EMAIL SIGN UP!
Most Popular This Week
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- Disaster Capitalism Strikes as Hedge Funds Circle Near-Bankrupt Municipalities Like Vultures
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
- Patent Filing Claims Solar Energy ‘Breakthrough’
- Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"
- Climate Change's 'Evil Twin': Ocean Acidification
- In 'March Toward Disaster,' World Hits 400 PPM Milestone
- Ignoring Bee Crisis, EPA Greenlights New 'Highly Toxic' Pesticide
Popular content
Today's Top News
Handshakes, Cricket and Sexual Intercourse
Difference of Religion breeds more quarrels than
difference of politics.
-- Wendell
Phillips, 1860 Speech
In a competition with Pat Robertson for proving how stupid one can be, it's hard to win, but Dubai, Iran and Pakistan gave it a good try. Pat's entry into the "Can you believe how stupid I am" competition was his explanation that the Haitian earthquake resulted from a pact with the devil made by the Haitians to rid themselves of the French. The legal system in Dubai, a diplomatic reception in Spain and cricket in Pakistan were Mr. Robertson's competitors.
Until the most recent event, Dubai had been in the news because of its near brush with financial death that preceded by just a few weeks the opening in Dubai of the tallest building in the world. Its entry in this contest had nothing to do with that. Its entry came courtesy of its legal system. Reports in assorted media described the plight of an unmarried British couple comprising a 23-year-old woman of Pakistani descent who, with her 43-year old male traveling companion, traveled to Dubai for New Year's Eve. During the visit the woman was raped by a hotel employee in a public bathroom. The couple promptly reported the assault to the police who being detectives realized that this unmarried couple was sharing a hotel room. Ignoring the claim of rape, officials charged them both with having illegal sex and drinking alcohol in an unauthorized location. Given the seriousness of those offenses, their passports were taken and they may not return home until the investigation is completed. One report says that police are skeptical that a rape occurred. Dubai police apparently think life for tourists in Dubai is so dull that the couple made up the story in order to make their trip more interesting.
If the couple is ultimately convicted, they face up to six years in prison The director of the police station that arrested them explained to Gulf News that: "Our rules are clear in the U.A.E.; illegal drinking and sexual intercourse is considered an offense, so a case was filed against the couple as well." (There are almost certainly circumstances in Dubai when sexual intercourse is not considered an offense. People planning on traveling there should not rely on the preceding sentence but should do their own investigation into the rules covering this activity.)
For our next example we travel to Spain. The question presented by events in that country is what happened at a diplomatic reception given by the king and queen for ambassadors and ministers. It involved a handshake or a non-handshake. One of the ministers in attendance was Stas Misezhnikov, Israel's tourism minister. Another was Iran's tourism minister, Hamid Baghaei. According to Mr. Misezhnikov's assistant, the two ministers shook hands at the reception. Iran, which we have seen time and again, can get excited over the most peculiar things, was furious. Its tourism ministry issued a statement in which it said that the suggestion of a handshake was "an ugly and false rumor". It went on to say that Iranian officials present at the reception "never encountered Israeli officials in any form," thus putting to rest any thought that its minister might have had contact with some disembodied form of Israeli floating around the room in spectral fashion. To reaffirm the preposterousness of a handshake the statement said Iran considered "the permanent struggle against this international pariah its divine duty." Although Iran may have hoped that statement would earn it the prize, it was competing with Pakistan. That kafuffle involved cricket rather than a handshake.
One of the big cricket events that takes place each year is the cricket tournament in India sponsored by the Indian Premier League. Prior to the tournament there is an auction in which players are selected to participate in the tournament. The winning teams in the tournament make a great deal of money. Pakistan's players are acknowledged to be the champions of the kind of cricket that is played in the tournaments and in years gone by have been chosen to participate. Their acknowledged prowess notwithstanding, this year none of the Pakistanis was chosen by the 8 teams that the Indian Premier League comprises.
That failure was almost as offensive to Pakistan as the non-existent handshake to Iran. Pakistan's interior minister, Rehman Malik says the failure to choose Pakistani players had nothing to do with their skill but, instead, was a diplomatic statement. He said: "The manner in which the players were insulted showed that India is not serious about the peace process with Pakistan." He said that he was convinced that the Indian government had put pressure on owners of the teams not to bid on any Pakistani players. S.M. Krishna, India's foreign minister responded saying: "Government has nothing to do with I.P.L. on selection of players and various exercises that are connected with it."
As I said at the outset, Pat Robertson hasn't cornered the market on nutty behavior. He has no reason to be ashamed of his effort, however.
Comments
Note: Disqus 2012 is best viewed on an up to date browser. Click here for information. Instructions for how to sign up to comment can be viewed here. Our Comment Policy can be viewed here. Please follow the guidelines. Note to Readers: Spam Filter May Capture Legitimate Comments...
19 Comments so far
Show AllUS Manifest Insanity is rubbing off!
boysgramps
Sometimes, just sometimes the US has nothing to with it.
Just saying.
Several months ago, just prior to giving up, completely, on CNN, etc., as I watched some news, the banner running along the bottom of the screen announced a warning -- "No intercourse/sex allowed on any beaches in Dubai. We are still a Muslim nation."
At the time, the warning struck me that something, such as what the author reports in this article, could happen. In addition, in some Muslim countries, women who are raped are stoned to death.
In other words, Dubai might not be the playground that it's been reported to be. Beware!
Brauchli does not know what he is talking about when he writes about cricket and Pakistan.
Pakistan are the world champions in T20 cricket. That not a single one of the players got drafted / bought by a single team, indicates a deliberate coordinated boycott to make a point.
If the Indian teams were concerned about the availability of the Pakistani players, firstly, the players had already gotten Pakistani government approval. Which means if there would be holdups, it would have been from the Indian government.
And if there were holdups, they could have told the Pakistani players BEFORE the draft, instead of INVITING and accepting their entries, and then not selecting a single one.
All of which various Indian cricket commentators have pointed out. Even one of the owners of the Indian teams, has expressed his regret at how the situation was handled.
Furthermore, Pakistan cricket is sensitive to these kind of snubs, because, in recent years, due to the bombings, the security issues in Pakistan, they are having a very difficult time organising matches against the other test playing nations. They have often had to play "home" matches outside of Pakistan. There is the fear that cricket in Pakistan is slowly being strangled into a slow death.
--"indicates a deliberate coordinated boycott to make a point. "
It indicates nothing of that sort. The fact that Pakistani players were not chosen has more to do with the cost of providing them security. The IPL has NOTHING to do with the Indian Government policy, similar to the NFL and the U.S. Government.
However, whats more important, is to point out that rabid right-wing propoganda is not the exclusive preserve of Pakistan's military/politicians. Indias right-wing political parties (thankfully getting smaller every year) still have a violent, regressive streak to them which could jeopardize any matches involving Pakistani players. Thats the real issue. In fact the Indian Govt was caught unawares with this controversy. There is however a fairly strong movement within the cricketing fan base in India to make the IPL include players from Pakistan as well, since Pakistani players are amongst the best in the game.
The Pakistani "Govt" on the other hand, represented by Pakistans version of Chemical Ali (Rehman Malik !!) have never shown any genuine interest in a diplomatic solution to their problems with India. Whats needed is a 'genuine', representative, democarcy in Pakistan for any meaningful solution with India.
riddimboy,
when I said coordinated boycott, I don't mean a coordinated boycott by the GOVERNMENT. The IPL has nothing to do with Congress party policy.
That doesn't mean that the owners are incapable of colluding and acting together, without the government telling them to do so.
In other words, I'm not blaming the Indian Govt. I'm blaming the owners.
--"In other words, I'm not blaming the Indian Govt. I'm blaming the owners."
I totally agree. the owners dont wanna shell out the extra costs involved and would rather have the Govt bankroll security costs while they skim the profits !
I too read some discussion on this topic. I'm not sure if the Pakistani players were specifically 'invited' to send in their entries. You mention "one of the owners of the Indian teams has expressed his regret at how the situation was handled". This chap, Shah Rukh Khan is a total phony, a Bollywood actor. He should be counting his blessings that he gets to make millions of dollars through his stupid so-called acting. Not content, he gets to buy a cricket team to play in a tournament that has nothing but money as its objective - all the "owners" of the teams in this league or industrialists and Bollywood actors and liquor manufacturers. Shah Rukh Khan's ancestry is from Pakistan - so, being a Muslim, it's easy to understand where his sympathies might lie in this case. But what prevented him from recruiting Pakistani players for his own team? The Indian government has made it clear that it never interfered - though they seem to have suspended official visits by the Pakistani national cricket team to India for now. I think last year this league wanted security provided by the police and military in India - but the government refused, since they had the national elections around the same time. So the matches were held in South Africa?
Here's what I think should happen: sporting events that involve millions, if not billions of dollars, clearly promoted by commercial interests, should start dying off. They are nothing but major distractions and a rip-off. I am surprised that Indians and Pakistanis fell for this scam called T20 cricket. It did not exist until a few years ago. Though the fans are supposed to cheer for their "local" teams, the teams, and the "owners" are anything but local. Personally, if I were to live in one of those cities where these teams are supposedly "based", I would feel insulted if I'm asked to cheer for my "local" team. Especially if I got to watch the whole commercial venture unfold right in front of my eyes.
By the way, my contempt is not just limited to commercialized sports - it extends to all mass "entertainment" that so distracts the public, keeps their brains occupied with totally trivial issues, while the capitalist system sucks the wealth out of the entire society to be concentrated in a few hands. You just have to look at the owners of teams in this latest monstrosity called the Indian Premier League. One of the owners, a liquor company baron, also part-owns a Formula-1 racing team, and the Formula-1 gang is itching to enter India, while dumping Canada - because they know a greener pasture when they see one. This chap, who also owns an airline, was arguing for a bailout, along with other private airlines in India, I think last year. I've seen a documentary on India - made before the economic slump - where this chap shows off his private plane with such luxurious interior deco, and he had the balls to say that such displays could serve as inspiration to other Indians to create wealth or some such nonsense. My point is that he had no shame when asking for a bailout, while splurging on luxuries such as his private aircraft, a cricket team and a Formula-1 team. Capitalists in India, like this chap, are even more shameless compared to the rest of the world, it would seem.
What I notice is that Indians easily fall for such scams, thinking that they will one day join the rich-man's club. Once again, it's the elite that benefit and get their kicks, while the vast millions are losing even what they had before.
You say "There is the fear that cricket in Pakistan is slowly being strangled into a slow death". But cricket, while it may be a welcome escape from other problems, should be the least of the worries of Pakistani people. While other countries in the region are only marginally better when it comes to democracy, the situation in Pakistan is far worse. Democracy never took hold, and the military has a stranglehold on the entire system. Even Bangladesh seems better in this regard. I think they should just say, 'f*ck cricket' and get on with nation-building. Same with the Indians. They should say 'F*ck Bollywood' and 'F*ck cricket' and work towards a more equitable society.
They were asked to send in their entries.
"his chap, Shah Rukh Khan is a total phony, a Bollywood actor. He should be counting his blessings that he gets to make millions of dollars through his stupid so-called acting."
He isn't the only actor who owns a team. Furthermore, why does the fact that he is an actor matter? He is an owner.
"e should be counting his blessings that he gets to make millions of dollars through his stupid so-called acting. Not content, he gets to buy a cricket team to play in a tournament that has nothing but money as its objective - all the "owners" of the teams in this league or industrialists and Bollywood actors and liquor manufacturers."
You are contradicting yourself here. None of the owners are saints, none are any saintlier than Khan. So, why is what Shah Rukh Khan said irrelevant?
"Shah Rukh Khan's ancestry is from Pakistan - so, being a Muslim, it's easy to understand where his sympathies might lie in this case. But what prevented him from recruiting Pakistani players for his own team?"
How very nice of you to consider Indian Muslims to be less Indian than other Indians. Are non-whites, non-Christians also not really Americans?
Are you seriously this naive? Can a leftists seriously be this naive about labour issues? Have you never heard of the term "collusion"? Is it really possible that it NEVER crossed the mind of a leftist that owners in a monopsony situation can and do collude against labour?
I'll spell it out for you: the Indian GOVERNMENT did not stop the Pakistani players from playing. That doesn't mean that the OWNERS did not come to an agreement among themselves for all of them to boycott the Pakistani players.
"Here's what I think should happen: sporting events that involve millions, if not billions of dollars, clearly promoted by commercial interests, should start dying off. They are nothing but major distractions and a rip-off. I am surprised that Indians and Pakistanis fell for this scam called T20 cricket. It did not exist until a few years ago."
Yes, T20 is recent. What of it?
I am NOT surprised that you believe that Indians and Pakistanis "fell" for what you call a scam. Typical leftist western imperialism. Assuming that the brown people are too stupid to make their own choices, and are duped. T20 is far far more popular in the subcontinent than in other countries You are aware that it is PLAYED by many many people yes? You are aware that it's short duration, it can be played in the evenings after work, is precisely why it is so popular, that so many people, yes poor people, play it? You are aware that the growth of T20 is driven by India, by the subcontinent? That it is England that has been resisting T20, even though strictly speaking they invented it?
" What I notice is that Indians easily fall for such scams, thinking that they will one day join the rich-man's club. Once again, it's the elite that benefit and get their kicks, while the vast millions are losing even what they had before."
Right, Indians easily fall for such "scams", but westerners don't.
"You say "There is the fear that cricket in Pakistan is slowly being strangled into a slow death". But cricket, while it may be a welcome escape from other problems, should be the least of the worries of Pakistani people. While other countries in the region are only marginally better when it comes to democracy, the situation in Pakistan is far worse. Democracy never took hold, and the military has a stranglehold on the entire system. Even Bangladesh seems better in this regard. I think they should just say, 'f*ck cricket' and get on with nation-building. Same with the Indians. They should say 'F*ck Bollywood' and 'F*ck cricket' and work towards a more equitable society."
How about the Pakistanis who say "Cricket helps in nation-building since it appeals to everyone on the subcontinent, cutting across race, religion, class, lines"?
How about the Pakistanis who say "Better cricket, than the fucking Taliban, the nutcases who think that they are fighting for the people by blowing people up"
How about the Pakistanis who say "We want normal lives"
How about the Pakistanis who say "Fuck westerners who think that they have a fucking right to tell us what to do. Fuck westerners who think that they can lecture from on high about what we should do with our lives".
rfloh, I'm not even sure that I should respond to your presumptuous comment - you presume too much, you assume too much. Nevertheless, let me try:
YOU mentioned that "one of the owners" regretted the rejection of the Pakistani players' bid - and that chap who openly talked about it happens to be Shah Rukh Khan. NO OTHER OWNER regretted that aspect. So my reply focused on him. While focused on him, I made a general comment about Bollywood actors. They, like anyone else, are in it for the money. The people fall for their scams. The relative amounts of money they make in a relatively poor country like India is way too much. I don't need to explain why I feel contempt for such characters - I'll just say I'm not alone on this. Again, this Khan chap has never taken a stand on any other issue - unless it affected him directly - like when he was held up at a US airport, or, in this case, about Pakistani players. If he suddenly speaks out for Pak' players, it has to be because he has Pakistani ancestry - once again, I'm not alone on this assessment. Not only is he a phony, he's also a hypocrite (there's a small difference there): he was free to pick any Pakistani players if he was so concerned, but he didn't. So, he wants easy money, but doesn't want to stand out from the rest of the owners, but still wants to appear "reasonable" by expressing regret about the rejection of Pakistani players. I don't need lessons on religious matters from ANYONE - I just don't want someone to assume. You know what they say when you assume - you make an 'ass' out of 'u' and 'me'. So, don't bother.
I have contempt for T20. And the IPL. So do I have it for the olympics, for the superbowl, Formula-1, and so on. So what? Yes, Indians do fall these types of scams. T20 is different from the older matches - where at least the people get to cheer for their national or regional teams. Not that it's required, but at least it was a chance for the country of such diversity to come together on something. I suppose Pakistan needs its cricket for the same reason. But when sports becomes more about money - money that's in short supply to take care of their own people at the bottom of the society, yes, they have my contempt. When sports - especially such blatantly commercial ventures takes away the attention of young people, when right in front of them their country is sold off in bits and pieces to the capitalist buyers - both international as well as their own - yes, I worry about them. GOT IT? Because I feel Indians should NOT be scammed by these types, HOW does it imply that I assume "that the brown people are too stupid to make their own choices"?
How about the Pakistanis who say "We want normal lives", you ask? That's what I'm saying too. One way to have normal lives when resources are in short supply is to stop patronizing blatantly commercial ventures - that nevertheless invoke patriotism to sell their wares.
I don't consider cricket players as "labor", pulease! And it's even less of a labor issue when Pakistani players are not recruited into an Indian scam called the Indian Premier League. When Indian team owners pay a million dollars to some foreign player (actually, I think it was a million and a half, the last year or the year before, and the owner, who also owns an airline, later goes to the government asking for bailout for his airline - I referred to that above), yes, they have my contempt. Just like - when the context is right - western bankers have my contempt as well.
So, what's your idea of a leftist? That you get to criticize and attack western capitalists, but not their Indian counterparts? Let's get one thing clear here: YOU are arguing for equal rights - or, rights based on merit - for Pakistani players to be recruited in an Indian-funded cricket league. I am saying that this league itself is recent, and nothing more than a blatant money-making venture that has nothing to do with nation-building. It's even more evil because it saps people's energy and attention, and it helps to perpetuate other inequalities. And so does Bollywood - in general. This article mentions cricket - and Bollywood happens to be related to the story, and as capitalist ventures that supply nothing of substance to the people, while sponging off resources (I could elaborate here: India and Pakistan have severe shortages of electricity; the hosting of one day-night match alone uses enough electricity to power several villages for months; India ranks 134 out of 182 countries in the Human Development Index,...), they both have my contempt.
(continued below)
(continued from above):
When you look at the history of sporting ventures such as NHL and NFL, it all started at some point because businesspeople created a "need" that didn't exist before, built up hype, and several years later, no one knows how it all came about, but it's taken for granted as part of the culture - whereas they are nothing more than about money. Now I see history in the making - in China, India, etc. - where the people are falling for these western forms of "entertainment", and already I have met young people who are so into such leagues, rattling off statistics and so on, and it alarms me - because I see resources and wealth being sucked out of the society to be concentrated in a few hands. And you want "the brown people" to have the freedom to fall for such scams, and you dare to lecture me on that?
I SUGGEST YOU GET OFF YOUR MORAL HIGH HORSE. OR, tell you what, just don't bother! You have proven enough about how much you are ready to assume and presume.
--"It's even more evil because it saps people's energy and attention, and it helps to perpetuate other inequalities. "
This makes no sense whatsoever. On the contrary, Cricket actually is a form of entertainment like any sport here in the U.S. How do you decide what people do with their lives. We in the West should stop polluting the environment and bombing innocent kids first, before offering advice to people in less evil countries !
If you had bothered to read the rest of my post, I had said that my contempt extends to other events such as the Olympics (a mega racket about which I have read a lot), Formula-1, Super Bowl, NFL, NHL, etc. The mega events are purely commercial ventures.
You seem to suffer from the same problem I noticed in an earlier story a long time ago: when I criticize something about a wasteful or unsustainable practice in India, you seem to essentially ask, "who the hell are you to talk about India?" That's a tribal approach. What now, do I have to prove my credentials first, that I have already sufficiently criticized the USA and the West, so let me criticize something in India this time? Get over it. My criticism invariably is about the elite in India - who conveniently hide behind their poor, and cite low average statistics for the country as a whole, and attack anyone talking about sustainability. I say that a day-night match in India, using flood-lights uses enough electricity to power several villages for months. And there ARE villages in India that do not have enough electricity, there are small industries that suffer frequent power cuts, etc. There are malls that needlessly try to ape a western, wasteful lifestyle. Even in Gandhi's birthplace Gujarat, there is so much inequality and nobody gives a damn about the poor construction workers. And yet, when someone points out any of these, people like you try to shut up others by pointing to the evil West. I am talking as a human being. And in context - while referring to a particular country.
How do you decide what people do with their lives, you ask?
It's simple: whether it's the USA or India or Pakistan, I think the basic needs of ALL people should be met FIRST. And if there are resources available after meeting the basic needs of ALL people, they can splurge on "entertainment" - which clearly use up A LOT OF resources. If you don't know that, I suggest you start reading books like "Five Ring Circus" which talks about the Olympic Movement. India is going to host the Commonwealth Games this year. Canada is hosting the Winter Olympics. Every country that has hosted any of these mega sporting events invariably has lost money, while only a few real estate developers and some businesspeople have made money. Montreal, which hosted the summer Olympics in 1976 just recently paid off its debt. If you read "Endgame" by Derrick Jensen, you'll get an idea how the so-called "civilization" is essentially a process of usurping resources by the few from the many. Whether it's cricket, football, hockey or olympics, the story is the same. The time to start dumping non-essential activities that consume huge amounts of resources is upon us - it doesn't matter which country we are talking about.
--"My criticism invariably is about the elite in India "
Your patronizing tone marks you as part of the very elite you are supposedly 'criticizing' ! Sports is one of the few avenues of entertainment left that plebes can still enjoy. You do sound like Moses chastising the commoners !
--"I say that a day-night match in India, using flood-lights uses enough electricity to power several villages for months."
A single SUV can do pretty much the same. How many millions SUV's can you count say in Texas alone ? And of course throw in the football, basketball, high-school matches in any little city in our own country.
-- "I suggest you start reading books "
Nah ... ill leave that to the iPad crowd.
-- "you'll get an idea how the so-called "civilization" is essentially a process of usurping resources by the few from the many. "
Ill be damned. I had no clue. Do such things happen in this day and age ?
rfloh--"How very nice of you to consider Indian Muslims to be less Indian than other Indians. Are non-whites, non-Christians also not really Americans?"
Rfloh ... this sentiment of Indian Muslims being less Indian is oft-repeated by Indian Hindus residing in the West and their brothers in India who invariably turn out to be right-wing-nuts ! Thankfully they are a minority.
riddimboy, I call out religious fanaticism when I see it. Just so you know, most of my posts referring to India and religion - on this site as well as elsewhere - have to do with Hindutva fanatics, their hypocrisy on cow slaughter, their caste-based bigotry, etc. I speak out against historic revisionism concerning the timeline of the Vedas vis-a-vis the Indus Valley Civilization. I also talk about Christian fundamentalists and their brutalities in the "New World". And Sikh terrorists. And pseudo-Buddhists like in Sri Lanka. And Jewish thugs in Israel. I have to wonder - how come no one objected on those occasions, and now, perhaps for the first time, I make a reference to an Indian Muslim - although a popular and rich actor, and I'm now called a right-wing nut all of a sudden? In this case, I did not call Shah Rukh Khan a fanatic, but a Muslim-sympathiser. I have not read about him taking a stand on any other social issue. I consider people like him as leeches. Not content with making money, now he opens his mouth on this issue - I simply cannot imagine him to be a socially concerned person, based on what I know.
Do you even care that the Indian Premier League itself is an abomination, where people are expected to cheer for a "local" team that's planted from outside? I mentioned that my contempt extends to the Olympics, Formula-1, Super Bowl, etc. - based on economic fairness considerations. Do these things matter at all to you, one way or the other? Yes - I made the comment about Shah Rukh Khan being a Muslim - because I felt it was relevant here - I still feel that was the reason for him expressing "regret" for the non-selection of Pakistani players. My contention is that the IPL itself is an impostor - so recruiting Pakistani players or not is irrelevant, and someone suddenly expressing an opinion only exposes himself and his sympathies, IMO.
I don't need to explain myself to anyone - but keep in mind that there are times when people do not have to be politically correct, and avoid reference to religion, just to appear reasonable. Also, keep in mind that it is perfectly all right to attack Indian capitalists and Indian actors who make megamillions when there are so many poor people - just as acceptable as it is to attack western capitalists. I find it unfortunate that you had to repeat rfloh's words "Indian Muslims to be less Indian than other Indians" - they were NOT my words. This is not too different from Zionists attacking others as being anti-semitic. My reference was to this one particular phony character whose stance on this issue seems clearly influenced by his religion and his ancestry from Pakistan. Like I said, we don't need to be politically correct all the time.
Your post/s is repetitious, irrelevant and frankly i couldnt get past the first few sentences nor can i gather the gist of what you are trying to say. However this statement --"perhaps for the first time, I make a reference to an Indian Muslim " leads me to believe you have hidden your bias very well all this while but probably just slipped up right now.
--"I don't need to explain myself to anyone - but keep in mind that there are times when people do not have to be politically correct, and avoid reference to religion, just to appear reasonable."
You are right ... please dont 'appear' to be reasonable or politically correct. This is an open forum and you can give vent to your true beliefs. If people bother to read your posts and if they have a few minutes they will respond appropriately.
No, I don't think MY bias slipped out - my bias on various subjects is there for all to see. It's probably yours that slipped out. Either your bias or your persecution complex. But still, I made an effort to clarify where I come from on a subject. But I guess I didn't need to have bothered, because you obviously can't go past your own religious affinity or sympathy or whatever it is that prevents you from reading the rest of my post "past the first few sentences" - when I was clearly responding to your insinuation. I notice the hypocrisy of some posters here - where it's OK to talk about certain religions, but not others, and ok to talk about certain countries, but not others. As long as their particular religion or country is not touched, they are fine, I guess.
Since you say you didn't read my post fully, let me repeat:
you sound like one of those Zionists who cry "anti-semitism" anytime someone criticizes Israel. Except, in your case, the country and the religion are different.
Male Gods, Male "Games", Male Insecurities.
Testosterone infused wet dreams of superiority and domination masquerading as "right"eousness.