soldiers overseas are done on government issue equipment which uses software to eliminate mishandled information, photos of pug ugly redheads torturing prisoners, and various puppy and human snuff video from embarrassing the US military. I mean, why wikileaks if there are brass so stupid as to go online and spout such shit so openly?

      Such opinions are probably better expressed with fellow soldiers (if you're active, or even a real veteran and not just some douche bag who claims a military past to gain unknown benefits).

      The more I think about this, the more convinced I become that you've never served a day in the military, and if you have, certainly not in any leadership role. Unless... freddy's on your debate team and you've been nominated to supervise her bathroom breaks.

      Troll on, troll.

  10. See, this is what I'm talking about. You're ignorant, and you mistake what information you THINK you have, all of which you get from the media or books, for actual knowledge and experience.

    I never said I was presently in the military. You ASSumed that. I never claimed I was high ranking when I was. You ASSumed that as well. You pile ASSumption on supposition, throw in a guess or two (which you are also bad at) and mistake the results for accurate information, when the truth is YOU DON'T KNOW. Which I've been trying to tell you from the beginning. And no matter how many times you are told it doesn't sink in. It doesn't compute with you that there's a difference between what you can read or watch on TV, and what the actual reality on the ground is.

    The concept is not that difficult, let me try and help you further. Ever traveled? It doesn't matter where. You read about the place before hand maybe, looked it up on the net, whatever. Maybe even talked to someone who'd been there. But when you got there, it was different than you thought. It wasn't exactly as you'd been led to expect. And this is my point. There is no substitute for REAL first hand experience. Anything else is just "what you think". You believe that "what you think" = reality. It may, but there is a much better chance that it does not. And this seems to escape you.

    "It does seem odd to me that you refer to being 'over here', when all communications made by soldiers overseas are done on government issue equipment which uses software to eliminate mishandled information, photos of pug ugly redheads torturing prisoners, and various puppy and human snuff video from embarrassing the US military. I mean, why wikileaks if there are brass so stupid as to go online and spout such shit so openly?"

    This is what I mean. You know this how?? You've have been led to believe by the media that this is how it is. It's not. The military went home in December. (Well, most of them) Dude, we have internet. (obviously) We have our own cell phones. Some of us have SAT phones. We're not the military, although 95% of us HAVE been in the military. Is this now clear enough for you?

    So, yeah, unlike you, I have actual experience with the people we were talking about. Not the ones that have immigrated. The ones that haven't. And won't. The real deal. You don't. And you therefor have no clue. And you continue to argue that you do.

    If there's anyone trolling here, it's YOU.


Comments are moderated so there will be a delay before they appear on the blog.