Quote from hapaboy:
Uh, you have read a newspaper in the last year or so, haven't you? You do know that Iran is going ahead with Uranium enrichment, don't you? Or is this all a Zionist conspiracy?
Isn't uranium enrichment necessary for producing nuclear energy? So is that evidence of a nuclear power program or a nucelar weapons program?
Why shouldn't Iran be permitted nuclear power? Yes, they have oil, but why not power themselves with nuclear and sell the oil? Why should all of this be denied them? Because they're Muslim? Because they have a low opinion of Israel?
Oh yes, so reasonable that they have stated that they wish to wipe Israel off the map, that the Holocaust never happened, and that the US is the Great Satan. Yes, Spec., the Iranian mullahs are the epitome of reason in this crazy world.
Hap why rule out a priori that someone who has a low opinion of Israel
could not possibly be a reasonable person?
If you are referring to Ahmadinejad's reference to "wiping Israel off the map", wouldn't you want to
make sure that's actually what the man said? (Ignore the lefty slant of the site, and just focus on the analysis.)
Regarding the holocaust, no where else have I ever encountered a more stubborn refusal to think critically. Just mention the possibility that six million jews might not have been gassed, and that's it, persona non grata. Just like that. Afterall, everyone
knows the gassings happened. Some people are a bit doubtful about the existence of God, but
absolutely certain about the gassings. It's the one historical event about which one is not permitted to harbor the slightest bit of scepticism. Is
this reasonable, hap? Is it reasonable to elevate the gassings to an article of religious-like faith, over which
no dissent is permissible?
Personally, having examined the evidence put forth, I think the case for gassings is woefully inadequate and the evidence for contradictory. Of course, that doesn't prove they didn't occur, but then I don't profess with religious conviction that they didn't; only that there is very good reason to doubt it. I think anyone who similarly scrutinizes the case would at very least come away with the impresssion that those who cast doubt are not unreasonable people. So if Ahmadinejad considers it worthwhile to hold conferences discussing the reliability of the gas-chambers narrative, and we demonize him for it, who exactly is being unreasonable?
As for the "Great Satan", fair enough, many Iranians don't like the US.
Why? Our freedoms? Sure. But that alone? If you don't talk to Iranians, or listen to people who do, how will you know? The Weekly Standard isn't going to be too keen to tell you.
I suppose bin Laden's manifestos and all this talk about a caliphate, that the West must convert or die, is just neocon/Zionist propaganda.
The last time I checked bin Laden wasn't the president of Iran. Nor a Shiite. And despite my distate for even moderate forms of Islam -- yes, I'm the quintessential bigot on Islam -- it's simply true that even extremely religious Muslims, the type who do stone women, are in disagreement with bin Laden about his methods. You might not believe this, but again, put down the Weekly Standard and
talk to some salafist Muslims. I've spoken with plenty of Koranic literalists, who would stone women, kill apostates and establish a caliphate. But they take a principled stand against bin laden and his ilk. Naturally, I couldn't possibly disagree more with their views and I regard their presence in western countries as fateful, but their not being liberals or filled with the spirit of enlightenment values does not make them unreasonable people. Try it and see for yourself.
This has really been an eye-opener for me. What others have seen on different threads, you have shown me in this one.
You really are quite the mad hatter (and hater).
No, I am simply willing to follow where the path of reason leads me.
