[POLITICOS] Armageddon Time..

johnhall johnhall@isomedia.com
Tue, 11 Mar 2003 19:08:23 -0800

To reiterate Russell's point, note that the reason God abandoned King
Saul was that he _did_not_ kill every man woman and child and destroy
all their stuff.  He decided to keep some of the stuff.

[Question: is genocide terrorism?]

The more appropriate retort is that this was a period some 1,800 years
or so before Mohammed and involve things that have been universally
condemned by western religious traditions for 300 years or so, something
Islam hasn't done.  Furthermore, it is not something supported by the
schism that resulted in Christianity 2,000 ago (622 and change before
Mohammed).  [Note of course that you could have noticed in the first
1,700 years of practice, I admit.]

Yet again Russell is quite right that you can't use the founding
documents of Jewish and Islamic belief to make a distinction on the
rules of war.

You can use them to make a distinction on the rules of peace.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: fork-admin@xent.com [mailto:fork-admin@xent.com] On Behalf Of
> Russell Turpin
> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2003 5:17 AM
> To: fork@xent.com
> Subject: Re: [POLITICOS] Armageddon Time..
> Ian Andrew Bell:
> >Jerry Falwell, on 60 Minutes, tonight, will call Mohamed, the prophet
> >Islam, a Terrorist.
> The irony is that the Old Testament contains quite
> a bit more outright terrorism than the Quran. The
> earliest description of genocide is in the
> Pentateuch, committed by Moses, as commanded by
> the ancient Israelite god, who explicitly called
> for the slaughter of innocents. Many Christians
> will point out an important difference: Moses is
> a myth, while Mohammed and his conquests are real.
> But that out is not available to Falwell and other
> fundamentalists, who take the Bible literally.
> _________________________________________________________________
> Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online
> http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963