Is all or the vast majority of terrorism taking place being done by Muslims? Seems like every single report of terrorist acts involve Islamic fundamentalists of some sort. The terrorism is all over the planet, from here to Singapore to Russia to the Middle East. Do they hate *everyone* who does not agree with them?

We know it's not just the US they despise. What's the explanation for this? Are there just a few nutcase groups, is this this an intrinsic trait of a large segment of their religion?

Any ideas? Thanks.

Is all or the vast majority of terrorism taking place being done by Muslims? Seems like every single report of terrorist acts involve Islamic fundamentalists of some sort. The terrorism is all over the planet, from here to Singapore to Russia to the Middle East. Do they hate *everyone* who does not agree with them?

We know it's not just the US they despise. What's the explanation for this? Are there just a few nutcase groups, is this this an intrinsic trait of a large segment of their religion?

Any ideas? Thanks.
Not really. What about McVeigh? Various abortion clinic bombers? The terrorists in Japan who tried to poision the subways? Neo-Nazi Skinheads? There are lots of terrorists in the world that aren't Muslim. Muslim terrorists are just getting the press right now.

How about the Protestant/Catholic terrorists in N. Ireland? Or the numerous terrorist groups in S. America?

The German RBF or the Italian Red Faction. Going back how about the guy who wrote the book on the subject (literally his book I believe is called Guerilla War) everybodies favorite T-shirt Icon Che Guevara.

...... and yes he wrote a book called Geurilla Warfare in 1961. It was also Che who brought the popular proclamation Viva La Revolucion .... he musta been a cyclist. Because of his wild, romantic appearance, his dashing style, his intransigence in refusing to kowtow to any kind of establishment however communist, his contempt for mere reformism, and his dedication to violent, flamboyant action, Che became a legend and an idol for the reveloutionary- and even the merely discontented- youth of the later 1960s and early 70's a focus for the kind of desperate revolutionary action which seemed to millions of young people the only hope of destroying the world of bourgeois industrial capitalism and communism.

One of the most interesting things I had ever seen was a failed plane hijacking in the 70's by some Palestinian terrorists who landed in Jordan. Most of the terrorists were killed and one of the remaining that weren't was a beautiful young palestinian woman, a terrorist who raised her fist in triumph as she was escorted down the plane's steps. She walked defiantly dressed in jeans and a Che T-shirt. It stands vivid in my mind as perhaps one of the most fashionable moments in history.

ciao

That's what the police chief of LA said on Nightline, when Koppel brought up the 1000th US casuality in Iraq. Better go out and get your assault rifle soon, now that they're legal. Ghetto dudes love these high powered assault weapons. The chief said they can make a police car look like "swiss cheese" and rip up body organs beyond repair.

Drive-by shootings are American style terrorism. The root causes are probably the same: alienation, despair, economic starvation. Add to that volatile mix a plentiful supply of weaponry, as in Iraq and this country, and there will be death and destruction. The police have a right to be worried, because they're on the front lines.

Terrorism has been the tactical choice of "revolutionaries" since mechanized armies became a permanent fixture of governments. It's cheap, can easily be concealed from the enemy, demands complete committment from the troops, and is very effective. It's fast becoming the warfare tactic of the 21st Century, just as HG Wells said it would.

Is all or the vast majority of terrorism taking place being done by Muslims? Seems like every single report of terrorist acts involve Islamic fundamentalists of some sort. The terrorism is all over the planet, from here to Singapore to Russia to the Middle East. Do they hate *everyone* who does not agree with them?

We know it's not just the US they despise. What's the explanation for this? Are there just a few nutcase groups, is this this an intrinsic trait of a large segment of their religion?

Any ideas? Thanks.


absolutely the vast majority is muslim. i defy anyone to prove otherwise. its an intrinsic trait of a fast growing monority of their religious base.

absolutely the vast majority is muslim. i defy anyone to prove otherwise. its an intrinsic trait of a fast growing monority of their religious base.
prove it.

prove it.

prove its not.

prove its not.
you first since you made that sweeping statement. until then i'll know that you just pulled that statistic out of your a$$ as usual.

you first since you made that sweeping statement. until then i'll know that you just pulled that statistic out of your a$$ as usual.


ok.

"Muslims are the main perpetrators of terrorism!"

"Holy warriors" from the Middle East long have supported fellow Muslims fighting in Chechnya, and Russian officials said nine or 10 Arabs were among militants killed. Our terrorist sons are an end-product of our corrupted culture.

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

But herein is the essence of the Muslim dilemma. For hopefully the majority of Muslims, this is not the meaning of Islam. But for a growing minority, it is absolutely the true meaning of Islam. This is a conflict that every generation of Islam has faced. Most of the Quran has moral and peaceful teaching. But part of it that calls for violence and conquest by the sword.

The primary method of Muslim evangelism is and has been the sword from the beginning. Muhammad is the one who set and practiced this foundational principle. So did his immediate followers. Islam spread from Mecca and Medina to the Atlantic in the west; from North Africa to the Pyrenees Mountains in the north; and to the borders of China in the east – all within a little over 100 years. This was not accomplished by friendly persuasion. It was accomplished by violence and the sword.

A core teaching of Islam is that the world is divided into only two regions: Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb – the region of peace and the region of war. All outside Islamic rule is considered the area of war and continuing conquest. The many verses in the Quran that call for the killing of Jews, Christians and other unbelievers provide ample religious justification for every generation to spawn Muslim terrorists. History bears sad witness to this.

all written by:
Abdulrahman al-Rashed, the general manager of a leading Arabic television network – Al-Arabia.


but he's also a muslim so what the hell does he know about it right bocephus?

go back to sleep now and keep the shades pulled down real tight.

i'm waiting on your response bocephus. i expect something like....well...well...well....BUSH LIED!


while youre fumbling for a response read this.

U.S.: Islamist carnage
in Sudan is 'genocide'

The United States is calling the slaughter of blacks in western Sudan by the Islamist Khartoum regime and its Arab militia allies genocide.

"We concluded that genocide has been committed in Darfur and that the government of Sudan and the Janjaweed bear responsibility and genocide may still be occurring," said Secretary of State Colin Powell in testimony prepared for the U.S. Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

U.S. officials contend no legal obligations are attached to a declaration of genocide, but nongovernmental groups monitoring the situation insist it brings a moral imperative to act.

As WorldNetDaily reported, activists have asserted for some time that the killing in Darfur is part of a wider effort that fits the U.N. definition of genocide, which is to "deliberately inflict ... conditions of life calculated to bring about physical destruction in whole or in part."

Khartoum's "deliberate obstruction of humanitarian aid offers clear and unambiguous evidence of an intent to destroy" African tribal groups in Sudan's western region of Darfur, said Eric Reeves, a professor at Smith College in Massachusetts devoted to researching and speaking out about the northern African nation's ongoing crisis.

The conflict between mainly black rebels in Western Sudan and government-backed Arab militiamen has led to the deaths of tens of thousands and about 1.2 million refugees.

Separately, Sudan's cleric-backed National Islamic Front regime in the Arab and Muslim north declared a jihad on the south in 1989. Since 1983, an estimated 2 million people have died from war and related famine. About 5 million have become refugees.

The All Africa Conference of Churches, or a continent-wide group, has warned Darfur resembles Rwanda 10 years ago when up to a million people were slaughtered as the world looked on.

Responding to the U.S. declaration, a Sudanese official asserted it will only raise tensions.

"We don't think this kind of attitude can help the situation in Darfur," Sudanese Deputy Foreign Minister Najeeb Al-Khair Abdel-Wahab told The Associated Press. "We expect the international community to assist the process that is taking place in Abuja, and not put oil on the fire."

Abdel-Wahab is in Nigeria's capital, Abuja, where Sudan's government in engaged in peace talks with rebels to end the 19-month-old Darfur conflict. He insisted the government is "doing everything possible to resolve the crisis."

In his testimony this morning, Powell said the U.S. will initiate today a new U.N. Security Council resolution under the Genocide Convention.

He noted the significant U.S. role in trying to end the violence throughout Sudan and the provision of up to 80 percent of all international humanitarian aid to Darfur.

Powell said the intervention of U.N. peacekeepers is unlikely because no country is willing to send troops, but suggested an expanded mission of the African Union is the best solution.

The State Department has produced a report of atrocities in Darfur that forms the basis of its genocide determination.

The Janaweed, an Arabic colloquialism meaning "a man with a gun on a horse," are an Arab militia engaged in pillaging the towns and villages of the Zaghawa, Masalit, and Fur tribes in Darfur. The Janaweed are working with the Khartoum government to resist rebels that draw their members from the three tribes.

I fail to see how this proves that the vast majority of terrorists are muslim. Sure there are a good number of terrorists that are muslim and they are getting lots of press now, but what about Northern Ireland? Japan? South America? Mexico? Not all terrorists are Muslim. You still fail to provide any meaningful comparison. You just state somebody's opinion as fact.

absolutely the vast majority is muslim. i defy anyone to prove otherwise. its an intrinsic trait of a fast growing monority of their religious base.

Might it have something to do with the failures of the Bush Administration? Bush's "strategy" has fostered a hydra-headed terrorist monster. If he had a built a true worldwide coalition to fight terrorists instead of kowtowing to his Saudi friends and backers, the US and the world would be a much better place. But then he'd have to do something for American citizens besides fearmongering.

Just when was the last terrorist attack in N. Ireland? Hmmm? How about Japan? Mexico? Yes there is a faction in Mexico who does not like the present government, but what acts of terror have they initiated? How do they compare to what happened here, in Russia, in Turkey, in Saudia Arabia, in Bali? I think your argument is stupid. So is comparing this to death by firearms in the US.

I fail to see how this proves that the vast majority of terrorists are muslim. Sure there are a good number of terrorists that are muslim and they are getting lots of press now, but what about Northern Ireland? Japan? South America? Mexico? Not all terrorists are Muslim. You still fail to provide any meaningful comparison. You just state somebody's opinion as fact.

Bocephus, it's Bill's education, or better yet, prejudice by media and our government.

I recently saw an ad I thought was for a new video game. It was shot through night vision lense. It depicted various people wearing turbans, carrying AK-47's guarding a facility in the desert. Then it cut to a sniper and his spotter in camouflage hidden in the side of a mountain. Then "Protecting America Against all Enemies.... The US Army." shot across the screen. To my shock, It was a recruitment ad for the US Army. A racist stereotypical ad. I was appalled!

It's no wonder bill thinks the way he does.

So let's see, if it was an asinine video game it would be OK, but it is an ad depicting who we are actually fighting, and you're appalled?

Drop the stereotypes, put down the broad brush, turn off Fox News, put down the Washington Times and vote for a party that does not use Muslim baiting as the linchpin of its election strategy.

So let's see, if it was an asinine video game it would be OK, but it is an ad depicting who we are actually fighting, and you're appalled?



Wrong Steamy. The reason I thought it was a commercial for a video game was the way it was shot through night vision lense. You just don't get it?

It's people like you who accept racist propaganda from their own government.

I'll spell it out for you:

Not every muslim is an extreme fundamentalist.

Not every muslim is a terrorist.

Not every person who wears a turban is a terrorist.

It's sad that weakmineded individuals, like yourself, can't see that this is exactly what our government is promoting. It's no wonder the Nazi's were able to control Germany...

Drop the stereotypes, put down the broad brush, turn off Fox News, put down the Washington Times and vote for a party that does not use Muslim baiting as the linchpin of its election strategy.
good ideas. if bill represents the majority opinion in this country i'm afraid for our future. how long before we have internment camps for all muslims living in the US?

Is all or the vast majority of terrorism taking place being done by Muslims? Seems like every single report of terrorist acts involve Islamic fundamentalists of some sort. The terrorism is all over the planet, from here to Singapore to Russia to the Middle East. Do they hate *everyone* who does not agree with them? We know it's not just the US they despise. What's the explanation for this? Are there just a few nutcase groups, is this this an intrinsic trait of a large segment of their religion?

It seems that there's an Islamic extemist fringe attitude that has decided that terrorism is an acceptable response to their perceived grievances. But if this were basic tenet of their religion, I think we'd have a bit more trouble with a billion or so armed militants intent on scorching Western society.

It also seems that there are different conflicts at issue. The Russian tragedy is based on the separatists civil war in Chechnya. OBL & AQ seem to be religi-cultural fundamentalists intent on driving non-Islamic (currently Western, mainly US) influences out of the Middle East. The bombings in Indonesia seem to be a splinter AQ group targeting Western (Australian), but I'm not sure about that. As discussed here before, Iraq & Afgahnistan are mixes of inter-cultural power plays, warlord posturing, nationalists, and AQ jihadists.

Latin America still has its criminal narco-terrorists and maybe even a few Maoists deep in the bushes. Is it Nepal that is having it's own Maoist problems now? Much of the terrorism in India relates to disputed areas or long-time rifts between Muslims & Hindus - the Hindus certainly doing their fair share of the nastiness. Likewise the worst in Africa seems to stem from religi-tribal conflicts. In the Balkans good old Christian Slavs were targeting Muslims.

I think it's not Islam. It's extremists exploiting the powerlessness and economic failure of Islamic countries. The problem is that their goal of fundamentalist nation-states will doom them to a life outside the global economy with deepening poverty & despair. The common thread I see is application of religious fervor in forming (or trying to) national social structures.

. . .

Just when was the last terrorist attack in N. Ireland? Hmmm? How about Japan? Mexico? Yes there is a faction in Mexico who does not like the present government, but what acts of terror have they initiated? How do they compare to what happened here, in Russia, in Turkey, in Saudia Arabia, in Bali? I think your argument is stupid. So is comparing this to death by firearms in the US.

The overwhelming majority of Muslims world wide are peace loving and just want to get along. When fighting breaks out in one of their countries, however, the less economically well-off are caught in a moral dilemma whether to at least partially accept the aims of the terrorists, even while condemning their tactics, and look for ulterior motives by the "liberators" from outside.

The challenge for the US is to get Muslims to take care of their terrorists. When we step up, we just provide ideal targets for terrorist anger and discontent. We should have learned in Vietnam that territorial conquest never defeats terrorism, but always ratchets up the violence and outrage--on both sides. The cowboy mentality doesn't relate to that.

I fail to see how this proves that the vast majority of terrorists are muslim. Sure there are a good number of terrorists that are muslim and they are getting lots of press now, but what about Northern Ireland? Japan? South America? Mexico? Not all terrorists are Muslim. You still fail to provide any meaningful comparison. You just state somebody's opinion as fact.


how do you even compare japan, south am. and mexico to 2,000,000 killed in the sudan? what about the 88 dead last month in the two russian airliner crashes or the 10 killed a couple days before in the moscow subway by a muslim suicide bomber?

from michelle malkin:


It wasn't no-name militants or wayward guerrillas who have butchered, beheaded and slaughtered thousands of innocents over the last three years alone. Anniversary reality check:


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Russia stabbed babies to death, shot toddlers in the back, forced children to eat rose petals and drink their own urine, raped teenage girls, executed their teachers and blew themselves up in a crowded school gymnasium. Death toll: 338.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Spain detonated bombs on four commuter trains during Madrid's rush hour. Death toll: 190.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Bali blew up a beach resort with an electronically triggered bomb at one bar and a car bomb hidden in a van at another nightclub filled with young Western tourists on holiday. Death toll: 202.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Pakistan kidnapped and beheaded American journalist Daniel Pearl.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Saudi Arabia kidnapped and beheaded American engineer Paul Johnson.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Iraq kidnapped and beheaded American independent contractor Nick Berg.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Iraq kidnapped and executed Italian security guard Fabrizio Quattrocchi.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in the Philippines kidnapped and killed American missionary Martin Burnham.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Israel engineered near-simultaneous suicide attacks on two buses, killing at least 15 people.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Morocco waged suicide bombing attacks in Casablanca.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in Turkey bombed synagogues and the British consulate.


In the name of Allah, Muslim terrorists in America hijacked and incinerated three planes full of men, women and children, trapped pregnant women and firefighters in smoke-filled stairways, and forced office workers to leap 99 stories to their deaths after saying final prayers from the ledges of the World Trade Center on a peaceful September morning. Death toll: 3,000.

how do you even compare japan, south am. and mexico to 2,000,000 killed in the sudan?

Christian Crusaders are just the same, and just as ugly, as Islamic Jihadists... There's no difference. Hate in the name of God. It's kinda ironic, actually.

So is that 2,000,000 in Darfur or are we talking all of Sudan's civil wars? Were all the civil wars based o the same religious lines as the Darfur outrage? The UN thinks "only" 50,000 have been killed in Darfur - still outrageous but well short of 2M.

Christian Crusaders are just the same, and just as ugly, as Islamic Jihadists... There's no difference. Hate in the name of God. It's kinda ironic, actually.


So is that 2,000,000 in Darfur or are we talking all of Sudan's civil wars? Were all the civil wars based o the same religious lines as the Darfur outrage? The UN thinks "only" 50,000 have been killed in Darfur - still outrageous but well short of 2M.


pdxmark...the christian basher.

i wondered how long it would take you. tell me, how long has it been since youve read about christians using the bible to cut of heads or stab 18 month olds or murder civilian women and children. when was the last time a christian flew aircraft into buildings? youll have to work with me on this. i am dealing in the here and now, not centuries ago.


the article says:
Separately, Sudan's cleric-backed National Islamic Front regime in the Arab and Muslim north declared a jihad on the south in 1989. Since 1983, an estimated 2 million people have died from war and related famine. About 5 million have become refugees.

pdxmark...the christian basher.

i wondered how long it would take you. tell me, how long has it been since youve read about christians using the bible to cut of heads or stab 18 month olds or murder civilian women and children. when was the last time a christian flew aircraft into buildings? youll have to work with me on this. i am dealing in the here and now, not centuries ago.


the article says:
Separately, Sudan's cleric-backed National Islamic Front regime in the Arab and Muslim north declared a jihad on the south in 1989. Since 1983, an estimated 2 million people have died from war and related famine. About 5 million have become refugees.


Actually Bill if you have read "Under the Banner of Heaven" you will read about the fundamentalist sect of the Morman religion here in the good old US of A that butchered a young mother and her infant daughter (stabbed by the by) in the name of true Chrisianity.

Pretty recent stuff Bill.

Bosnia 1993. But that's beside the point.

My point is that religious extremism allows people to sink to profound levels of evil, whether the extremism is Islamic, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Animist, whatever. And you Bill sound exactly the same as the nut-case Islamic preachers in back-alley Saudi "schools" spewing frothy hate-filled messages about Christian Infidels. Except in your case it's semi-reasoned "proofs" of the universal hatefulness and violence of all Muslims. It's exactly the same message. All I have to go by is what you post here, and it's frightening to see.

Actually Bill if you have read "Under the Banner of Heaven" you will read about the fundamentalist sect of the Morman religion here in the good old US of A that butchered a young mother and her infant daughter (stabbed by the by) in the name of true Chrisianity.

Pretty recent stuff Bill.


is that it? not to reduce it to numbers but that really weak.

is that it? not to reduce it to numbers but that really weak.

You asked for an example and I gave you one BILL. When you speak in absolutes as you do, it is very easy to poke a hole in it.

You asked for an example and I gave you one BILL. When you speak in absolutes as you do, it is very easy to poke a hole in it.

as usual, youve read what you wanted to read. i asked when the last time was. i didnt say it hasnt happened. there are nuts throughout history (and in history).

Bosnia 1993. But that's beside the point.

My point is that religious extremism allows people to sink to profound levels of evil, whether the extremism is Islamic, Christian, Hindu, Jewish, Animist, whatever. And you Bill sound exactly the same as the nut-case Islamic preachers in back-alley Saudi "schools" spewing frothy hate-filled messages about Christian Infidels. Except in your case it's semi-reasoned "proofs" of the universal hatefulness and violence of all Muslims. It's exactly the same message. All I have to go by is what you post here, and it's frightening to see.


i havent promoted christanity as superior to any other religion. i havent spewed anything. nor have i said on this board that all muslims are terrorists. in fact, i have said that most are not. you can try and build your case by claiming my posts are hate-filled but you cant show one example.

like bocephus, you continue to ignore a problem developing in the name of a god and religion that has vowed to kill us all. ignoring it and defending it as you have here makes you as much the problem as the solution.

as usual, youve read what you wanted to read. i asked when the last time was. i didnt say it hasnt happened. there are nuts throughout history (and in history).

You're right. I just posted the year, not how long it's been.


[QUOTE=pdxmark]Bosnia 1993[/QUOTE=pdxmark]

I'll do the math for you. 11 years.

Just 60 years ago we had the Holocaust.

You're right. I just posted the year, not how long it's been.


[QUOTE=pdxmark]Bosnia 1993[/QUOTE=pdxmark]

I'll do the math for you. 11 years.

Just 60 years ago we had the Holocaust.

you think hitler was a christian?

was bosnia christian or islamic and why were they fighting?

i havent promoted christanity as superior to any other religion. i havent spewed anything. nor have i said on this board that all muslims are terrorists. in fact, i have said that most are not. you can try and build your case by claiming my posts are hate-filled but you cant show one example.

like bocephus, you continue to ignore a problem developing in the name of a god and religion that has vowed to kill us all. ignoring it and defending it as you have here makes you as much the problem as the solution.
Wasn't the USA founded on the principle of freedom of ALL religion?

nor have i said on this board that all muslims are terrorists.

Maybe we're splitting hairs, but this is what you posted just 8 hours ago in the "Not Usually a Proponent of Torture" thread:

"The primary method of Muslim evangelism is and has been the sword from the beginning. Muhammad is the one who set and practiced this foundational principle. So did his immediate followers. Islam spread from Mecca and Medina to the Atlantic in the west; from North Africa to the Pyrenees Mountains in the north; and to the borders of China in the east – all within a little over 100 years. This was not accomplished by friendly persuasion. It was accomplished by violence and the sword.

A core teaching of Islam is that the world is divided into only two regions: Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb – the region of peace and the region of war. All outside Islamic rule is considered the area of war and continuing conquest. The many verses in the Quran that call for the killing of Jews, Christians and other unbelievers provide ample religious justification for every generation to spawn Muslim terrorists. History bears sad witness to this.

So, you're right, you didn't say all Muslims are terrorists... you said that their religion is inherently prone to violence like terrorism. I see the difference... NOT.

In Bosnia, Orthodox Christain Serbs launched an ethnic cleansing war against Muslim Bosia... including mass murders of civilian innocents, including women and children. You'll remember that the GOP leadership like Newt hoped that Clinton (ie, our troops) would fail when he sent in aircraft to break the seige of Sarajevo where serb snipers were plucking off Bosnian civilians like squirrels.

As for Hitler, he distinguished Jewish people from others on a seemingly religious basis. I could be wrong, but I doubt his reference point was Islam. Did he commit the Holocaust in the name of Christianity? No. Did he use the Jewish-Christian distinction to further the Holocaust? Maybe so.

Actually, no it wasn't. It was founded on the priniciple of freedom for the founders' religion. If you weren't a believer, you stood a real chance of being burned as a heretic.

Wasn't the USA founded on the principle of freedom of ALL religion?

The Christians were one of the first organized religions to practive "Holy War". Here is a quick excerpt to remind Bill that Christianity can be a religion of brutes and that the Crusades were undoubtedly the start of the problems the mideast is facing today:

The Crusades
The great series of western holy wars were the Crusades, which lasted from 1095 until 1291 CE. The aim was to capture the sacred places in the Holy Land from the Muslims who lived there, so it was intended as a war to right wrongs done against Christianity.

The first Crusade was started by Pope Urban II in 1095. He raged at the capture of the holy places and the treatment given to Christians, and ordered a war to restore Christianity. He said that the war would have the support of God:

"Let this be your war-cry in combats, because this word is given to you by God. When an armed attack is made upon the enemy, let this one cry be raised by all the soldiers of God: It is the will of God! It is the will of God!"

"...Whoever shall determine upon this holy pilgrimage and shall make his vow to God to that effect and shall offer himself to Him as a living sacrifice, holy, acceptable unto God, shall wear the sign of the cross of the Lord on his forehead or on his breast."
The pope also absolved all who took part in the crusade of all their sins.

The first Crusade captured Jerusalem after bitter fighting, and the residents of the city were brutalised and slaughtered by the Christian invaders. The invaders' conduct breached the principles of modern just war ethics, and the massacres still colour Islamic politics today.


http://www.bbc.co.uk/religion/ethics/war/holywar.shtml

Actually, no it wasn't. It was founded on the priniciple of freedom for the founders' religion. If you weren't a believer, you stood a real chance of being burned as a heretic.
many of the founders were not Christian. And how do you explain the Treaty of Tripoli written by the 5th Congress where they specifically state that they are not a Christian nation?

http://secular.embassyofheaven.com/usa/tripoli.htm

You've skipped ahead a bit. By the 5th Congress, we were comparatively progressive. Those who first came from England to escape religious persecution had no concept of universal religious freedom. For them, it was their religion or nothing. Those who wrote our Constitution may not have subscribed to that belief, but it was a departure from their predecessors.

Religious intolerance is an important part of our history.


many of the founders were not Christian. And how do you explain the Treaty of Tripoli written by the 5th Congress where they specifically state that they are not a Christian nation?

http://secular.embassyofheaven.com/usa/tripoli.htm

as usual, youve read what you wanted to read. i asked when the last time was. i didnt say it hasnt happened. there are nuts throughout history (and in history).

It was 1984.

They are strident in their belief that God told them to smite the infidel.

Funny I seem to have heard that before.

you think hitler was a christian?You think he was a Godless Communist or something?

Actually, no it wasn't. It was founded on the priniciple of freedom for the founders' religion. If you weren't a believer, you stood a real chance of being burned as a heretic.

Read the "Mayflower Compact." 1623 I believe. The verbage in the document makes it pretty clear that all that came aboard were not Pilgrims. Despite this they found it important enough to bind together anyway and allow different choices as such.

In most cases this was not an issue dealing with Anglophiles from Great Britain, this would begin to rear itself later after the establishment of the country for the most part especially with the influx of Irish Catholics (see nativism etc).

You've skipped ahead a bit. By the 5th Congress, we were comparatively progressive. Those who first came from England to escape religious persecution had no concept of universal religious freedom. For them, it was their religion or nothing. Those who wrote our Constitution may not have subscribed to that belief, but it was a departure from their predecessors.

Religious intolerance is an important part of our history.
that is likely true. the religious freedom they professed was to be able to practice their brand of Christianity without interference from England. I'm guessing an atheist or pagan in those times kept their mouths shut about it or suffer the consequences. Case in point was the Salem witch trials. And don't even mention what some did to the native americans because they were "savages".

Christian Crusaders are just the same, and just as ugly, as Islamic Jihadists... There's no difference. Hate in the name of God. It's kinda ironic, actually.

So is that 2,000,000 in Darfur or are we talking all of Sudan's civil wars? Were all the civil wars based o the same religious lines as the Darfur outrage? The UN thinks "only" 50,000 have been killed in Darfur - still outrageous but well short of 2M.

Didn't Bush call the assault on Afghanistan a Crusade for Justice? then he changed it like three times. Good way to show how you understand the region.

Maybe we're splitting hairs, but this is what you posted just 8 hours ago in the "Not Usually a Proponent of Torture" thread:

"The primary method of Muslim evangelism is and has been the sword from the beginning. Muhammad is the one who set and practiced this foundational principle. So did his immediate followers. Islam spread from Mecca and Medina to the Atlantic in the west; from North Africa to the Pyrenees Mountains in the north; and to the borders of China in the east – all within a little over 100 years. This was not accomplished by friendly persuasion. It was accomplished by violence and the sword.

A core teaching of Islam is that the world is divided into only two regions: Dar al Islam and Dar al Harb – the region of peace and the region of war. All outside Islamic rule is considered the area of war and continuing conquest. The many verses in the Quran that call for the killing of Jews, Christians and other unbelievers provide ample religious justification for every generation to spawn Muslim terrorists. History bears sad witness to this.

So, you're right, you didn't say all Muslims are terrorists... you said that their religion is inherently prone to violence like terrorism. I see the difference... NOT.

In Bosnia, Orthodox Christain Serbs launched an ethnic cleansing war against Muslim Bosia... including mass murders of civilian innocents, including women and children. You'll remember that the GOP leadership like Newt hoped that Clinton (ie, our troops) would fail when he sent in aircraft to break the seige of Sarajevo where serb snipers were plucking off Bosnian civilians like squirrels.

As for Hitler, he distinguished Jewish people from others on a seemingly religious basis. I could be wrong, but I doubt his reference point was Islam. Did he commit the Holocaust in the name of Christianity? No. Did he use the Jewish-Christian distinction to further the Holocaust? Maybe so.

that paragraph you attributed to me was a quote from an article. try again.

that paragraph you attributed to me was a quote from an article. try again.
PdxMark has you on the ropes, but ... you briefly flabbergast him with the astonishing contention that you cut and paste "quotes'" that you disagree with. Since no one has ever caught you doing such a thing overtly, we must all now stand rapt while you explain to us which of your cuts-and-pastes represented your true point of view, and which were just a smokescreen. Considering the vast number involved, we'll be here awhile ...

Just when was the last terrorist attack in N. Ireland? Hmmm? How about Japan? Mexico? Yes there is a faction in Mexico who does not like the present government, but what acts of terror have they initiated? How do they compare to what happened here, in Russia, in Turkey, in Saudia Arabia, in Bali? I think your argument is stupid. So is comparing this to death by firearms in the US.

BELFAST, Northern Ireland - Protestant extremists crashed a forklift truck into a Belfast pub packed with Catholics early Friday and tossed firebombs into the building on a road on the front line of tensions between the two communities.