This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

← Al Qaeda: We're open to questions

Al Qaeda: We're open to questions - Comments

Ohnhai's Avatar Comment 1 by Ohnhai

That's who Dinesh should debate next !

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 06:46:00 UTC | #96588

TonyA's Avatar Comment 2 by TonyA

Yes!

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 06:52:00 UTC | #96592

Cook@Tahiti's Avatar Comment 3 by Cook@Tahiti

I have a question: What do you hate more? The Great Satan, America? Women? Jews? Israel? Science? Apostates? Alcohol? Life? Gays? Christians? Buddhists? Hindus? Atheists? Anyone having a good time? Any idea later than 1000AD? Or yourselves?

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:02:00 UTC | #96599

NormanDoering's Avatar Comment 4 by NormanDoering

Ohnhai wrote:

That's who Dinesh should debate next !
I'd like to see a debate between Hitchens and Ayman al-Zawahiri about how religion inspires moral behavior.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:08:00 UTC | #96604

cincyatheist's Avatar Comment 6 by cincyatheist

If CNN decides to do this, it could prove very eye-opening for a lot of people. If they ask them why they carried out the attacks on 9/11 and they tell the world that it was motivated by Islam, that will settle it once and for all. A lot of people think that it's socio-political or economical factors.

Can't wait to see what happens.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:14:00 UTC | #96609

USA_Limey's Avatar Comment 5 by USA_Limey

Comment #101270 by Diacanu:

And would you orally satisfy the prince of darkness as hard as you flat out suck here on Earth?
Greedily, and with reckless shameless abandon?

Or, would you suck it tenderly, knowing you had eons to build up to the rough stuff?



I'm at work and that gave me a hard on you bastard.

;-)

[EDIT - OK post missing now - thought better of it did ya!]

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:14:00 UTC | #96608

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 8 by irate_atheist

3. Comment #101271 by Rtambree -

Missing option - Jim Davidson.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:15:00 UTC | #96611

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 7 by Diacanu

Ah, sorry, I had to delete my original post.

It was in bad taste.

I can't help myself. I get to even theoretically ask Al-Qaeda questions, I get....colorful..with my metaphors...

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:15:00 UTC | #96610

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 9 by Diacanu

USA_Limey-

[EDIT - OK post missing now - thought better of it did ya!]


Well, y'know, I dunno how far I can go on these forums, didn't wanna get banned...

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:24:00 UTC | #96613

faouloki's Avatar Comment 11 by faouloki

Diacanu-

Fortunately USA_Limey quoted it so it's still there for us all to enjoy!

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:46:00 UTC | #96624

al-rawandi's Avatar Comment 10 by al-rawandi

Most suicide attacks are not religiously motivated (See research by Robert Pape @ U of Chicago).

The religious idiom is almost incidental. The religious cause is brought out via abductive reasoning. Suicide is prohibited by almost every religion.

The religious stuff just makes them additionally obnoxious.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 07:46:00 UTC | #96623

tieInterceptor's Avatar Comment 12 by tieInterceptor

dicanau is good that USA_limey quoted you , because it was funny.


al-rawandi... when a certified doctor burns himself to death when trying to blow up his car, and has to be manhandled to the floor by the police to extinguish his flaming body, while shouting "Alahu akbar" without stopping to breath in...

then, I think you can safely say that he was working hard on his 72 virgins in paradise.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:01:00 UTC | #96634

USA_Limey's Avatar Comment 13 by USA_Limey

Fortunately USA_Limey quoted it so it's still there for us all to enjoy!



... Once you commit something to the internet it's there FOREVER. MUH HA HA!

But I'll take the wrap for keeping it on the thread - Diacanu you are absolved of guilt my son.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:03:00 UTC | #96635

Dax's Avatar Comment 14 by Dax

al-rawandi: without promise of reward in the afterlife, you get people just offing themselves, not taking others along. Suicide attacks need some form of divine or ideological justification beyond that what any reasonable person could come up with. Researchers who say otherwise due to years of political correct thinking, are just deluding themselves.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:07:00 UTC | #96638

TonyA's Avatar Comment 15 by TonyA

Researchers who say otherwise due to years of political correct thinking, are just deluding themselves.
Prof. Pape says this about the issue:

"Rather, what nearly all suicide terrorist
attacks have in common is a specific secular
and strategic goal: to compel modern
democracies to withdraw military forces from
territory that the terrorists consider to be
their homeland."

I guess he's talking about their sacred homeland promised to them by their religion.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:15:00 UTC | #96642

al-rawandi's Avatar Comment 16 by al-rawandi

Dax:

Suicide bombing... Tamil Tigers. Marxist Atheists. First use of suicide vests. Many of the bombers had never attended a religious ceremony in their lives.

Palestinians have sent both Christian and Atheist suicide bombers. (One a former ambulance medic, who was unbearably disgusted with Israeli aggression)

Nazis sent suicide subs, piloted by the a-religious.

Communist Russia (state atheism) sent suicide waves at the Germans.

Religion is just one idiom. Read the research. Suicide bombing is not where we atheists will make headway.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:17:00 UTC | #96645

al-rawandi's Avatar Comment 17 by al-rawandi

I think you fail to see, that religion is a product of human evolution. They were attached to their land (a reasonable feeling for any human). If later they concocted a revelation to support this... That would be coincidental correlation.

The Ancient Arabians had similar views, supported by similar mythopoeia. Nothing new, certainly endemic to the human condition, as religion also seems to be endemic.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:21:00 UTC | #96647

TonyA's Avatar Comment 18 by TonyA

I see your point, but if they didn't have religion to empower and embolden them, they might find better solutions to the problems.

I don't think people are claiming that we need to get rid of religion because it teaches people to blow up other people. I think the problem is religion allows otherwise good people to blow up other people.

Without religion, we have the possibility of compromise. With religion, nobody can dare to back off, for fear of insulting their god.

Their religion gives them the arrogance, racism, bigotry and the idiocy that makes being bad so good (in their eyes).

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:29:00 UTC | #96650

al-rawandi's Avatar Comment 19 by al-rawandi

That sounds a lot more reasonable to me.

The issue that surrounds the suicide bombing, is that if it is attributed (by the non-religious) to religion, and it isn't a religious pehnomenon, then they can say "intolerant atheists want to crush our beliefs and way of life." They wouldn't be wrong in that assertion if we made illogical attributions to religion.

The Arabs are a tribal society, with tribal ethos. Compromise is something achieved through parity of force. Get rid of religion, and you may only get rid of some of the problems.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:34:00 UTC | #96651

Steve Zara's Avatar Comment 20 by Steve Zara

Get rid of religion, and you may only get rid of some of the problems.


Well, that sounds a useful first step to me.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:37:00 UTC | #96654

al-rawandi's Avatar Comment 21 by al-rawandi

Ok how do you plan to get rid of it? I understand a lot of atheists (occassionally myself included) have a lot emotion wound around the anti-religion thing, but what's the plan? Kill all the al-Qaeda types? That hasn't really gone so well. Topple governments that are religious?

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 08:44:00 UTC | #96659

mdowe's Avatar Comment 23 by mdowe

Re: 21. Comment #101334 by al-rawandi


... a lot of atheists (occassionally myself included) have a lot emotion wound around the anti-religion thing ...


Left to my own devices I never give religious considerations a second thought ... until it is forced on me from the outside.


Ok how do you plan to get rid of it?


Sadly there is such thing as a problem with no particularly good solution, and I'm afraid these dangerous religiously-motivated groups form the basis of one of them. I think the only realistic approach is to try and contain the problem as much as possible in order to minimise the suffering and carnage. You isolate the states that support the fundamentalism/terrorism, support those that try to fight it and educate their populations, try to foil the schemes of the terrorists, and capture or kill them and their leaders whenever you get the chance. You are bound to have good days and bad days. If this sounds a lot like what most countries are doing, well, the options are kind of limited. What else are you going to do? -- start vapourising the countries from which the fundamentalists/terrorists are springing along with their populations? Invade every such country and try to impose change from outside? Unthinkable and fantasy respectively.

On another note, It is my opinion that we should be (or more to the point, should have been ...) a lot more careful about the ideals of the people we allow to settle in our countries. As I see it, particularly dangerous religions like Wahabist Islam, should be treated as criminal.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:15:00 UTC | #96680

Cook@Tahiti's Avatar Comment 22 by Cook@Tahiti

21. Comment #101334 by al-rawandi

>Ok how do you plan to get rid of it?

By looking at how other secular countries voluntarily cast off their religious shackles. Sweden didn't have a top-down atheist revolution. The evidence is that most people will automatically shed their religion if given an adequate standard of living, economic security, and scientifically literate education.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:15:00 UTC | #96679

Diacanu's Avatar Comment 24 by Diacanu

al-rawandi-

Ok how do you plan to get rid of it?


Spermination.

Nail their daughters, and breed it out.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:18:00 UTC | #96683

al-rawandi's Avatar Comment 25 by al-rawandi

Diacanu

Spermination. I am working 24/7 to realize that solution. Unfortunately they don't drink. That was an unforeseen snag in my plan.

I must rely on whit and charm.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:21:00 UTC | #96687

irate_atheist's Avatar Comment 26 by irate_atheist

25. Comment #101363 by al-rawandi -

Spermination. I am working 24/7 to realize that solution. Unfortunately they don't drink.
I don't think Diacanu's suggesting they drink it. Oh, I see what you mean.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:25:00 UTC | #96691

konquererz's Avatar Comment 27 by konquererz

Diacanu, let me know if you need help with that.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:26:00 UTC | #96693

NormanDoering's Avatar Comment 28 by NormanDoering

al-rawandi wrote:

Suicide bombing... Tamil Tigers. Marxist Atheists.

You're either a liar yourself or you have been lied to.

The Tamil Tigers are indeed a terrorist group, and not a religious one, and they are indeed "Marxist." However, their founder and supreme leader, Vellupillai Prabhakaran, is a Methodist Christian. Their official spokesman, ANTON Balasingham, is also Christian. Most of the top guys in the Tigers are Christian and Hindu, not atheist.

You've replaced the word "secular" with "atheist." These are not the same things. Secularism is what our founding fathers wrote into the U.S. constitution, the wall of separation of church and state. Secular is the opposite of sectarian. When the Tamil Tigers say they are secular, they don't mean they're atheists, they mean that their government shouldn't endorse one religion over another. They mean only that religion and ecclesiastical affairs should not enter into the function of the state especially into public education. Religion is your own private business, it's not the business of the state. The reason Hindus would go for that is because they know they are a minority.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:26:00 UTC | #96694

al-rawandi's Avatar Comment 29 by al-rawandi

Rtambree

"The evidence is that most people will automatically shed their religion if given an adequate standard of living, economic security, and scientifically literate education."

Well I spent some time in the Arabian Peninsula. Believe me they live well, they are educated in western universities. Many have PhD's. Some in the sciences. And yet they are still religious.

Bin Laden himself is the supreme example. Wealthy, educated, secure, moderately religious. Now a fanatic talking about zionists and crusaders.

Every protest in the Arab world is led by a sign reading "Harb al-Salabiyya al-Mu'assara" (The contemporary crusades). They feel that it is Christian fanatacism causing the trouble.

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:29:00 UTC | #96698

al-rawandi's Avatar Comment 30 by al-rawandi

NormanDoering:

Comes out swinging....

The people carrying out the suicide bombings are non-religious (to a greater degree than the general population of the regioin). Some may be Hindu (at a nominal level). But I get the feeling from the research that it is a non-religious insurrection.

So will you then be saying that Secularism is a cause of suicide bombing (I will concede that atheism isn't the overwhelming identity, but some of the bombers were atheists)? I think it proves my point that there isn't a uniting monolithic religious identity motivating the movement.

Since the 'top guys' are Christian... that must be the cause?

Thu, 20 Dec 2007 09:35:00 UTC | #96702