Posted on 06/26/2004 2:55:42 AM PDT by TigerLikesRooster
Police in the entire country is ordered to be on watch over 'Pig Blood Terrorism' against mosques.
According to natinal police today(June 26th), somebody posted a writing urging, "Let's spray pig blood on mosques!", on a bulletin board of an anti-Iraq group which was just set up at a well-known Internet portal site.
The writing contains a highly inflammatory expression, "Muslim believes that mere sight of pig blood would send them to Hell. Let's spray it on mosques." Many replies to the post supported the idea, which alarmed police.
Koran, Islam's holybook, teaches that Pigs are taboo. It is highly offensive to eat pork or even show it in front of Muslims.
Should such an attack materializes, police fears that anti-Korean feeling could quickly develop among Muslim countries. National police ordered all police force, "Be Vigilant against any attempt to release pigs or throwing blood at mosques."
Nationally, there are 40 mosques and 35 missions of Muslim countries and police deployed 220 men to guard those facilities.
A police official worried, "Spraying pig blood could create far more serious troubles than threatening phone calls or breaking into mosque for violence. We are tightening up the security around mosques, checking everybody."
Since the murder of Kim Sun-il, mosques at Itaewon, Yongsan(, Seoul), and the ones in Pusan experienced 3 break-in violences while mosques in the entire country received hundreds of threatening phone calls.
Store will be banned from selling ham, pork chops, bacon, and all you sports fans......No pigskin footballs!
Ham, pork chops, bacon I can do without. But take away football, they will have a real fight on their hands.
What nuked city? I want to see a nice waterway from Bahrain to Egypt.
Didn't the ROK (Republic of Korea) soldiers have a reputation for ruthlessness in Vietnam during the early years?
Okay I'll go with that too. Do the Indians today harvest milk from the cows? If not, wouldn't that weaken your argument?
BTW, I don't even want to talk about the Jains and their eating customs, lol.
Where did you pull this stuff from?
I think using this on enemies in Iraq is called for.
One theory I have read about the reasons Judaism had the hoof-rule for pigs is that it wasn't so much for health reasons (this assumes they surely knew how to use/cook pork meat by this time) but that a nearly tribe/culture to the hebrews held pigs either sacred or very unclean, and there was some motive in not alienating the next door culture in the pig law.
So were the Flower Wars just an exuse to enrich their diet with protein? really creepy. I always thought the sacrificied bodies went to feed the zoo, not people. Your history knowledge is fascinating and your links teach a lot of us and were not ignoramuses either. Thanks for the knowledge........Phil
That's easy . They're the ones who are so passionate about their peaceful religion that they put all of their energy into denouncing the crazy radicals who have hijacked their religion. They're the ones who have organized the mass protests against the terrorists in NYC and Washington DC.
They're the ones who have risked life and limb to get the message out that they are not terrorists. You can always tell the non-terrorist Imams apart from the terrorist-supporting ones because the peaceful ones have issued thousands of fatwas against the murderers, like the ones the Iranian Mullahs issued against Salman Rushdie. /sarcasm
In other words, there aren't many! In fact, I think I've read about both of them!
Harris: My interest in this puzzle goes back a long way to about 1964. When I started out, the hypotheses that I offered were considered to be extremely radical. But with the passage of time, my position has become generally accepted, in India at least, as being the best way to understand the prohibition on the slaughter of cattle and consumption of beef in India.
Briefly, the argument is that it is inadequate to say that the reason why Hindus don’t consume beef is that their religion prohibits it. This is no explanation, because you have to ask, as well, why Hinduism has this kind of reverence for cattle but Islam, Judaism, and Christianity do not. The answer has to be sought in the material conditions of the production and utilization of cattle in India compared with the production and utilization of cattle in other parts of the world.
In the pre-Hindu period in India, during Vedic times, cattle were slaughtered and consumed; beef was in fact one of the most important foods offered to the gods and consumed by the participants in pre-Hindu rituals. With the passage of time the Brahmans, who were in ancient times the caste responsible for the slaughter of cattle, became the caste responsible for the protection of cattle against slaughter. Cattle occupied an essential position in Indian agriculture as power animals, and a choice had to be made between raising cattle for plowing purposes and raising them for meat production; the Indian ecosystem and production system couldn’t support both functions. With further intensification of plough agriculture and the ever-increasing density of the Indian population, the sacredness of the cow became an important barrier against development of a meat slaughter industry which would threaten the availability of plough animals to poor peasant farmers. The result is that far from being useless, as many people assume, cattle are India’s tractors. As a byproduct, the cows also produce milk; but their most important function is to produce the tractor, that is, the male plow animal. Another benefit that comes from this prohibition on the slaughter of cattle is that it puts a barrier between the farmer and his cattle when there are droughts or other agricultural crises. It is essential that farmers hold on to their plough animals and not give them up for slaughter.
Aurora: How is this principle reflected in the proscription on eating pork?
Harris: The usual reason given for the prohibition on the consumption of pork is that the pig is regarded as a dirty animal; it is impure and unclean, and therefore not to be eaten. That’s the same kind of circular explanation that can be evoked to explain the Hindu prohibition on the slaughter of cattle. It’s the religion that does it. It’s the religion that says pork is unclean. But then why does Judaism state that, and why do Islam and Hinduism follow suit, whereas Christianity deviates and accepts the consumption of pork? If we look once again to the material conditions of production in specific habitats, the first thing that emerges with respect to the pig in the Middle East is that it is the last kind of domesticated animal that you would want to rear in that habitat. Although pigs were originally domesticated in the Middle East, and they were raised and consumed for five to six thousand years before the writing of the prohibitions, they nonetheless were adapted to ecological situations which were rather rare in the Middle East and which became rarer as time went on. The pig is a creature of woodland and glens and riverbanks; it does best when it forages on the forest floor, rooting up everything that has fallen off trees—acorns, different mushrooms, things of that sort. It does not do well in arid habitats. The reason is that the pig doesn’t sweat, despite the common saying that someone is “sweating like a pig”. In fact, pigs don’t have any sweat glands and consequently they have to be wetted down. In order to control their body temperature they have to have external sources of moisture. That’s why they wallow in mud. Pigs prefer to wallow in clean mud, but if nothing else is available, they will frequently wallow in their own urine, giving rise to the notion that they are dirty animals.
Now, the Middle East, especially the desert area, is the last place to raise pigs. There are many other domestic, longhaired animals like cattle, sheep, and goats that are much better suited to arid, sunny, desert conditions. In addition, the pig has another manifest disadvantage: unlike sheep, goats, and cattle, it is not a ruminant. That is, the pig has a digestive system that does not permit it to consume and gain weight on grass. Pigs eat grass if they are very hungry, but they can’t use it as a regular source of food. Ruminants that can live and thrive on grass, whose whole digestive physiology is centred on their ability to consume plants that are high in cellulose, are much preferable to the pig in arid habitats.
If you turn to Europe, to the areas that were the heartland of Christianity at the turn of the Christian era, you are confronted with a totally different ecological situation. Here you do have forests, where pigs could be raised by letting them root about in the forests for a good part of the year. Therefore, you have a different attitude toward them compared with what continues to exist in the Middle East.
Aurora: But the question comes to mind, why bother looking for a religious precept that proscribes pork, then, if pig-raising is so entirely unsuited to the climate and the plant life of the area?
Harris: That’s a very important question. I think the answer is that since it was possible, to a small extent, to raise pigs as a luxury food, it is important to have a taboo or prohibition that says, under no circumstances are you to experiment with this animal, because over the passage of centuries it is the collective wisdom that to do so is to waste resources. The temptation will always exist for some people to try, but God says, “Thou shalt not raise pigs.” This is a sacred rule which fits into a general class of prohibition termed “total prohibitions”. Such prohibitions are digital; that is, they are on-off things. For example, the commandment “Thou shalt not kill” does not say it’s O.K. to kill some people and not others. Such a total taboo is necessary in a situation where the short-term benefits for, let’s say, raising pigs, might be quite good, but the long-term benefits would be quite disastrous for the larger community. The taboo is “on track” in terms of ecological wisdom. It reflects long-standing, accumulated knowledge about the consequences of raising nonruminants in that habitat.
now THERE is an inspired idea - have paint balls manufactured with lard and on impact - POW - pigstuff all over the target.
I bet we can nail some of those hollering morons in the minarets who do the "call to prayers" things.
PLUS they hurt like crap when they score a direct hit to the crotch.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.