I have read basically all that you posted to me & have responded carefully & systematically. My opinion is basically nothing much you have posted is related to either Buddhism or rebirth. Rebirth in Buddhism is about the results (vipaka) caused by intentional actions (kamma) of individuals. L.N. correctly wrote:
The suttas say:
In the case of a victim of crime, it is the doer of rape or murder engaged in the act of bodily kamma. It is the volition of the rapist or murderer performing the rape or murder.Intention, I tell you, is kamma. Intending, one does kamma by way of body, speech & intellect.
I did not ever declare all the victims in a crime are wholly innocent. I wrote that retaliation & retribution can occur.
In summary, my participation in the discussion commenced when I quoted many suttas that were contrary to the idea or view of: "How can there be "innocent victims" when there is kamma??" The Pali suttas say there can be innocent victims therefore this idea of the impossibility of innocence was demonstrated to be heretical or pernicious.
The kamma of many Rohingya is they have chosen to be Muslim. But this choice is not the cause of their demise. The cause of their demise is the kamma of those who volitionally act to rape & murder them.
I think these articles can remove any prejudice that may be obstructing hiri-ottappa:
Why the Arabs Don’t Want Us in Syria
They don’t hate ‘our freedoms.’ They hate that we’ve betrayed our ideals in their own countries—for oil.
By ROBERT F. KENNEDY, JR. February 22, 2016
In part because my father was murdered by an Arab, I've made an effort to understand the impact of U.S. policy in the Mideast and particularly the factors that sometimes motivate bloodthirsty responses from the Islamic world against our country. As we focus on the rise of the Islamic State and search for the source of the savagery that took so many innocent lives in Paris and San Bernardino, we might want to look beyond the convenient explanations of religion and ideology. Instead we should examine the more complex rationales of history and oil—and how they often point the finger of blame back at our own shores.
For Americans to really understand what’s going on, it’s important to review some details about this sordid but little-remembered history. During the 1950s, President Eisenhower and the Dulles brothers—CIA Director Allen Dulles and Secretary of State John Foster Dulles—rebuffed Soviet treaty proposals to leave the Middle East a neutral zone in the Cold War and let Arabs rule Arabia. Instead, they mounted a clandestine war against Arab nationalism—which Allen Dulles equated with communism—particularly when Arab self-rule threatened oil concessions. They pumped secret American military aid to tyrants in Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Iraq and Lebanon favoring puppets with conservative Jihadist ideologies that they regarded as a reliable antidote to Soviet Marxism. At a White House meeting between the CIA’s director of plans, Frank Wisner, and John Foster Dulles, in September 1957, Eisenhower advised the agency, “We should do everything possible to stress the ‘holy war’ aspect,” according to a memo recorded by his staff secretary, Gen. Andrew J. Goodpaster.
The CIA began its active meddling in Syria in 1949—barely a year after the agency’s creation. Syrian patriots had declared war on the Nazis, expelled their Vichy French colonial rulers and crafted a fragile secularist democracy based on the American model. But in March 1949, Syria’s democratically elected president, Shukri-al-Quwatli, hesitated to approve the Trans-Arabian Pipeline, an American project intended to connect the oil fields of Saudi Arabia to the ports of Lebanon via Syria. In his book, Legacy of Ashes, CIA historian Tim Weiner recounts that in retaliation for Al-Quwatli’s lack of enthusiasm for the U.S. pipeline, the CIA engineered a coup replacing al-Quwatli with the CIA’s handpicked dictator, a convicted swindler named Husni al-Za’im. Al-Za’im barely had time to dissolve parliament and approve the American pipeline before his countrymen deposed him, four and a half months into his regime.
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story ... ica-213601
The Truth About Radical Islam
November 5, 2017 (Tony Cartalucci - NEO)
The source of terrorism is not the Qu'ran - a book that few critics of Islam have even picked up let alone genuinely read - but rather a very easily traced money trail that leads to Washington and London.
It is indeed the Western World that has created, branded, and marketed "radical Islam," which is for all intents and purposes a strictly political tool designed to provoke direct Western military interventions where possible, and fight conflicts by proxy whenever direct military intervention is not possible.
In Syria and Iraq, the US has used its terrorist proxies to do both - first to fight the government of Damascus and its allies by proxy, and when that failed, to set a pretext for direct US military intervention.
Wahhabism - The Key to Arab Conquest
Part of "radical ignorance" includes a deep and profound ignorance of history. Understanding the actual inception of "radical Islam," more accurately known as Wahhabism, dispels many of the most virulent lies spread about Islam - that is has always been a barbaric, warlike ideology. Militant Islam is a relatively new phenomenon, invented by the House of Saud, then cultivated and exploited to its full potential by the British Empire and its American heirs.
The Ottoman Empire and mastery over the Arab World was coveted and contested by the British Empire. The promise of Arab independence was dangled over the heads of the founders of many of the dynasties now ruling Arabia - dynasties that were carved out through cults of personality and a violent misinterpretation of Islam known as Wahhabism. The British, after betraying the Arabs, would harness this political tool to do what all empires do best - divide and conquer - and specifically so regarding the Middle East and North Africa (MENA).
As the British Empire unraveled, the Americans picked up where London left off. The Saudis and their neighboring Persian Gulf kingdoms have been propped up by the West since the end of World War 1. Since World War 2, many of the same dynasties have sat in power, armed, funded, protected, and invited into some of the most lucrative business deals and economic activity in human history.
It was with members of the Muslim Brotherhood that the US attempted to overthrow current Syrian President Bashar Al Assad's father, Hafez al-Assad with. It was the US with the Saudis and factions within Pakistan's military and government who oversaw the very creation of militant groups like Al Qaeda to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan.
And it is to this very day still very much a US-European enterprise perpetuating the Saudi regime in Riyadh, arming it to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars in weapons and military support, and using Riyadh admittedly as an intermediary through which Washington, London, and Brussels arm and fund the worst, most virulent terrorist organizations on Earth.
Even current US President Donald Trump - who regularly cites "radical Islam" as an enduring threat to America's national security, has signed off on immense weapon deals to the very nations the US uses to cultivate and perpetuate global terrorism.
http://landdestroyer.blogspot.com.au/20 ... islam.html