Much of the New Testement, as well as parts of the Old, like the book of Macabbees, are basically the story of a nation of people who held rather conservative and fundamentalist religious beliefs, who were occupied by a foreign power, which not only had another set of religious beliefs, but brought their own culture and traditions with them, and these basically were antithetical to the beliefs and traditions of the natives. The occupying power of course, brought all sorts of higher civilization, technology, arts, built roads and made them safe for commerce, however to the locals all this offended their religious sensibilities. Some wenrt to the point of committing acts of terrorism and murder against not only the occupying power, but any local who collaborated with them. The very trial of Jesus and the preference for Barabbas, who according to the occupying powers was a murdered and a terrorist, gives one a rather good idea of the sort of policies that the majority of the local prefered. Of course, in time the locals rebelled against the foreign occupying force, in the year 70 C.E., and their center of worship was destroyed. And again, in 132 C.E. another rebellion and the natives were scattered to all corners of the earth, not to return to their own lands for two thousand years.

Basically, the Macabbees objected to the pagan or secular Hellenism of the occupying Seleucid Greeks, and the a good many, but not all, Jews of first century Judea wanted the Romans out. There were a lot of Jews living in that period who were not conservative, saw little harm in enjoying the benefits that the Romans brought. Some like Philo of Alexandria attempted to reconcile the Hellenistic neo Platonism philosophy with the monotheism of Moses These were often as targeted for assasination by the more conservative and zelous believers.

Those who opposed the Roman occupation, violently, were considered terrorists. Many, in fact, would fit any proper definition of terrorist and terrorism.

Every occupying force claims that its occupation is for the good of the locals, and more often than not, a good percentage of those who are living in the occupied countries simply do not see it as so. The Greeks and Romans claimed they were bringing civilization and law, and yes, even their own idea of “democracy” to more primative cultures. So does the United States.

By 1958, it had become obvious that the PKI had become the largest mass movement in the history of Indonesia, and a small group of American intellectuals from various think tanks like the RAND group started pressuring their right wing contacts in the Indonesian upper military echelons to seize power and to liquidate the PKI. Most prominent of these was Guy Pauwker, a RAND corporation consultant and friend of General Suharto. After a failed attempt at suppressing the PKI in 1959, the U.S. Government authorized a 20 million dollar a year program and a U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff memo made the overthrow of the Sukarno government and destruction of the PKI an American top priority.

Of course once Indonesia became controlled by the Muslim right, it was a much safer place for Americans to live in. But Obama was a witness to the history of how Indonesia went from being a secular nation to one with an Islamic government.

The CIA waited 5 months before changing its opinion, largely in an effort to cover up the false information and articles it had placed in the news in many European countries before the American media looked more closely at its role in giving false information to pro Bush journalists all over Europe. And they did and do exist.

In India there are two separate Christian terrorist groups in two different areas of the country that use western donations to fund their terrorism. This is not missionary work, this is attacks with weapons purchased with missionary dollars, bombs made with missionary money, etc. Obama, having lived in Indonesia when there was no such thing as an Islamic Terrorist, but there were many Christian Terrorists in those nations, is rather well prepared to enter into discussions with the Muslim world, as opposed to Bush, who basically asserted that the Islamic world had no real beef with the western world, ignoring the fifty year period in which, after World War II, many Islamic nations were forced to accept evangelical missionaries onto their territory who largely converted not Muslims, but the Catholic local community, who had lived peacefully with the Muslim community for the previous 400 years. The evangelicals brought a more dogmatic and less tolerant set of belief to the region, and the idea of conversion by force, or killing those who would not convert increased by leaps and bounds between 1950 and the 1980’s when the first Islamic terrorist groups started appearing. Lets face it, even the Palestinians waited close to 20 years after being booted out of their homes before creating a “terrorist” organization.

Terrorism, as we know it today, is largely an invention of the western world. Pretty much all of it started in Europe in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, and is rather unnatural to Muslims, whose religion is rather fatalistic. If things are the way they are, its because Allah wants it that way, and getting up and doing something about it is something that Muslims only do when conditions have become pretty bad for the majority of them.

Most changes in the Islamic world were brought to them by people who were educated in the West. Attaturk a secular athiest was educated in the West and was basically trained by western military forces. The founder of the Baath Socialist Party was another western educated Syrian Orthodox Christian, Michel Aflaq. Educated in French Christian schools he brought back western political and nationalist ideas and attempted to fuse them with Pan Arab nationalistic aspirations.Though Aflaq was born a Christian did not see the world in terms of a clash of cultures between Islam and Christianity, because Christianity was not NATIVE to Europe. It was imported to Europe from the Middle East and so Europeans could never actually be Christians in a spiritual way, but would distort it by using it to support both political and economic systems. He saw Islam as a better medium for Arab aspirations than Christian ones. But still it took a westernized Christian Arab to decide to create a system to superimpose over the western colonial rule after the fall of the Ottoman Empire.

Of course there were economic benefits in the colonized Islamic nations for those who converted. Those who were or converted to Catholicism in French controlled areas got jobs and benefits, the same occured for those who converted to various Protestant sects in areas controlled by England or the Netherlands. After the fall of colonialism the Christians still were extremely well funded by both the ex colonial powers and their religious missions. One of the most powerful terrorist forces in Vietnam was a quasi Christian group called the Caodaists, which combined Christian and local Vietnamese beliefs, and was established in 1926. Interestingly enough Cao Dai has an organizational structure that copies the United States government with executive, legislative and judiacial branches within the church.

Americans are rather dreadfully ignorant of how much “damage” has been caused in other countries under the guise of “spreading democracy” whether the people of the country wanted it spread to them or not.

George Bush rather cleverly stated that they “hated us for what we are” but never actually defined the term “what we are”. But he showed it by his attempts of what Republicans now define as “Coercive Democracy” The idea that its okay to FORCE Democracy on other nations whether they want it or not is nothing new. Its just “rebranding” of the same old Kiplingesque “White Man’s Burden” and it is really only applied to places that have some resource that we either want or need.

The truth is, that if we never stuck our noses into the Middle East or the ex colonies of other nations, nothing like the Vietnam War or 9/11 would ever have occured at all. Our problems with Iran, with Cuba, in Vietnam, and with the Islamic terrorism all have their roots in policies that were started in a two year period, between 1952 and 1954.
Either we overthrew a bunch of democratically elected governments, simply because they decided that they didnt want American businesses running their economies, OR we supported dictatorships that arose in the wake of the colonial powers leaving, as long as they promised to give us free reign of their economies.

Aflaq, in 1943, predicted that because the western desire to control the Middle East in order to access its resources, the Muslims of the region would find it necessary to rise up against the western world in order to preserve its own cultural history and legacy.

He said:

“A day will come when the nationalists will find themselves the only defenders of Islam. They will have to give a special meaning to it if they want the Arab nation to have a good reason for survival.”

The one thing the religious right and supporters of the Iraq War cannot answer simply why we were over in their area of the world, and they were not over here trying to control our governments, get our natural resources, and bring THEIR way of life over here. The people of these countries didnt ask to come over there. Thugs we cut deals with did.
Even the majority of Islamic terrorists today largely are led by people who were educated in the west, more familiar with the west, and had some form of western education. All of the 9/11 terrorists were highly westernized men. They more closely resembled westerners than the average Muslim living in the western world.

Where did modern terrorism start. In the areas of Europe that were controlled by the Muslim Ottoman Empire. The first modern terrorist group was the Internal Macedonian Revolutionary Orgization. A fanatically Nationalistic/Christian organization dedicated to freeing Christian dominated areas from Muslim rule. It started in the same city that Ataturk, the man who finally overthrew the Ottoman caliphate and replaced it with a modern, secular state in Turkey was given his western education, Adrianople, which was part of Greece at the time.

The IMRO was every bit as violent and brutal as Al Qaeda is today. And every terrorist organization since has basically copied this organizations ideas and tactics.

Modern terrorism, is largely a western phenomenon, something imported into the Muslim world as most attempts to change the Muslim world have been. Had the Muslims been left to their own devices, terrorism is the last thing that would have come to mind.

This is the process by which someone else can access Niger yellowcake:

Given the structure of the consortiums that operated the mines, it would be exceedingly difficult for Niger to transfer uranium to Iraq. Niger’s uranium business consists of two mines, Somair and Cominak, which are run by French, Spanish, Japanese, German and Nigerian interests. If the government wanted to remove uranium from a mine, it would have to notify the consortium, which in turn is strictly monitored by the International Atomic Energy Agency. Moreover, because the two mines are closely regulated, quasi-governmental entities, selling uranium would require the approval of the minister of mines, the prime minister and probably the president. In short, there’s simply too much oversight over too small an industry for a sale to have transpired…

The large quantity of uranium involved should have been another warning sign. Niger’s “yellow cake” comes from two uranium mines controlled by a French company, with its entire output presold to nuclear power companies in France, Japan, and Spain. “Five hundred tons can’t be siphoned off without anyone noticing,” another I.A.E.A. official told me…

As usual the French and Germans diplomatic and friends to the United States that they are, did not publically attempt to embarass the President of the United States by going public with the facts. They attempted to do so privately, upon which Bush started his public tirade against “old Europe” in anticipation that these two nations might publically refute the assertions before Bush was able to con Americans into accepting an attack on Iraq.

The government and the business infrastructure of Niger itself is too primative to even stablize Uranium ore and turn it into yellowcake, which is just that Uranium ore that is stablized and cannot deteriorate when it comes into contact with air. It was impossible for the government of Niger to provide it, as they didnt own the mines, nor did they have the industrial capacity to convert the ore into “yellowcake”

Examples of what can be interpreted as hate speech in the Bible:

The Mosaic Code consists of 613 injunctions, which are found in the book of Leviticus and other books in the Hebrew Scriptures. Some of the Code might be considered hate literature, because it targets people on the basis of their religion, gender, and sexual orientation.

The book of Joshua contains numerous examples of genocides ordered by God against the inhabitants of Canaan. These were based on the Canaanites having followed a different religion from the Hebrews. A casual reader of the Bible might conclude that God is teaching that people who do not worship him are sub-human and have no right to exist. Five examples from other books in the King James Version (KJV) of the Hebrew Scriptures include:

Exodus 22:18: “Thou shalt not suffer a witch to live.” This calls for the execution of all “witches.” English Bibles differ in their translation of the Hebrew word “m’khashepah” in this verse. Some render it as “witch;” others as “sorceress” or “any woman who does evil magic,” etc. The vast majority of persons who call themselves Witches in North America are followers of Wicca or other Neopagan religion. Promoting the execution of Witches, or the followers of any other religion, is advocating religious genocide — one of the most serious forms of hate literature. More details.

Exodus 22:20: “He that sacrificeth unto any god, save unto the LORD only, he shall be utterly destroyed.” The “Lord” in this case refers to Yahweh. Literally interpreted, this verse would only apply to those North Americans who follow religions like Santeria — who often sacrifice chickens to their Gods and Goddesses — or to Wiccans — who have been known to sacrifice an apple or other fruit in a religious ritual. Interpreted more generally, the verse calls for the genocide of followers of all religions other than Judaism and Christianity.

Leviticus 20:13: “If a man lies with a man as one lies with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. they must be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” This calls for the execution of men who engage in at least some form of same-sex behavior.

Theologians differ greatly over specifically which acts are included in this passage. Some English translations of the Bible imply that any sexually active gay or lesbian should be executed. Some liberal theologians interpret the verse as applying only to two men engaging in ritual sex in a Pagan temple. Since the Lawrence v. Texas ruling of the U.S. Supreme Court in 2003, consensual sexual activity between two male or two female adults is no longer considered a criminal act anywhere in the U.S. Any literature which advocates the execution of two persons for performing a legal act would seem to promote the restriction of a person’s human rights – the right to live. This would appear to qualify as hate literature.

Deuteronomy 13:1-5 “If there arise among you a prophet, … saying, Let us go after other gods, which thou hast not known, and let us serve them…And that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death…So shalt thou put the evil away from the midst of thee….” This verse is another call for genocide against religious minorities. If applied in North America, it would result in the execution of every non Judeo-Christian clergyperson, and all laity who are engaged in proselytizing.

Psalms 79:6: “Pour out thy wrath upon the heathen that have not known thee, and upon the kingdoms that have not called upon thy name.” This is a call to God to commit genocide against persons of other faiths who are either unfamiliar with Judaism and Christianity, or who have learned and rejected these religions.

Examples of hate literature in the Christian Scriptures (New Testament):
Matthew 27:24-25: “When Pilate saw that he could prevail nothing, but that rather a tumult was made, he took water, and washed his hands before the multitude, saying, I am innocent of the blood of this just person: see ye to it. Then answered all the people, and said, His blood be on us, and on our children.” This passage, probably more than any other text in the Christian Scriptures fueled anti-Judaism, and later anti-semitism. Matthew records that a crowd of Jews said a most improbable statement: that they and their children were responsible for Jesus’ death. This inspired the church father Origen (circa 185-254 CE) to write: “Therefore the blood of Jesus came not only upon those who lived formerly but also upon all subsequent generations of Jews…” The Christian church taught until recently that all Jews — past, present and future — are equally responsible for the death of Christ. 2

John 8:44: “Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do. He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it.” In this passage, Jesus is speaking to Jews who, like the majority of the residents of Palestine, rejected his teachings. He says that they are sons of Satan.

1 Corinthians 10:20-21 “But I say, that the things which the Gentiles sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God: and I would not that ye should have fellowship with devils. Ye cannot drink the cup of the Lord, and the cup of devils: ye cannot be partakers of the Lord’s table, and of the table of devils.” Here, Paul writes that the Gods and Goddesses of other religions are actually demons. In modern terms, they are Satanists. He taught that Christians are to isolate themselves from non-Christians.

2 Corinthians 6:14 “Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what communion hath light with darkness?” Paul is recommending that Christians have minimal contact with non-Christians. He compares Christians to light and non-Christians to darkness. This may promote hatred of non-Christians.

1 Thessalonians 2:14-15: “…ye also have suffered like things of your own countrymen, even as they have of the Jews: Who both killed the Lord Jesus, and their own prophets, and have persecuted us; and they please not God, and are contrary to all men.” This passage has been used to promote anti-Judaism and anti-semitism up to the present time. In reality, Jesus’ death sentence was ordered by Pilate, a Roman official, and was carried out by soldiers in the Roman Army. Only they had the authority to crucify slaves and non-slaves who were considered to be insurrectionists and terrorists by the occupying Roman authorities.

Revelation 2:9: “I know thy works, and tribulation, and poverty, (but thou art rich) and I know the blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the synagogue of Satan.” Here, Jesus “claims the name of Jews for himself and his church,” and is condemning other Jews as followers of Satan. 3

http://www.religioustolerance.org/bibl_hate2.htm

Most of the Quran, to anyone who has actually read it, is simply a retelling of the Old and New Testement as Muhammed heard it preached in his own area of the world at the time that he lived. Most of his interpretations of both Judaism and Christianity came from Christians and Jews who he knew at the time, and who became his advisors on issues of both Christian and Jewish Scriptures. Jesus and his mother Mary are mentioned in the Quran, more than Muhammed, as are the prophets Adam,Abraham, Noah, John the Baptist, Moses, Isaiah,Solomon,Joseph, David, Jeremiah and Exekiel. These make up about 90 percent of the Quran. Almost all of the Quran stories are basically the same as those in the Bible.

The Quran contains:

1 Torah narratives

1.1 Adam and Eve (آدم Adam and حواء Hawwaa)
1.2 Cain and Abel (Qābīl and Hābīl)
1.3 Noah (نوح Nūḥ)
1.4 Abraham (Ibrāhīm ابراهيم) promised a son
1.5 Lot and Sodom and Gomorrah
1.6 Joseph (Yusuf يوسف)
1.7 Moses (Mūsā موسى)
1.8 Destruction of Korah (Qarun)

2 Later Hebrew Bible narratives
2.1 Gideon
2.2 Saul, David and Goliath (Tālūt طالوت, Dāwūd داود and جالوت Jalut)
2.3 The Queen of Sheba
2.4 Jonah (Yunus يونس) and the “whale”
2.5 Haman

3 New Testament narratives
3.1 Zechariah and John (Zakariya (زكريا) and Yahya (يحيى))
3.2 Mary (”Maryam” مريم),
3.3 Jesus (Isa عيسى)

There are only two distinctions between the Quran stories and the Bible. In the Quran it is Ismael who is the son chosen by God to create a great nation, and Jesus is the greatest prophet, but not divine.

Everything else is pretty much your basic Bible, as it was practiced by those who lived in biblical times. No modern liberalizations or tolerances etc.

But all a Republican has to do is assert that “free market capitalism has been the greatest engine of economic growth in history” and assert it as an axiom of faith, and at least 50 percent of the public will not stand aside from this axiom, and examine it to see if that is true.

Is a completely unregulated economic system, established by humans who are subject to amazingly wide ranges of behavior, creating anything from Mother Teresa, to Adolph Hitler, going to operate in ways that totally remove the effects these humans have on that system.?

A conservative will immediately say yes, but out of faith, not out of observation. Or he will attempt to do “postdiction” that is to make predictions and assertions after the fact, rather than before hand.

I love i when I read conservative Christians who assert:

Would you rather have your Allah, who tells you; to

kill me in order for you to go to heaven, or my Jesus who tells me to love you

because I am going to heaven and He wants you to be there

with me?’

When Christianity not Islam, has a far greater record of using violence and asserting that violence is APPROVED of in the bible and backing it up with biblical verse.

This is pure hypocrisy. In order to compare both Islam and Christianity the only APPROPRIATE method of doing so is to use the same set of rules and apply them to each page of each book.

The bible (old testement” asserts that God wants his followers to commit genocide against all who do not accept the biblical god. It is filled with acts of violence, and even Christ applies similar assertions to those who do not beleive. The Bible, both New and Old Testements are filled with various amounts of hate speech and exortions to reject, kill and commit complete genocide against the unbeleiver. In many more places than the Quran does.

However, bible beleiving Christians choose a looser and more gentle method of interpreting their own scriptures, while setting a totally different set of rules when examining other scriptures.

However, in the third world there are just as many, if not more CHRISTIAN terrorists than there are Islamic terrorists, and most Islamic terrorist organizations began in order to protect themselves or retaliate against Christian terrorists. Obama is well aware of this, growing up in Indonesia. In the eastern sections of Indonesia, the population is 50/50 Christian/Muslim and for decades Christians organized into terrorist militias that killed their relatively peaceful Muslim neighbors. After about 40 years of this, young Muslims started forming self defense groups and then started committing acts of terrorism in retaliation for Christian acts.