(Yawn) So, vat else is new? (Kind of political)

[Boxlicker101]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_india_shooting

I am aware that the vast majority of Muslims are not fanatical terorists. However, I will say this: Of any large group, such as a religious denominations, races, nationalities, etc., The percentage of Muslims who are fanaticasl terrorists is probably far and away the largest. I have no solid proof of that; it is strictly an observation from reading about so many things such as this, and not reading about as many incidents, or incidents as bloody, that are pepetrated by any other group of people.

 

[Guest]

"You have no solid proof . . . "

Then why post it? It's the same as spreading unfounded gossip.

Happy Thanksgiving, Box.

 

[TE999]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_india_shooting

I am aware that the vast majority of Muslims are not fanatical terorists. However, I will say this: Of any large group, such as a religious denominations, races, nationalities, etc., The percentage of Muslims who are fanaticasl terrorists is probably far and away the largest. I have no solid proof of that; it is strictly an observation from reading about so many things such as this, and not reading about as many incidents, or incidents as bloody, that are pepetrated by any other group of people.

In terms of religious fanaticism...think Spanish Inquisition with plastic explosives and Kalishnikov's.

 

[Guest]

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5McSEU48Y8

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_india_shooting

I am aware that the vast majority of Muslims are not fanatical terorists. However, I will say this: Of any large group, such as a religious denominations, races, nationalities, etc., The percentage of Muslims who are fanaticasl terrorists is probably far and away the largest. I have no solid proof of that; it is strictly an observation from reading about so many things such as this, and not reading about as many incidents, or incidents as bloody, that are pepetrated by any other group of people.

Depending on how you define fanatical terrorism, and given their smaller population... I would think Judaism wins out.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/as_india_shooting

I am aware that the vast majority of Muslims are not fanatical terorists. However, I will say this: Of any large group, such as a religious denominations, races, nationalities, etc., The percentage of Muslims who are fanaticasl terrorists is probably far and away the largest. I have no solid proof of that; it is strictly an observation from reading about so many things such as this, and not reading about as many incidents, or incidents as bloody, that are pepetrated by any other group of people.

Depending on how you define fanatical terrorism, and given their smaller population... I would think Judaism wins out.

That's interesting. I hope you noticed that my post used present tenses, meaning that I am referring to people now. I say that becvause I have never heard of any Jewish acts of terrorism recently, although I have read about a group of Jews operating in Palestine right after WW2, who might have been considered to be terrorists, depending on how you define the word. However, that was over 60 years ago.

 

[TE999]

Nobody expects the Spanish Inquisition.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X5McSEU48Y8

 

[Joe Wordsworth]

That's interesting. I hope you noticed that my post used present tenses, meaning that I am referring to people now. I say that becvause I have never heard of any Jewish acts of terrorism recently, although I have read about a group of Jews operating in Palestine right after WW2, who might have been considered to be terrorists, depending on how you define the word. However, that was over 60 years ago.

I didn't think we were talking past tense. And there are a lot of Palestinians who regard Israel as a terrorist state, and a religion that begets terrorism. I'm not saying they're right, I'm just saying that depending on how you define terrorism--given their smaller population, Judaism is probably in the lead.

 

[slyc_willie]

I didn't think we were talking past tense. And there are a lot of Palestinians who regard Israel as a terrorist state, and a religion that begets terrorism. I'm not saying they're right, I'm just saying that depending on how you define terrorism--given their smaller population, Judaism is probably in the lead.

The definition of terrorism is also in the minds of those who are attacked. And Israel has never been a "live and let live" state. Being a first-world country surrounded by third-world states that would love to see them dead, Israel has, since 1947, utilized a policy of shoot first and ask questions later. Okay, that's simplifying things. But as the most targeted religious/ethnic group in the world, Israeli Jews have a lot to be nervous about . . . not to mention be proactive.

To their enemies, the Israelis are the definition of terrorism.

 

[DeeZire]

While I agree with Joe and Slyc (Joe and I agree? WTF?) I think the ethnic cleansing going on in Africa could be considered worse than the crap going on in India right now, or the Middle East, for that matter. Being a dumbass, I couldn't tell you what religion is responsible for the carnage in Africa, but when there is carnage afoot, it is usually fueled by religion. (One more reason so many voted to keep Sarah Palin out of the Whitehouse.)

 

[sr71plt]

"You have no solid proof . . . "

Then why post it? It's the same as spreading unfounded gossip.

Happy Thanksgiving, Box.

Wasn't this covered with Sweetpea just yesterday?

Anyone been to Ireland recently? I'd say Cyprus too, but I think Thursdays are the Greek terrorists' day off there.

I'd have to agree that Islamists are up there too, however. (and not just from hearsay; am editing a book now reviewing Islamic activities by country worldwide--and it's a pretty thick [and scary] book--800 pages).

 

[slyc_willie]

Wasn't this covered with Sweetpea just yesterday?

Anyone been to Ireland recently? I'd say Cyprus too, but I think Thursdays are the Greek terrorists' day off there.

I'd have to agree that Islamists are up there too, however. (and not just from hearsay; am editing a book now reviewing Islamic activities by country worldwide--and it's a pretty thick [and scary] book--800 pages).

I'd love to see the statistics in that book, sr. Not because I doubt them, but because I'm sure they're worse than I think.

There's no such thing as an empirical definition of terrorism. It's only either ethnocentrism or arrogance that assumes there is.

 

[sr71plt]

I'd love to see the statistics in that book, sr. Not because I doubt them, but because I'm sure they're worse than I think.

There's no such thing as an empirical definition of terrorism. It's only either ethnocentrism or arrogance that assumes there is.

No statistics to speak of, just reams and reams of names of organizations/individuals up to nothing good (with a smattering of chilling examples). Several formerly secular countries becoming increasingly Islamic; Saudi Arabia pouring billions of dollars on all sides of the equation.

I have to agree with a previous post, though, that terrorism is rampant in Africa--with little/no reference to Islam at all.

 

[slyc_willie]

No statistics to speak of, just reams and reams of names of organizations/individuals up to nothing good (with a smattering of chilling examples). Several formerly secular countries becoming increasingly Islamic; Saudi Arabia pouring billions of dollars on all sides of the equation.

I have to agree with a previous post, though, that terrorism is rampant in Africa--with little/no reference to Islam at all.

The main thing I've observed about Africa is a scale of genocide and ethnocide to surpass anything we saw in Eastern Europe. And it's been going on for God knows how long. It seems to have less to do with religion than ideas of racial/tribal identity.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

The main thing I've observed about Africa is a scale of genocide and ethnocide to surpass anything we saw in Eastern Europe. And it's been going on for God knows how long. It seems to have less to do with religion than ideas of racial/tribal identity.

Exactly the kind of conflicts that the Europeans stopped when they colonized the place . . . and replaced the tribal conflicts with their own. Now the Africans are free and independent . . . to go right back to machete-ing each other, which they've done all too often. There are bright spots there, it is true but the Dark Continent definitely has more than its share of darkness. Well-meaning people in Europe and America wail "What's wrong with Africa?" Sadly, the answer is "Africans".

 

[Boxlicker101]

I didn't think we were talking past tense. And there are a lot of Palestinians who regard Israel as a terrorist state, and a religion that begets terrorism. I'm not saying they're right, I'm just saying that depending on how you define terrorism--given their smaller population, Judaism is probably in the lead.

I agree about definition, but I think most reasonable pesons would agree that defending yourself by attacking those who are attacking you is not terorism.

 

[slyc_willie]

I agree about definition, but I think most reasonable pesons would agree that defending yourself by attacking those who are attacking you is not terorism.

It would be if you only perceived they were attacking you.

What constitutes an attack? A bombing? A kidnapping? An assassination? Or maybe something as apparently indirect as libelous claims in a newspaper, inflammatory suggestions that a certain person or persons should be killed.

If you were surrounded by enemies, would you take the chance of waiting for words to become actions?

I pose that only as a philosophical question. But for many Israelis, that is how they live their lives. Better to kill a possibility than to wait for it to kill you.

Very easy to view that as terrorism. It could also be seen as self-preservation.

Take your pick.

 

[Boxlicker101]

Wasn't this covered with Sweetpea just yesterday?

Anyone been to Ireland recently? I'd say Cyprus too, but I think Thursdays are the Greek terrorists' day off there.

I'd have to agree that Islamists are up there too, however. (and not just from hearsay; am editing a book now reviewing Islamic activities by country worldwide--and it's a pretty thick [and scary] book--800 pages).

Your reference to Ireland: Are you thinking of the CIRA or some other of the splinter organizations? Would you consider them to be representative of Catholics, Irish Catholics, or what? Whatever, there are only a handful of them, compared to the Islamist terrorists.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuity_Irish_Republican_Army

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_National_Liberation_Army

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_People's_Liberation_Organisation

Who ae the Greek terrorists you mention? This was about all I could find, and it is a very small group. http://www.albanian.com/community/vbl/showthread.php?t=20757

 

[Boxlicker101]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
I agree about definition, but I think most reasonable pesons would agree that defending yourself by attacking those who are attacking you is not terorism.

It would be if you only perceived they were attacking you.

What constitutes an attack? A bombing? A kidnapping? An assassination? Or maybe something as apparently indirect as libelous claims in a newspaper, inflammatory suggestions that a certain person or persons should be killed.

If you were surrounded by enemies, would you take the chance of waiting for words to become actions?

I pose that only as a philosophical question. But for many Israelis, that is how they live their lives. Better to kill a possibility than to wait for it to kill you.

Very easy to view that as terrorism. It could also be seen as self-preservation.

Take your pick.

Let's face it. Kidnapping your citizens or shooting at you with rockets or guns would be considered attacking you. This is the kind of thing that elicits a retaliatory attack.

 

[slyc_willie]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Boxlicker101
I agree about definition, but I think most reasonable pesons would agree that defending yourself by attacking those who are attacking you is not terorism.




Let's face it. Kidnapping your citizens or shooting at you with rockets or guns would be considered attacking you. This is the kind of thing that elicits a retaliatory attack.

The perceived threat of doing the same also elicits the same response.

I don't apologize for anyone. I merely see the various sides.

 

[rgraham666]

Thanks Box. For showing that the Right in America and the Islamists are now objective allies. They need each other to stay in existence. Without the other they would fade into history.

And my first thought when I saw your link wasn't, 'The Muslims have done it again.'. It was 'Those militant Hindus have done it again.'

 

[Liar]

I agree about definition, but I think most reasonable pesons would agree that defending yourself by attacking those who are attacking you is not terorism.

But then all it comes down to is "but you started it", "no, you did", "no, you", "no, you".

Because that's EXCATLY what the Palestinian Jihad, Hamas, Hezbollah and up until lately, the PLO are doing towards Israel. Defending themselves against a violent invasion. From their perspective.

So they're not terrorists then?

Let's face it. Kidnapping your citizens or shooting at you with rockets or guns would be considered attacking you. This is the kind of thing that elicits a retaliatory attack.

How about helicopter airstrikes and preemptive arrests? I call that shooting with rockets and kidnapping.

Not defending either side here, just saying that your view is simplistic and biased.

 

[Liar]

Oh and to answer your original post...

I am aware that the vast majority of Muslims are not fanatical terorists. However, I will say this: Of any large group, such as a religious denominations, races, nationalities, etc., The percentage of Muslims who are fanaticasl terrorists is probably far and away the largest. I have no solid proof of that; it is strictly an observation from reading about so many things such as this, and not reading about as many incidents, or incidents as bloody, that are pepetrated by any other group of people.

Ok, so it seems like there's an over representation of religious fanatism in the Muslim world at this day and age. Have you even bothered to devote two brain cells and as many seconds to the question why?

Because they're Ragheads and Ragheads are Evil? Because the Koran is al "Kill Kill Kill AAAAREGH!" and every other religion is all about peace, love, unicorns and rainbows and shit? Because the moon is in Uranus? What?

Come on, I'm waiting.

 

[voluptuary_manque]

Oh and to answer your original post...

Ok, so it seems like there's an over representation of religious fanatism in the Muslim world at this day and age. Have you even bothered to devote two brain cells and as many seconds to the question why?

Because they're Ragheads and Ragheads are Evil? Because the Koran is al "Kill Kill Kill AAAAREGH!" and every other religion is all about peace, love, unicorns and rainbows and shit? Because the moon is in Uranus? What?

Come on, I'm waiting.

Because Mohammed needed allies and the closest ones he could find were Bedouins who, like the European Medieval nobility, considered warfare a grand sport. So he built into his theology approval for the conquest of Unbelievers and promised them dominion over the world, the fat, soft Townies, if you will.

For nearly a thousand years the Moslem conquests seemed to be following that promise and then, about the Battle of Tarento, things began to go seriously, terribly wrong for them. After WWII oil seemed to be the key to world domination but that all ended up in the hands of the ruling elite of the Arab world and True Believers weren't getting much of it and now that the industrial world is rapidly aiming its intellect towards the elimination of oil as a necessity, the Islamic world is once again headed into the backwaters of civilization. Its birthrate is falling at the fastest rate of any group, its princes are turning out to be just as decadent as the Khalifes of old and the promise of world dominion is fading.

What causes Islamic Fundamentalist jihadees? Frustration.

 

[xssve]

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/people-places/34347399.html