To: Daisy

Submitted by Blackspeare (United States), Mar 26, 2006 at 23:17

First, in the context of the thread when I said the concept was "moot" It meant that it was immaterial to the argument.

Second, having an agenda is not inconsistent with making a good point.

Third, your quote; "And I most certainly do not think that totalitarian Islam (or any other form of totalitarianism) supplies "structure" by any stretch of a humane imagination. But you do."

You gotta be kidding! For example let's look at Yugoslavia and Saddam's Iraq. While Tito was not a ruthless killer in the mode of Saddam Hussein he ruled with an iron fist and kept the parties in check or in otherwords provided structure. Hussein in fact did the same thing. Upon their demise things went to pot in their respective countries. You could argue that they just delayed the inevitable, but in their time they provided a structured society even if by force.

The one comment that does bother me is when you call me an aplogist for Islam----I hope I didn't come across that way. I'm just trying to be a realistic observer using past history to predict a possible future outcome.

---

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".