They were sure bombs but I was thinking more about airplanes. It's always amazed me that some of the British pilots could get close enough to the V1's to tip them with only the wing tips of their spitfires which would knock their gyroscopes out of wack and cause the buzz bombs to crash into the ocean. More nerve than I've ever had.

and two or three percent of a huge number still is a LOT of scary people, too...

I think in the US probably 95% are liberal Muslims.. probably 97 or 98% actually.

In the rest of the world, it's about 70%, maybe...

There's a lot of people who are "Muslim" because if they aren't "Muslim", their family, or their town, or their government, will murder them.

Robbie... my question about that dates back a year or so... What if a litigant in some disagreement decides that they'll only accept a Sharia Law Court?

Do we end up with parallel legal systems? Which court system would an appeal of a verdict go to?

THAT kind of unintended consequence scare the crap out of me...

I completely agree with that, Jan, but I'm also hopelessly outnumbered by the "tolerate intolerance" masses who keep defending the rights of such minorities (Islamists) to have things Their Way (Sharia Law, etc.) and ignore the history and traditions of the country (countries!) they've emigrated to!

So, how about Spanish as an acceptable alternative language in the US, or flying a Mexican Flag really close to an American flag "to honor THEIR heritage..."?

Which slope got slippery first?.... just wonderin'...

Now, thanks for saying that. THAT prompted me a new thought...

It sure LOOKS as if the fundamentalist Islamists DO have a strategy and tactic of subtle and slow invasion and patient modification of their new surroundings until they outnumber 'the natives' and take over...

But that kind of begs the question that assumes that EVERY immigrant to a new country shares that 'wait and take over later' strategy. Since it sure looks like there is a negligible (if any) segment of the Islamic population that EVER does any kind of push-back against the Sharia-demanding Islamists, one could easily infer that yes, they ALL ARE bent on the Universal Takeover of The World.

Evidence to the contrary seems to be lacking, which does lead to a very negative and easy generalization about Islam and Muslims.

I'd LOVE them to prove me wrong, but again, the evidence...

Hondo, those suggestions still have no predictive value, which is one of the foundations of science.
The 'proof' exists only in the hope or belief that there IS an afterlife with a heaven or hell, and THAT proof has been shown to be somewhat lacking over the past, say, million years or more.
:) I've been through some religion and philosophies in my life and I'm pretty clear that 'proving existence exists' is a hard thing to... prove.

Go with the oil theory. I don't.
I also think one of the most stupid moves by any alleged 'world leader' is/was to tell your opponent the exact timing of your withdrawal from the battlefield. Our finest military minds of the past would have spat in his face over that if they were still around.

Sum, do you account for the German buzz-bombs and V-2's they rained on England the same way??

I would not do well under a modern Muslim regime. I have a problem with that too...and with the thought that the US is tolerating Sharia law _anywhere_ in our country.

Jan

It may be the case for Islam...but when Islam was in power between the 8th and 10th centuries it did not do that, but instituted a culture of tolerance and commercialism instead. The Muslims who are 'activating' that part of their religious code are the modern ones. This means that all permutations of Islam cannot be considered to be innately and inescapably violent and intolerant.

I am in favor of fighting against the aggressions of modern Islam, but I want to get the granularity correct when I speak about the Muslim religion per se.

Jan

In my humble opinion it is a bad thing. They were elected to represent their constituency, not to spend their time trying to insure that they get re-elected. Serving in congress was never intended to be a profession. One of the greatest mistakes this country has allowed to happen is for politics to become a profitable enterprise.

It's self evident. See Baptist preacher above. Also evolution.

I just learned today that Al Jazeera is a network I should be watching. I was told that you get "the rest of the story" there which is not necessarily the case on such as Fox, MSNBC etc.

I think Hillary would disagree with you. She thinks we should try to learn more and be more agreeable. If she is the DNC candidate I'll vote for whoever runs against her. Even John McCain again.

I was typing at technocracy

Mexican is a lot like Spanish, except you speak slower, ie's sounds like e's, mandé means cómo, and they say that thing padre/madre to mean cool/bad-ass that I don't fully understand.

There are numerous reasons for bombing. I'm aware that there are more than one (that's one reason that there are usually secondary targets) but didn't see the need to compose a thesis. Other than when they were directly attacking trains, convoys, encampments etc. factories could be on the bombing list and vice versa.

Yes the Germans did the same on both the eastern and western fronts and for the same reasons that the allies did. I don't see what your point is there.

In Vietnam the bombing of the Ho Chi Minh trail was to stop the supply of materials into South Vietnam but if there happened to be a convoy or a division (for example) movement, they'd bomb it. Other targets were supply depots and Hanoi to name just one city.

I've been reading all the unexpected responses.
All I was trying to say was that Christians are freed from all the picky sacrifice goat laws of the Old Testament.
That would include Jews who become Christians.
I definitely would not stone an adulterer.
Psst! I ate the spare pork chop in the fridge with a dinner of microwaved leftovers.

"Define normal in a pluralistic society."
I'm just thinking of my life. My mom is Methodist; my dad is Catholic. They take some few elements literally and view most of it as metaphoric. My wife's mom/dad were Methodist/Catholic by background too, but they were even less into it, dismissing all religion completely even at the end of their lives. My wife and I were both UUs when we met.
At an event, it's not uncommon for us to meet other people from different backgrounds-- maybe one's some version of Muslim and her parents are really into it, and the other is Catholic by background but knows almost nothing about it. And we're all here in the modern world doing our things.
It would be inconceivable to me that meeting someone at an event I would reject someone on the basis of religious background. Almost no one I meet takes their religion of background literally; it just informs their world view. I can't imagine giving my business card to someone at a fundraiser, knowing that they might have read an article I wrote likening their background to the devil. Usually their sweet grandma was really into, and they're doing research at the UW and view the world empirically/objectively as I do.

It does work, yes. But sometimes it sure seems to take a long time to be effective.

I'm not sure. You're not supposed to yell fire in a movie house I'm told (never tried it myself to check out it's truthiness). In Denton there are many Mexican shops that have their names outside only in Mexican. The city told them that they should post the names in English because not all firemen can read Mexican. At the same time, teachers here are called on to learn Mexican to be able to teach our diversified society.

Wasn't there something a couple of years ago about children being trapped in a Russian school by "bad guys". The memory gets fuzzy at 73.

and died a Christian :)

I think I'm not supposed to post a link here, but in case I'm wrong,

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/quran/...

proves your point.