Posted on 01/01/2007 12:13:37 AM PST by dennisw
"Nazism is a compassionate political philosophy which is being unfairly marginalised by a few extrememists."
L
Buddhism has always struck me as the root of all New Age/PC feeling. It's the ultimate religion for those with the victim mentality.
"I hold the Dalai Lama in the highest esteem"
I don't, 10 or 15 years ago the Lama and all the other religions had one of those international gatherings where they discussed how perfect life is and can be etc., the only negative note by the Lama, was a gentle mention of the "extremist Christians".
Here is an interesting article about Ghandi from Commentary magazine.
http://history.eserver.org/ghandi-nobody-knows.txt
Islam is a political philosophy too. And the koran is very clear about the concept of "Islamic territories".
It's a lot like the Soviet Politburo viewed Europe. "What's ours is ours. What's yours is negotiable."
L
I think so. Karma and reincarnation are ideas which are more
conducive to passivity. If you have to worry about eternal hellfire your outlook is different.
And the Dalai Lama knows well enough not to bite the hand that feeds him.
The traditional Tibetan view of Islam is set out in the Myth of Shambhala and Gesar of Ling. The Kulika King , the last Chakrivartin of Shambhala will ride forth and defeat Islam's attempt to put its yoke on the world. A pity the Dalai Lama will not ride with him.
A summary of Shambhala mytholgy can be perused at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shambhala
The Dali Lama is nothing but a giggling goofball. Obviously he still can't read, and has no knowlage of history whatsoever for him to make such a PC comment on Islam.
I saw that discussion he had with a Muslim and Christian. The guy is a hopeless idiot. all three were nothing but apologists for Islam.
Sun Tzu wrote in The Art of War that to know both oneself and one's enemy is to be unbeatable in battle. To defeat the jihadists, one must understand their conception of themselves and also their conception of us. In their minds, Muslim warriors are chivalrous heroes, while those who oppose them are devious miscreants. In the West, we are heavily focused on evidence and reason, whereas a mythological type of thinking still dominates in the Islamic world. It is plain to us, when we read the Qur'an and the Hadiths and other early textual sources of Islam, that the early Muslims were not especially virtuous people. The Muslim mind begins with the myth that the first generation of Muslims were the most virtuous heroes in history, and proceeds from there. The Muslim mind adores chivalrous heroes. That is why Saladin is so popular, and why tyrants like Saddam Hussein have followings the sizes of which are in direct proportion to their abilities to cast themselves into the heroic mold.
The mismatch between the actual behaviour of jihadists — murdering innocent civilians and so forth — and this mental ideal causes a tremendous amount of cognitive dissonance in the Muslim mind. That's why Muslims are always looking for ways to validate their beliefs about Muslim superiority and the inferiority of non-Muslims. That's why all sorts of grievances which are irrational to us are so appealing to them. If Muslims aren't outperforming non-Muslims, it must be because Muslims are being held back or suppressed in some way by non-Muslims. That's why images of Abu Ghraib and Guantánamo Bay are so popular among Muslims, because it allows them to call us hypocrites for claiming to champion human rights, which eases the cognitive dissonance by deflecting the focus off themselves. It's also why the West cannot purchase the goodwill of the Islamic world with goods or foreign aid, because any attempt to do so is immediately interpreted as subservience and subterfuge, which is answered with contempt.
To call for Muslims to be treated oppressively, in addition to being wrong and contrary to the best of our culture, also plays right into the hands of Islamist leaders who their control their flocks by convincing them that non-Muslims are out to get them. Long lists of historical Muslim atrocities such as posted by godfreyofbouillon may be daming evidence against Islam to our way of thinking. But what happens when you present such as list to a Muslim? He counters with a list of atrocities committed by Christians, even though the events may have happened hundreds of years ago or the Christians in question were clearly violating the tenets of Christianity. How many times have you seen this happen? To us, it doesn't make any sense; rationally, we can think of a thousand reasons why the Muslim's response is fallacious. But the Muslim mind is not thinking in terms of evidence for or against Islam, but is rather seeking a way to ease the cognitive dissonance and maintain its belief in Islamic superiority.
He is irrelevant.
Did I say he is irrelevant?
It kind of makes you feel sorry for Tibet. They wait around all that time for a rare form of mental retardation to appear, then they worship the ground he drools on for as long as he lives.
Then they wait years for him to say something profound, which is really just an attempt to say something at all.
He's no Gandhi.
That's for sure.
And Gahdi was pretty darn low to the ground as far as idiots go as well.
Evidenced, of course, by all the orphanages, hospitals, and food distribution programs undertaken worldwide in the name of Mohammed.
Oh, wait, that is Jesus Christ.
dhimi lama
Only one other world leader consistently says this. President George W. Bush.
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.