Russian Terror

[fintstone]

Originally posted by 350HP930
Hitler and the german propaganda machine accused the 'international jewish conspiracy' of being behind everything from WWI to the crippling reparations they were forced to pay for that fiasco.

So essensially the german state blamed the jews for everything from domestic street crime to the death of thousands of german soldiers and a continuing plot to destroy germany and all of western civilization.

The more that you talk about your ignorance of history the more I am lead to believe that the history books you refer to are the history books in high school that usually contain more pictures than paragraphs and represent a very cartoonish version of history.

Time to bust out the big wordy history books if you think that jews had to hijack aircraft to be propped up as the bogey man for the third reich.

Either you are totally inept at reading or putting thoughts into sentences...or you are (although rudely) agreeing with my assertation that you are apparently? trying to refute. Let me quote myself...since you seem to find it difficult to do so correctly:

Please explain. I don't remember any Jewish terrorists shooting hundreds of German children in the back or attacking buildings full of civilians with civilian aircraft full of innocents. Please refresh my memory...I can't remember a thing about that in my history books.

Please explain if you are indicating you have some sort of source (big wordy history book) that claims that there were Jewish terrorists in Germany murdering children... that ultimately justified the holocaust. I am mystified how anyone could draw a parallel between the two.

I am also mystified that you could draw a conclusion that in the quote above that I have acknowledged some sort of lack of knowledge of history.

I think you have spent too much time at move-on.org for such an adult topic. You did mention a "cartoonish version of history." Have you considered some sort of phonics course? I have heard that they are quite helpful.

[dd74]

Fint, I'm wondering if you and 350 are on the same page at all. I understand your argument - you want to know about Jewish terrorists whose acts compare to those of the Muslims in Beslan. Well, to my knowledge, there hasn't been anything like that occurring on such a large scale. But there have been Jewish terrorists. Moshe Dyan, Uzi Narkis and Israeli PM Ariel Sharon have been linked to terrorist activities. But Jewish terrorists shooting German schoolchildren - you're right; never happened.

350's point (I think) aligns itself with another post where someone compared our enmasse treatment of Muslims to how Germany treated the Jews during the rise of the Nazis. I believe that post is suggesting that the Bush Administrations modis operandi is to exterminate Islam from the world, which is similar to Hitler's solution to exterminate Judiasm from Germany, Europe and elsewhere.

[Victor]

Originally posted by fintstone
Please explain. I don't remember any Jewish terrorists shooting hundreds of German children in the back or attacking buildings full of civilians with civilian aircraft full of innocents. Please refresh my memory...I can't remember a thing about that in my history books.

Please explain?

I will try, thank you.

None of the Muslims I know have shot any children or attacked buildings full of civilians with civilian aircraft full of innocents.

Do you know any Muslims personally? The dehumanisation of Muslims by the media is no different to the policies and propaganda of the Third Reich. Some think this is not a bad thing. They know how effective this is as they have suffered at the had of it.

Now go ask yourself why the US government is not searching for nukes/weapons of mass destruction is Israel instead.

[azasadny]

from CNN online today...

""Holy warriors" from the Middle East long have supported Chechen fighters, and Russian officials said nine or 10 Arabs were among militants killed when commandos stormed the Beslan school in southern Russia on Friday.

Middle East security officials, speaking on condition of anonymity, said it was too early to know the nationalities of the Arabs among the dead militants.

However, a prominent Arab journalist wrote that Muslims must acknowledge the painful fact that Muslims are the main perpetrators of terrorism.

"Our terrorist sons are an end-product of our corrupted culture," Abdulrahman al-Rashed, general manager of Al-Arabiya television, wrote in his daily column published in the Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper. It ran under the headline, "The Painful Truth: All the World Terrorists are Muslims!"

Al-Rashed ran through a list of recent attacks by Islamic extremist groups -- in Russia, Iraq, Sudan, Saudi Arabia and Yemen -- many of which are influenced by the ideology of Osama bin Laden, the Saudi-born leader of the al Qaeda terror network.

"Most perpetrators of suicide operations in buses, schools and residential buildings around the world for the past 10 years have been Muslims," he wrote. Muslims will be unable to cleanse their image unless "we admit the scandalous facts," rather than offer condemnations or justifications.

"The picture is humiliating, painful and harsh for all of us."

Arab TV stations repeatedly aired footage of terrified young survivors being carried from the school siege scene, while pictures of dead and wounded children ran on front pages of Saturday's newspapers in the region.

Ahmed Bahgat, an Egyptian Islamist and columnist for Egypt's leading pro-government newspaper, Al-Ahram, wrote that the images "showed Muslims as monsters who are fed by the blood of children and the pain of their families."

"If all the enemies of Islam united together and decided to harm it ... they wouldn't have ruined and harmed its image as much as the sons of Islam have done by their stupidity, miscalculations, and misunderstanding of the nature of this age," Bahgat wrote."

[fintstone]

Victor
Thank you for your reasoned reply. I have not witnessed any dehuminization of Muslims myself, but I have seen a lot of video footage of them doing some pretty terrible things...to westerners as well as their own people. It seems that the radicals value human life very little.
Yes, I know Muslims personally. As far as I know, they are innocent of any crime. There were also many Japanese and Germans in WW2 that were equally innocent...we did not hesitate to go to war with those countries to protect our own (and they were relatively humane in comparison to the Islamic terrorists). Many muslims and leaders of islamic countries (as well as many Americans and Europeans) have either overtly or covertly supported terrorism in the middle east for many years. It is little wonder that the current crop has expanded its area of operation. Even now many on this BBS defend Saddam Hussein who openly rewarded famililies of sucide bombers with more money than they could earn in a lifetime. Sucide bombers are revered and their pictures are displayed in Mosques and parades in many Muslim countries. People in these countries must make a choice...and quickly. The western world did not choose this battle, nor do we have the luxury of waiting. These nations must throw the leaders who support terrorism from their governments and their mosques or sadly face the consequences. It is their choice to make. So far, we have shown surprising restraint. If I were to allow a fellow to shoot at passerbys from a window in my home, I should be little suprised if eventually someone starts to shoot back. These terrorists are well known in their own countries and are funded, supported, and hidden by them. As my Pappy always said, "when you lie down with dogs, you get up with fleas."

Why is the US government not seeking nukes in Israel? For the same reason we do not look similarly in Australia. Because, of course, we know they have them. They have had them for many years, yet have never threated a single neighbor with them. They are victims of the same terrorists that we are. All they have ever asked is to be allowed to live in peace. Imagine those same weapons in the hands of Saddam who attacked two of his neighbors and probably had every intention of attacking more if he had not be stopped. He did not hesitate to use chemical weapons on his enemies..or even his own people. can you imagine that he would hesitate to use nuclear weapons....can you imagine that Bin laden or these terrorists that slaughtered the school children would hesitate?

[adrian jaye]

it makes me feel very sad,

9-11 was bad enough (and not taking anything away from that)

but this, all thoes kids man !

What we "homo sapiens" can do to each other beggers belief.

Dayem, the devil is in the house, I'm tellling ya.

Religion gets the blame for everything, what it is, is people apparently "saying what they think there religion says".

Wether your a Jew a gentile a muslim or whatever, your "God" does not advocate killing other people or little children for his cause.

In fact your supposed to love one another, (and if a Xristian it does state) your enemy AS your brother .

sad, sad, sad, were all going to hell in a handbasket fellas,
yall need to get your butts into church,

(some dayem fine women in there as well )

laters

[Mule]

Hold on a minute guys! Is it co-incidence that all the terrorists are muslims? Co-incicence has not a damn thing to do with it. The sad truth is that the teachings in mosques world wide are the reason most terrorists are muslim. Untill they clean up thier own out-house then it should come as no surprise to them that many people throughout the world see muslims=terrorists. Only they can fix this.

[red ufo]

There any proof the Russian terrorist are muslims?

Any proof besides what Putins government put out? Did they do a religious check during negoications? Putin already lied about this case within 72 hours and recanted. Too bad Bush can't admit to his serial lying too.

Just remember the anthrax attacks were a blantant attempt to set up muslims 30 days after 911. But we all know the anthrax came from a US army base and of course nobody was arrested.

There is no proof any muslims did 911, the FBI took the passenger list and assumed muslims did it. There were arab sounding names on some of the flights not lumped into the 19 hijackers. How did the FBI know who was the terrorist and who wasn't? They didn't, the whole thing was fabricated to blame arabs and attack Iraq.

[mikester]

It's all pretty sad. I am acquainted with Muslims here and there but I don't know that I have any friends who are Muslim (though I know some Hindu Indians). Those that I am aware of are very good people.

I've done a lot of searching on Google regarding Islamic history and specifically Saudi Arabian history as it seems to me that the most reliable formation of government in the mideast started with SA.

From the timelines I have looked at in various historic sources (I'm being very general) there have always been Islamic Extremists who have taken measures to violent hands. There has also been a few extremely common themes in the violence. They want foreigners off of their land; they want modern technology removed from their presence and they do not want to give Israel it's own state (withdraw from Jerusalem). I don't recall seeing a lot of "conversion" efforts that turned to the theme of "convert or die."

This was actually a topic I was considering posting but I hadn't gotten far enough in my research to post in more than these generalities.

I'm not sure I would condem islam as a whole but in every religion there are extremists - The Islamic extremists seem to be willing to take the harshest measures. I wonder if it is because they have the least to loose?

[djmcmath]

That's some good research.

Some thoughts, though:
1 - Check your sources carefully on this topic -- I find a large number of Islamic sites posting histories of Islam that are pretty biased. To get an objective picture of the history of Islam, you need to either read through the bias or find an external source. Good luck, most of the popular sites (ie, the ones returned towards the top of the Google list) are pretty clearly Muslim operated. When you're reading, the bias will be obvious by statements like the following:
a - "Islam spread" - they fail to mention that it spread through violence.
b - "City XYQ rejected Islamic offers of peace" - which leaves out the fact that peace comes at the brunt of a brutal occupation, making the victims sound like aggressors, despite the fact that there's a Muslim army at their city gates.
c - Those are the only two I can come up with off the top of my head. Just read the Muslim-written Islamic histories carefully.

2 - There's a difference between extremists and fundamentalists. A fundamentalist is someone who believes in the fundamental principles of a thing. For example, a US Marine could be considered a fundamentalist military member -- there are certain fundamental principles that make up being "military," and US Marines tend to embody those whole-heartedly. A fundamentalist Christian is liable to read the Bible regularly and generally live by it. A fundamentalist Muslim is no different.
The question to ask, then, is "What does the Koran teach?" What are the fundamental principles that fundamentalist Muslims are being fundamentalist about? While a casual reading of the Koran will reveal some notable Peaceful-Happy passages, it should be understood that those segments apply only to members of the House of Islam. If you're not a Muslim, you're of the House of War (like that name? It implies that be not subjugating yourself to Islam, you're choosing war for yourself. Neat, huh?). Members of the House of War are afforded none of the generosity, kindness, etc. afforded to members of the House of Islam.
(sigh) I could go on, but whole books have been written about this topic, and some of them are quite good. The bottom line is that the happy-friendly-peaceful Muslims that you find aren't living according to what their book teaches. The ones who blow up school busses, on the other hand, are. (shrug) But then, anyone who can persuade a guy to go be a suicide bomber is clearly a better leader than I am -- perhaps I should take lessons?

Dan

[Mule]

Pinkie, you must've spent the last few years with your head completely up your a$$.

"There is no proof any muslims did 911,"

Unbelievable!!! Who do you think bin laden is working for, the Pope? I have a new term for people like you, Chaimberlanians. Before WWII Neville Chaimberlain tried to convince the world that hitler was a good guy & there was nothing to worry about. The truth is that he was just chicken*****. From this point forward you all other buffoons who want to keep their heads in the sand & hope the muslims dont kill them, shall be known as Chamberlainians. Wake up dude!

[350HP930]

While there are passages in the koran that call for the death and conversion of non-believers, the same also applies to the bible.

While I am no fan of religion I am constantly amazed at the arrogance of so many so called christians who are quick to generalize an entire religion as violent and intolerant due to recent isolated events despite the fact that the history of christianity during the past thousand years has been one of the most attrocious examples of the negative effects of religion that there is.

Then again I am not suprised that the people who spout this 'islam promotes terrorism' BS are the same ones who also spout BS like 'the terrorists hate us because we are rich and free' and refuse to look at the true causes of terrorism like US foriegn policy and militarism.

[Les Paul]

Anyone explain to me why some dickweed with a bomb strapped to his body would want to kill kids. Justify that.

[Rando]

err... that would be plural DICKWEED(S)... and I'd like to know as well.

[djmcmath]

350, thanks for your well-reasoned and thought-provoking argument. It should be noted, however, that there are some inconsistencies.

1 - The Koran supports the general principle of conversion by violence. It is not described as a one-time event, but rather as a life principle. The Bible, in contrast, has essentially one major war which was a single one-time event ("Israel -- go take the Promised Land."). Yes, it lasted quite some time, as the Israelites didn't finish it all at once, but it would be a phenomenal stretch to argue that the Bible in any way supports violent religious conversion -- not a defense you can make for the Koran. Further, it is clear from the context that the actions ordered were one time events -- definitely not marching orders for modern Christians.

2 - The violence associated with Islam is neither recent nor isolated. Islam originated as a band of desert hijackers in Medina, north of Mecca. Mohammed tried to convince the Medinan Jews to join his cause, but his revision of the OT was too extreme, so they refused. Muslim history books will explain that the Jews "refused his perfectly acceptable offer of peace," at which point Mohammed ganged up on each of the three separate Jewish communities and killed them all. His gang of bandits grew in power as outsiders realized their choices -- be killed, be subjugated to crippling occupation, or just convert to Islam. Again, Islamic histories will describe this as "The influence of Islam spread..." In light of the history, I would hardly call recent terrorist actions "isolated." Rather, recent terrorist actions are merely a continuation of hundreds of years of the same, and an honest living-out of the fundamental principles advocated by their guiding document.

3 - Christian violence performed over the "past thousand years" is primarily isolated to the Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition.
The number one purpose of the Crusades were to liberate Jerusalem from Islamic control, after the Muslims had captured and occupied the city -- this is no different from the US invading Germany to free the French, for example. There were certainly actions taken by individual battlefield commanders that could not be justified Biblically, but to cite the individual sins of arbitrary Christians as a gross condemnation of all of Christianity is purely foolish.
The Spanish Inquisition was a single period of stupidity which was not supported Biblically. You'll be hard pressed to find any modern Christian who honestly supports the SI. You'll be especially hard pressed to find anything like Biblical support for the SI, as it doesn't exist.
The same cannot be said of Islam -- there are millions of Muslims who believe that the Koran advocates violent conversion, that terror is an excellent route to supremacy, who have no remorse for any of the past actions of Muslims, etc.

4 - I don't know too many people who spout both of those beliefs. In fact, I can't think of anyone who claims both "Islam promotes terror" and "Terrorists hate us for our money."


Hmmm, only 4 major inconsistencies with reality in a 3 sentence post. You're improving.

Dan

[on-ramp]

Originally posted by Les Paul
Anyone explain to me why some dickweed with a bomb strapped to his body would want to kill kids. Justify that.

that's awful, but, that kind of terrorism requires courage. to take your own life in what you believe in.
The kind of terrorism bush has shown us, on the other hand, requires invading a non-hostile nation (Iraq) by sending 1,000 men/women to their deaths to do his dirty work for him while he goes on vacation. that's the cowardly man's terrorism.

[turbo6bar]

Originally posted by on-ramp
that's awful, but, that kind of terrorism requires courage. to take your own life in what you believe in.
The kind of terrorism bush has shown us, on the other hand, requires invading a non-hostile nation (Iraq) by sending 1,000 men/women to their deaths to do his dirty work for him while he goes on vacation. that's the cowardly man's terrorism.

You've outdone yourself, LOL D

[Victor]

I beleive the number 1000 is only US armed forces deaths and does not include other nations involved in this spectacle.

[dtw]

Originally posted by on-ramp
that's awful, but, that kind of terrorism requires courage. to take your own life in what you believe in.
The kind of terrorism bush has shown us, on the other hand, requires invading a non-hostile nation (Iraq) by sending 1,000 men/women to their deaths to do his dirty work for him while he goes on vacation. that's the cowardly man's terrorism.

On-ramp, you're unbelievable. I have to think you only say ridiculous crap like this to bait your opponents, since you are unable to support your side with well-conceived and supportable arguments.

I think the majority of people participating in the OT political/philosophical debates, be they the most bleeding heart liberal or bloodthirsty neocon, will argue that suicide is arguably the most cowardly act a person can commit.

[on-ramp]

Originally posted by dtw
On-ramp, you're unbelievable. I have to think you only say ridiculous crap like this to bait your opponents, since you are unable to support your side with well-conceived and supportable arguments.

I think the majority of people participating in the OT political/philosophical debates, be they the most bleeding heart liberal or bloodthirsty neocon, will argue that suicide is arguably the most cowardly act a person can commit.

you obviously missed my whole point.