"Day Brown" <daybrown@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:4i%Xj.87331$y05.78797@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Mavisbeacon wrote:
>> Actually the word "thug" comes from "thugee" which was an assassin cult
>> the sort of Islamist OPPOSED by Saladin! Indian Thugee were KALI
>> wor****ppers. And the Mongols and Asatru has much in common - both Pagan
>> warriors. You also have ****nto Buddhist Samurai. Not to leave out the
>> Knights Templar I believe Saladin called them "the Fiery Heart of
>> Christendom".
> "The Children of Kali" by Rusby looked into that. The whole thing was a
> Christian British con job. Yes there were thugs, but their modus
operandi
> was to PRETEND to be pilgrims enroute to wor****p Kali.
I refer to two things above the Indian thugee and the assassin cult:
http://www.weirdload.com/hasan.html
For centuries beginning just before the First Crusade, the Assassins held
the Muslim world in the grip of fear. From his mountain keeps, the Master,
as he was called by his murderous devotees, the fidai, directed campaigns
of
holy terror chiefly against his Turkish and Persian neighbors. Rulers,
generals, prime ministers, all could be struck down at any moment not just
by a hidden assailant, but by a beggar or holy man on the street, even a
trusted member of their own households. When captured, the attackers were
contemptuous of death, resisting severe torture without betraying their
comrades — sometimes even naming innocent people as their sup****ters,
causing their deaths as well.
Sometimes a ruler would awake with a dagger in the pillow next to him,
which
usually was enough to make him reconsider his opposition. The great
Saladin
himself survived at least three attacks, and at times supposedly travelled
in an armored wooden box for protection. Yet no Muslim force was ever able
to eliminate the threat entirely: in the end, it took Hulagu Khan’s hordes
of Mongols in a campaign of extermination to wipe them out as a military
force in Iran
[end excerpt]
>
> Pagan traditions have all been tribal, part of their ethnic identity,
and
> therefore not the kind of thing to impose on outsiders as we see
Christian
> and Muslims do.
Well the Mongols were shaministic pagans and conquered the largest single
Empire ever. Pagan Vikings similarly conquered Britian and much of France
and Ireland.
>Communism evolved out of that prosytilizing
> tradition,
It is a bit of an oversimplification to say Muslims Communists and
Christians were of a "we will make you like us by force of arms" and
Pagans
were NOT like this. Pagans imposed their rule just like any others did.
Isalm astually advocates no ***punction in Religion and Judaism prohibits
Prosytilyising! Judaism isnt pagan is it?
>with Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot, and now that jackass in North Korea running
>personality cults hoping to convert all others.
But the Jews are an obvious exception to this so you can not cite it as a
general rule!
> Buddhism, Taoism, Con****ianism never regarded themselves as sole owners
of
> cosmic truth,
Confusionism is more of a philosophy than a religion and Budhism is not
really a theology since it is atheistic. taoism looks as everythiung as
being in balance. this is entirely OPPOSED to monotheidtic religions which
believe light removes darkness and there is NO BALANCE to that. You don't
need an equal amount of evil as good. Taoism does make claims and so what
if
they don't claim "the truth"? In fact Taoism's reliance on balance decries
absolutes. Certainly the ancestor Em****or wor****pping Chinese and the
caste
system Indians regarded their view as binding on "lesser people."
>that you cannot deliver it to people, but wait for them to seek it.
Christianity and Islam say the same! Faith is a personal thing.
>They have all respected other traditions.
As do Christians and Muslims.
>The Maitreyasamiti texts I referred to were found by Taoist monks
cleaning
>a Buddhist temple. If you recall, Gibbon noted how the pagan could attend
a
>ritual in any temple and feel the presence of the divine without worry
that
>he had the name of god correct.
Pagans and athiests are not banned from churches and mosques are they?
> The Levantine religions are in a class by themselves in that regard,
Well they ARE monotheistic so having a single God would of course be a
central feature of that. How is that such an extraordinary conclusion?
>and therefore have never been able to live in peace with each other
without
>the powerful hand of a tyrant imposing it.
It isnt true to say that people can't hav religions which believe in a
single God and also have peace! It is certainly NOT some superior form of
reasoning to assume it is true that monotheists can't live in peace but
polytheists can!
> Tamerlane understood this, sometimes using it to facilitate the profits
> from trade, but other times using "heresy" as an excuse, and actually
> murdered more Muslims than any other religion.
Ah! But now you are referring to how tyrants exploited religion and not
the
other way around.
> Until Mao, no religion had ever been imposed on the whole of China,
China (and japan) had a stable em****or wor****pping culture for Millennia!
Mao only replaced one ruling caste with another.
> so the division of powers among religions tempered tyranny.
Well "temper" can have opposite meanings like "emborgo" and "emark" so i
dont know what you mean. But if you mean religions cause tyrrany I can
tell
you tyrants existed without it! I can also say if you claim "communism is
a
religion" then you are indulging in a "only true scotsman" fallacy.
especially when you discount pagan religions from the same analysis!
>Even the famous book burning was mostly show, and when that emperor died,
>the books were taken back out of their hiding places.
if you refer to the Iconoclasts I think they were associated with Orthodox
christians and the Arian Heresies and not Roman. If you refer to "autos de
fe" they were a much later more frequent and associated with Northern
European Protestantism!
>everybody knew emperors dont live forever.
Apparently not in China! :)
> The problem in Islam is, that everyone thinks Allah will.
Believe it or not Christians and Em****or wor****pping Pagans ALL believed
that!
>There is, in that cosmology, no alternative but submission. And no
>acceptable reaction other than violence for the failure to submit, which
>non Muslims all embody.
Actually you are not compelled by Islam to follow Islam! And Islam makes a
didtinction between other "people of the Book" or as you say "of the
levant"
and others.
>
> The 5th century Maitreyasamiti texts in Tocharian A discuss the growing
> problem of mysogeny. A psychological analysis of the alpha male warrior
> personality perfectly explains how men will follow a prophet with a 9
year
> old wife and believe him when he tells the Jihadim that they get to
spend
> eternity ****ing 12 year old virgins.
Well what is an "Alpha Male Warrior personality" and who did such
psychological profile? If you are suggesting that Muhammad picked men t
lead
which all believed in the Authoritarianism and that christianity evolved
or
was planned in the same way then how do you explain Francis of Assissi or
John of the Cross?(mystics who rejected materialism and specifically
rejected authority and holy orders and called for others to do this in
order
to be free)
Jean dArc? The Virgin Mary? theresa of avila? (women leaders) Bernadette
subaru? (who actually made pronouncements which she admitted she didnt
understand
and which opposed or confused Church teaching on the issue)
>
> Tamerlane is just a more recent and better do***ented example of a long
> line of alpha male leaders who use the promise of loot and ***** to
> motivate the following.
But cart before horse again! You CLAIMED Monotheistic religions are SET UP
in order to promote this type of activity. You havent shown Pagans CAN'T
do
this as well!
>He rewarded those who were the most vicious and brave with more women,
and
>thereby bred more thugs just like you mite breed pit bulls.
How did Jesus reward those who were visious? didnt he replace the ear that
was cut off and hold back his troops and allow himself to be tortured and
crusified?
>And has a religion designed to pander to their passion.
How is Christianity designed to pander to lust and greed?
|
