Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

Palomar · 2005-07-16 12:11:32

Appeasement is your issue not mine. I never advocated appeasement.
Please apologize for saying I ever did.

*Sure. Just as soon as you apologize for saying I "cheerlead for"

Western fascism-lite wannabes.

But you know what? Don't bother with an apology (we'll just call it "even") because I'm letting the issue drop after saying this:

I'll repeat it -again-:

I continue to question the validity of the Iraq war.

That hardly jibes with your comment.

There's the Iraq war ... then there's the continued troubles with terrorists abroad and unrelated to Iraq. I'm trying to sort through the issues related to each, and independent of one another.

This has already gone beyond the point. You don't give me credit for the similarities we have, nor the times I've credited you with being right.

As for Left vs Right...generally I don't give a hoot about Left vs Right (that truly is not *my* issue), as my many posts should have shown by now. Some of us can see beyond The Divide (hence my being a Moderate).

Cya.

--Cindy

Josh Cryer · 2005-07-16 13:32:35

I am disappointed, I can understand hostilities between Robert and GCNR, they're intellectuals, they're passionate about their various feilds (so I won't out and say anything about their general jerkyness to one another). But the two of you have no reason to be so "passionate" about mere politics. These threads have created these lines between individuals here that really aren't necessary. We're all part of the same group (Mars enthusiasts). Our differences are minor. Don't let this utter shit get to your heads.

clark · 2005-07-16 15:02:51

:laugh:

I shouldn't laugh, but then I do a lot of things I shouldn't.

I have just gone through the arduous task of reviewing every post ever written to this point, in every thread, on this board. Nope, no one here ever blamed the victims of terrorism.

No one is saying some shmuck on a bus, or a plane or at a disco deserved to get killed by terrorists.

What seems to be lost here is that while we can agree that we need to do something about bad people doing bad things, we disagree on how best to solve the problem.

It's easy to fall into the trap of looking at outward appearances and making broad generalizations about a group of people. It's easy to say, "they treat their women badly", and end the discussion there.

However, is the way a culture treats their women justification enough to do all the things we are doing now? I have an open mind, so if you think so, say so. But I for one think that if we are going to go through the trouble of righting all the ills of the world, we ought to have a frank and open discussion on doing just that.

You see, we never had that discussion. We never had the debate to determine what the consensus opinion was. Instead, we were told half-truths and outright lies to avoid the actual debate.

I for one am pissed, not because I think doing good for the world is wrong, but because I respect that other people have a differing opinion and their voices were shut out.

And just for the fun of it, and believe me, spelling is not my strong suit, but it is imperialists.

Every time I read that I think a bunch of Muslims are coming over the border to count things.
:laugh:

Toodles.

BWhite · 2005-07-16 22:03:27

I shall take the public advice offered by Josh and other advice given in private and undertake a unilateral ceasefire on issues related to terrorism and Iraq.

Don't no one post anything too outrageous or maybe I will need to create a new persona.

Cheers!

= = =

By the way, you are right Josh.

= = =

One edit.

When does prudence become appeasement and turn around and bite you in the a***?

It would be imprudent to justify appeasement on the grounds of prudence. :;):

Edited By BWhite on 1121610551

DonPanic · 2005-07-17 11:00:03

Boo
Iraq collateral damages on the forum ? ???

Well, the support for Bin Laden and is fast shrinking in most of arab and islami countries, as they see day by day the terrorist wildery, extended at young kids.

Guantanamo and mistreatments of anykind, armed overreaction as the Fallujah assault had rose the hostility of the muslims to a top and were the best Al Qaeda supports.

This opinion reversal is not due to tough counter reactions to the terrorists.

The whole world will support USA if acting as morally acting peacekeepers instead of warmongers. No doubts.

Shaun Barrett · 2005-07-17 17:54:06

Sometimes I wonder whether the lack of a soundtrack in internet conversations like these causes people to misinterpret the mood of some posts. Without cues from a person's 'tone-of-voice', the same post can be taken in various ways - sometimes not in the way it was intended at all(?).

Josh speaks wisely and I agree absolutely that our agreement on Mars exploration must override our disagreements on some political points.

In an atmosphere of conciliation, I would point out that my last post had more than a tinge of frustrated resignation to it, which may have gone unnoticed. I feel there is no solution to the barbarity of Islamic extremism, except from within Islam itself, and despair of that religion doing anything about the problem for many years to come.
I agree with Cindy that the basis of Islam, as it exists in many parts of the world today, is fundamentally flawed in its treatment of women. And that this misogynist-mindset, together with the lack of separation of church and state in Muslim countries, probably is connected with the violence we're seing now.
I also agree that extreme religions can't be reasoned with, despite Clark's belief to the contrary.

Bill:-

... AND Western fascism-lite wannabes that people like Cindy and Shaun cheerlead for.

Now now, Bill!

clark · 2005-07-17 18:12:27

Well, since I made it into the apologia, I will direct me comment here, all in the name of clearning up misperceptions... :laugh:

I also agree that extreme religions can't be reasoned with, despite Clark's belief to the contrary.

I have not stated that we can find common ground with extremism. However, extremists will use whatever opportunity presents itself to espouse their views as represenative of the everyone, including the more moderate sects of any group.

We are not waging a war against Islam, but it is turning out to be a war against Islam, and views expressed liek your own do not help. Too often I see others willfuly and ignorantly try to portray the situation as one of generalizations and broad brush stokes that do little to explain what is going on.

In Iraq in particular, women had rights. Secular muslims were in control. There were no terroists running amok in Al Amok.

Meanwhile, the US and her western allies get into bed, or stay in bed, with countries who impose a harsher view of islamic law. Women are being treated poorly in countries like Saudia Arabia and Pakistan- the same places where we operate from- not into.

Yet somehow the more intelligent in the group are supposed to buy into the premise that going off into Iraq was to make our world better. It's a fu*king lie.

The end product of that lie is to enable extremisim, which allows the terroists to draw more legitimacy among the moderates. The moderates have a hard time of denoucning the extremists because of the US lies (in relation to our reasons for invasion) and because our actions give an air of legitimacy to the response of extremists.

So the more moderates get involved because they think this is their only chance to make a difference.

Mind you Shaun, millions of muslims live in our countries- yet we end up with a handful of attacks that are supposed to represent a threat to our way of life. It just isn't so.

The politicans scared the public and lied to the public to stifle debate. They used an exscuse for an opportunity they did not want to lose because they were afraid that their "vision" could not stand public scrutiny.

I agree we need to do something about muslim extremists, the same way I agree we need to do something about Christian extremists or jewish extremists or conservative extremists or liberal extremists. Both ends of the spectrum are the enemy of the middle.

Going into Iraq may have been the right thing, but the way it was executed has undermined the legitimacy and rationale of our purpose. The western world is a democracy, it is supposed to debate prior to action and listen to all sides. That was not done, and the reason is was not done was based on a false pretense.

BWhite · 2005-07-17 18:35:52

Bill:-
... AND Western fascism-lite wannabes that people like Cindy and Shaun cheerlead for.
Now now, Bill!

Be careful what you pray for. . .

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-17 19:50:01

These threads have created these lines between individuals here that really aren't necessary. We're all part of the same group (Mars enthusiasts). Our differences are minor. Don't let this utter shit get to your heads.

Can't argue with that. But I must comment on this:

... AND Western fascism-lite wannabes that people like Cindy and Shaun cheerlead for.

Suffice it to say. . . Tastes great and less filling.

Carry on beating the bejesus out of that horse skeleton.

BWhite · 2005-07-17 20:04:57

These threads have created these lines between individuals here that really aren't necessary. We're all part of the same group (Mars enthusiasts). Our differences are minor. Don't let this utter shit get to your heads.
Can't argue with that. But I must comment on this:
... AND Western fascism-lite wannabes that people like Cindy and Shaun cheerlead for.
Suffice it to say. . . Tastes great and less filling.
Carry on beating the bejesus out of that horse skeleton.

Heck, if you gotta have fascists, incompetent fascists are the way to go. . .

I mean come on, making prisoners wear women's underwear on their heads and do dog tricks? Or if that fails have US servicewomen partially disrobe and give 'em lap dances?

I wonder how much actionable intel that generated. :;):

Can't really call it torture, or even cruel and unusual since there are free American citizen who fly to Vegas and pay good money for similar treatment.

But after word gets out about stuff like that, the real fascists will need to hang their heads and pretend not to know these US wannabe fascists.

</snark>

Shaun Barrett · 2005-07-17 21:23:03

Clark:-

... yet we end up with a handful of attacks that are supposed to represent a threat to our way of life. It just isn't so.

Hmmm.
If you look at what I said, you'll find I stated quite clearly my opinion that the terrorists will never succeed in changing the West to suit their religious views. That was the point of my argument. Their cause is not connected to any rational or attainable goals. In that sense, you're right; our way of life, ultimately, is not threatened.

In another sense, though, there are some people who regard having trains and buses blown out from under them in rush-hour traffic as a threat to their way of life. Probably because their way of life involves travelling to and from work each day on public transport.
These same people, whose views I tend to sympathize with, look at being incinerated in an explosion while holidaying in a place like Bali, or having the architecture in their cities suddenly and explosively rearranged by means of passenger planes used as battering rams, and think of these things as somehow threatening - at least on a local scale.
And I think they have a point.

Clark:-

We are not waging a war against Islam, but it is turning out to be a war against Islam, and views expressed liek your own do not help.

You're right that we're not waging a war against Islam as a whole and you may well be right that it is, or could be, turning out that way.
But the reason it could turn out that way doesn't lie with individuals like me expressing the view that the extremists are irrational, which they are. The reason lies within Islam, where the clerics are failing to present a united front against the 'bad seed' in their midst. If every Imam declared loudly that suicide bombers are not martyrs, that killing themselves and the innocent people around them is condemned in the Koran and is a sin against God (which is the case, apparently), the murder and mayhem would almost certainly stop.
This indicates to me that the fault lies not just with a few mixed-up savages on a mindless killing spree for no obvious reason, it shows there's something rotten within some echelons of the hierarchy of Islam.

Clark, you may follow Bill's lead in thinking prudence is sometimes more important than morality. And I concede there is, regrettably, a place for such pragmatism in the real world.
But where we have prominent Muslim clerics effectively encouraging terror and murder from the pulpit, or at the very least not condemning such atrocities unconditionally (and this is happening here in Australia), then I think the time for pussy-footing is over.
We need to make it clear to such clerics that the freedom of speech they enjoy here in the 'evil West' does not extend to inciting civil unrest and violence.

If you or Bill find this viewpoint 'imprudent', though I don't believe you will, then this is definitely where our paths part company. This is where, at least in my book, prudence blends into spineless appeasement.
There's not much we can do against Islamic-extremist murderers if they're determined to kill us in the streets, but at least we don't have to listen to their rogue clerics cheering them on from the sidelines.

BWhite · 2005-07-17 22:34:30

Clark:-
... yet we end up with a handful of attacks that are supposed to represent a threat to our way of life. It just isn't so.
Hmmm.
If you look at what I said, you'll find I stated quite clearly my opinion that the terrorists will never succeed in changing the West to suit their religious views. That was the point of my argument. Their cause is not connected to any rational or attainable goals. In that sense, you're right; our way of life, ultimately, is not threatened.
In another sense, though, there are some people who regard having trains and buses blown out from under them in rush-hour traffic as a threat to their way of life. Probably because their way of life involves travelling to and from work each day on public transport.
These same people, whose views I tend to sympathize with, look at being incinerated in an explosion while holidaying in a place like Bali, or having the architecture in their cities suddenly and explosively rearranged by means of passenger planes used as battering rams, and think of these things as somehow threatening - at least on a local scale.
And I think they have a point.

Wow! I see a genuine basis for agreement. Lets see how far we can go and maybe resolve this dispute for good. So, in the spirit of constructive engagement, I offer:

We agree on your post quoted above. I also note that lightning kills more people each year than al Qaeda. That said, in the future, good POLICE WORK will prevent these attacks.

Good police work like not revealing the identity of double agents. Or snatching people from Italy and having an Italian judge issue arrest warrants for CIA agents.

Or giving classified material to known http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy … rinter]gay escort web site operators. :;):

"Jeff Gannon" had possession of and questioned Joe Wilson about a CIA memo that was classified at the time of the interview. How did this guy get that memo?

No one at the White House will discuss this question.

= = =

Shaun, I never, ever, said the War on Terror didn't need winning.

More to the point, our current Administration "leading us" is like the Keystone Kops doing so many things wrong their policies are making it harder rather than easier to win.

And despite our countless blunders, al Qaeda manages only a small handful of attacks, which proves how WEAK they really are.

In his heart, bin Laden probably is an evil as Hitler - - but he has maybe one-billionth or one ten-billionth of Hitler's power - - so lets not inflate a boogeyman beyond the reality.

Good police work premised on strong state-to-state understandings, like that terrific operation the CIA recently accomplished with excellent assistance from those cheese eating surrender monkey French!

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-18 07:12:36

We agree on your post quoted above. I also note that lightning kills more people each year than al Qaeda. That said, in the future, good POLICE WORK will prevent these attacks.

Bill, while your reasoning here is sound it rests on a false assumption. Police generally respond after a crime has been committed. If police work is to be our prime response to the terrorist threat we must either greatly increase surveillance, law enforcement authority to detain people and enact harsher penalties for activities that may be terrorist related depending on the circumstances of the case. Needless to say the precedent will spill over to other areas (in fact is already doing so to some degree) and we'll be worse for it. Otherwise we're in the absurd position of trying to prosecute suicide bombers after the fact.

The fact is that militant Islamic terrorism is an act of war, not merely a criminal action. While responding to a stateless attacker in a traditional "nation states at war" manner is not fully appropriate, neither is treating this act of war primarily as a law enforcement issue.

Mmmm. Rotting horse meat.

BWhite · 2005-07-18 10:26:45

A minor nit. Organized crime task forces do seek to prevent future crime.

Perhaps coordinated covert intelligence to infiltrate terror rings goes beyond what we consider traditional police work but that is within my understanding of police work.

http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/orgcrime/ocshome.htm]FBI link:

The FBI's fight against organized crime is unlike other criminal programs. Instead of focusing on these crimes as individual events, the FBI's Organized Crime Program targets the entire organization responsible for a variety of criminal activities. The FBI has found that even if key individuals in an organization are removed, the depth and financial strength of the organization often allows the enterprise to continue.
The dismantling or disruption of major international and national organized criminal enterprises is an area of FBI expertise. The FBI is uniquely qualified to dismantle organizations because of the experience, training and expertise of its agents in targeting criminal enterprises as opposed to individual criminal acts, the broad Title 18 and Title 21 statutory jurisdictions at its disposal, the FBI's presence throughout the country, and its history as a methodical and thorough investigative agency.

Like I said, POLICE WORK.

Edited By BWhite on 1121704286

DonPanic · 2005-07-18 14:25:10

LO

I feel there is no solution to the barbarity of Islamic extremism

We cannot and shall not compete with the barbarity, don't we? unless becoming barbarians ourselves.

Like I said, POLICE WORK.

Police + smart intelligence services :;):
USA and coaliton leaders would take advantage in reinforcing and extending International Justice courts powers up to prosecute as criminals all theses extremist preachers calling for hate in the pakistanese, afghani and the neighborhood countries' madrassas.

(...)except from within Islam itself, and despair of that religion doing anything about the problem for many years to come.

I guess that the many peaceful Muslims wich are threatened in their lives by terrorists or had parents killed in attacks won't agree with you and do not think that the extremists' barbarity come from their religion but rather from politics.
Islamofascists are very fascist, and very little muslims.
In spite he knows it's dangerous, an algerian friend of mine, who knows very well the muslim holly texts, although he is an atheistic, succeeds the most often to counter the islamist students speeches, opposing them a better knowledge on Koran.

Shaun Barrett · 2005-07-18 17:51:08

Here's an article from today's "The Australian" newspaper, which illustrates the kind of problem I've mentioned that exists within Islam - Crackdown]http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,15976086%255E601,00.html]"Crackdown on terror books".

For those with too little time to read the whole thing, here are a few sentences:-

Federal and state counter-terrorism officers will investigate at least one Islamic bookshop in Sydney following revelations it is selling literature promoting jihad and justifying suicide bombings.
Another bookstore in Melbourne, run by the country's most fundamentalist cleric, was yesterday selling a book calling for Christians to be trampled underfoot.
"It is either Islam or death," says the book, which is sold from the bookshop attached to the Brunswick prayer room where Sheik Mohammed Omran delivers his fiery sermons.

The latest glossy magazine, from a group called Islamic Youth Movement in Sydney, features a glowing interview with a leader of Iraqi terrorist group Ansar al-Islam.
Fundamentalist scholar Sheik Omran's shop sells a book that details reasons Muslims should not befriend Jews, Christians or non-Muslims. "If it becomes clear that someone is at odds with Islam, then fight him. The (Jew or Christian) who insults the Prophet should be killed," it says. Sheik Omran's website also praises a US scholar convicted last week for inciting his young followers to wage war. The website paints the influential scholar, Ali-al-Timimi, as a victim of spurious charges.

Weeding out these rogue Imams may not totally prevent acts of terror in our streets, but not weeding them out is unconscionable! We can't carry on turning a blind eye to this sort of thing for fear of upsetting the Muslim populations in our respective countries. Clerics like these must be rounded up and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
If a blond blue-eyed caucasian with a German accent stood up in public, with a swastika on his arm, and suggested violence against Jews, the left-wing rent-a-crowd protesters would be jamming the streets demanding action.
Why is the Left soft-pedalling on this equally fascistic extremist-Islamic problem? (I think I know why and I think others do, too.)
In fact, why are we all being so blase?! ???

clark · 2005-07-18 17:58:01

You're right Shaun. Lets start rounding up muslims.

DonPanic · 2005-07-18 18:39:25

LO

Here's an article from today's "The Australian" newspaper, which illustrates the kind of problem I've mentioned that exists within Islam - Crackdown]http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,15976086%255E601,00.html]"Crackdown on terror books".
For those with too little time to read the whole thing, here are a few sentences:-
Federal and state counter-terrorism officers will investigate at least one Islamic bookshop in Sydney following revelations it is selling literature promoting jihad and justifying suicide bombings.
Another bookstore in Melbourne, run by the country's most fundamentalist cleric, was yesterday selling a book calling for Christians to be trampled underfoot.
"It is either Islam or death," says the book, which is sold from the bookshop attached to the Brunswick prayer room where Sheik Mohammed Omran delivers his fiery sermons.
The latest glossy magazine, from a group called Islamic Youth Movement in Sydney, features a glowing interview with a leader of Iraqi terrorist group Ansar al-Islam.
Fundamentalist scholar Sheik Omran's shop sells a book that details reasons Muslims should not befriend Jews, Christians or non-Muslims. "If it becomes clear that someone is at odds with Islam, then fight him. The (Jew or Christian) who insults the Prophet should be killed," it says. Sheik Omran's website also praises a US scholar convicted last week for inciting his young followers to wage war. The website paints the influential scholar, Ali-al-Timimi, as a victim of spurious charges.

Weeding out these rogue Imams may not totally prevent acts of terror in our streets, but not weeding them out is unconscionable! We can't carry on turning a blind eye to this sort of thing for fear of upsetting the Muslim populations in our respective countries. Clerics like these must be rounded up and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.

Did they discovered that rigth now ? Bright journalists !
Wha, quelle claivoyance !

If a blond blue-eyed caucasian with a German accent stood up in public, with a swastika on his arm, and suggested violence against Jews, the left-wing rent-a-crowd protesters would be jamming the streets demanding action.
Why is the Left soft-pedalling on this equally fascistic extremist-Islamic problem? (I think I know why and I think others do, too.)

Sorry, but we didn't wait for London bombings for trying to fight and reduce muslim extremists' influence, be leftist or rightist, the governments named antiterrorist inquirers and judges.
Anarchist bombers, ETA murderers, Oklahoma bombers, nobody is less guilty for the death of innocent victims than the "islamo"terrorists.
What do you think ? Leftists, unlike your former russian foes, don't want security for everybody, themselves and their children too ?

BWhite · 2005-07-18 21:13:04

LO
Here's an article from today's "The Australian" newspaper, which illustrates the kind of problem I've mentioned that exists within Islam - Crackdown]http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,15976086%255E601,00.html]"Crackdown on terror books".
For those with too little time to read the whole thing, here are a few sentences:-
Federal and state counter-terrorism officers will investigate at least one Islamic bookshop in Sydney following revelations it is selling literature promoting jihad and justifying suicide bombings.
Another bookstore in Melbourne, run by the country's most fundamentalist cleric, was yesterday selling a book calling for Christians to be trampled underfoot.
"It is either Islam or death," says the book, which is sold from the bookshop attached to the Brunswick prayer room where Sheik Mohammed Omran delivers his fiery sermons.
The latest glossy magazine, from a group called Islamic Youth Movement in Sydney, features a glowing interview with a leader of Iraqi terrorist group Ansar al-Islam.
Fundamentalist scholar Sheik Omran's shop sells a book that details reasons Muslims should not befriend Jews, Christians or non-Muslims. "If it becomes clear that someone is at odds with Islam, then fight him. The (Jew or Christian) who insults the Prophet should be killed," it says. Sheik Omran's website also praises a US scholar convicted last week for inciting his young followers to wage war. The website paints the influential scholar, Ali-al-Timimi, as a victim of spurious charges.

Weeding out these rogue Imams may not totally prevent acts of terror in our streets, but not weeding them out is unconscionable! We can't carry on turning a blind eye to this sort of thing for fear of upsetting the Muslim populations in our respective countries. Clerics like these must be rounded up and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
Did they discovered that rigth now ? Bright journalists !
Wha, quelle claivoyance !

No, they used http://google.com]google.

Smart journalists!

Palomar · 2005-07-18 21:30:12

Here's an article from today's "The Australian" newspaper, which illustrates the kind of problem I've mentioned that exists within Islam - Crackdown]http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,15976086%255E601,00.html]"Crackdown on terror books".
For those with too little time to read the whole thing, here are a few sentences:-
Federal and state counter-terrorism officers will investigate at least one Islamic bookshop in Sydney following revelations it is selling literature promoting jihad and justifying suicide bombings.
Another bookstore in Melbourne, run by the country's most fundamentalist cleric, was yesterday selling a book calling for Christians to be trampled underfoot.
"It is either Islam or death," says the book, which is sold from the bookshop attached to the Brunswick prayer room where Sheik Mohammed Omran delivers his fiery sermons.
The latest glossy magazine, from a group called Islamic Youth Movement in Sydney, features a glowing interview with a leader of Iraqi terrorist group Ansar al-Islam.
Fundamentalist scholar Sheik Omran's shop sells a book that details reasons Muslims should not befriend Jews, Christians or non-Muslims. "If it becomes clear that someone is at odds with Islam, then fight him. The (Jew or Christian) who insults the Prophet should be killed," it says. Sheik Omran's website also praises a US scholar convicted last week for inciting his young followers to wage war. The website paints the influential scholar, Ali-al-Timimi, as a victim of spurious charges.
Weeding out these rogue Imams may not totally prevent acts of terror in our streets, but not weeding them out is unconscionable! We can't carry on turning a blind eye to this sort of thing for fear of upsetting the Muslim populations in our respective countries. Clerics like these must be rounded up and prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
If a blond blue-eyed caucasian with a German accent stood up in public, with a swastika on his arm, and suggested violence against Jews, the left-wing rent-a-crowd protesters would be jamming the streets demanding action.
Why is the Left soft-pedalling on this equally fascistic extremist-Islamic problem? (I think I know why and I think others do, too.)
In fact, why are we all being so blase?! ???

*Thanks for posting that, Shaun.

I'm sure it'll go right over some heads or they just "won't understand" [::polite cough::]...(won't being the operative word here, as opposed to -can't-).

It's a difficult read, that article.

Sure terrorism is terrorism is terrorism is
wrong (regardless of where it is found or who is doing it).

You're right, IMO, to point out that some segments of the population are afraid to call -certain- terrorists terrorists for fear of the "racism" charge.

I don't care if it's Timothy McVeigh (white U.S. boy) or someone named Al-Jabbar from Pakistan. A terrorist is a terrorist.

If most people in the West become willing to knuckle under and submit to rule through terrorism by cultural empirialist Islamists (especially via guilt-induction for past crimes, wrongs and mistakes), then we're majorly screwed. And at that point, future generations could rightfully ask if we deserved our freedoms and liberties anymore.

Samuel Adams
"If ye love wealth better than liberty, the tranquility of servitude better than the animating contest of freedom, go home from us in peace. We ask not your counsels or arms. Crouch down and lick the hands which feed you. May your chains set lightly upon you, and may posterity forget that ye were our countrymen."
(speech at the Philadelphia State House, August 1, 1776)

--Cindy

BWhite · 2005-07-18 22:04:28

My college campus had three (yes, exactly three) Nazis. They never got dates.

We also had two members of the Spartacus Youth League (honest-to-God Communists). We laughed at them.

Have no fear, Cindy. The FBI keeps a VERY CLOSE WATCH on radical Muslims who speak out like those Shaun describes. Heck, the FBI has files on Greenpeace members.

Good police work is the answer. The only answer.

clark · 2005-07-19 05:40:54

Apparently group think is the answer too.

You want to round up people, fine. You want to go off to distant lands and kill people, fine.

You want me to like it? Forget it.

There is an apparent zeal for the things we "have" to do. What many fail to realize is the not everyone is thrilled about killing other people. If everyone was, I doubt we would exercise what restraint we have shown.

The continual questions and challenges to the idea that we must confront individuals with the acceptance of killing them because they pose a possible threat to ourselves is an attempt to find other solutions.

C M Edwards · 2005-07-19 05:44:04

USA and coaliton leaders would take advantage in reinforcing and extending International Justice courts powers up to prosecute as criminals all theses extremist preachers calling for hate in the pakistanese, afghani and the neighborhood countries' madrassas.

No, no. The USA could never do that. We might get dragged before the international court also!

I'm with the Bush administration on this. Our dispute with terrorists should be settled out of court, in the time honored tradition of the Mafia. Hatfields and McCoys. OK Corral. McDonalds and Burger King.

It's the American way. :;):

Palomar · 2005-07-19 06:05:55

http://www.livescience.com/forcesofnatu … ke.html]21 Guardsmen injured

*...it's not what you think. Whoa. Only 1 person knocked unconscious was admitted to the hospital. ::shakes head::

--Cindy

Cobra Commander · 2005-07-19 06:20:31

Bill, I'm curious as to why you're suddenly on this "police work" kick, what brought this on with such zeal?

Anyway. . .

The old nation-states at war model doesn't really apply here because the enemy has no state but rather acts as a parasite or in symbiosis with sovereign states. A law enforcement approach doesn't really apply either because this is an act of war, we're dealing not with criminals but with fanatical self-styled warriors bent on killing as many of us as they can. They're attacking our nations and our culture, not running a crime syndicate.

But there's a third model that's only been hinted at in various discussions here and what the hell, time to lay it on the table.

In the case of terrorism within Western nations what we have is a case of two very different and opposed cultures occupying the same space. There are many historical examples of this, whether one chooses to go with whites vs. American Indians, Romans vs. Gauls, or perhaps most relevant, European Chistendom vs. Islam during the Middle Ages, doesn't much matter. In all cases, one of those cultures is always snuffed out in the territory of overlap. Sure, some diffusion takes place but in essence only one survives.

Perhaps going even further than militant jihadi-wacko Islam, "serious" Islam, as defined by those who take the religion to the point of actually praying five days a day in the office, dressing in traditional garb, etc. is an alien element within American, Australian and European society, one in which the fanatics grow. Foreign colonists.

So the real question before us is how are we going to respond to the steady influx of foreign colonists? Do we let them supplant us, endeavor to neutralize them through assimilation, or outright forcibly repel the invasion?

New Mars Forums

Announcement

#276 2005-07-16 12:11:32

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#277 2005-07-16 13:32:35

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#278 2005-07-16 15:02:51

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#279 2005-07-16 22:03:27

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#280 2005-07-17 11:00:03

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#281 2005-07-17 17:54:06

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#282 2005-07-17 18:12:27

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#283 2005-07-17 18:35:52

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#284 2005-07-17 19:50:01

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#285 2005-07-17 20:04:57

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#286 2005-07-17 21:23:03

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#287 2005-07-17 22:34:30

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#288 2005-07-18 07:12:36

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#289 2005-07-18 10:26:45

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#290 2005-07-18 14:25:10

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#291 2005-07-18 17:51:08

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#292 2005-07-18 17:58:01

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#293 2005-07-18 18:39:25

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#294 2005-07-18 21:13:04

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#295 2005-07-18 21:30:12

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#296 2005-07-18 22:04:28

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#297 2005-07-19 05:40:54

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#298 2005-07-19 05:44:04

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#299 2005-07-19 06:05:55

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

#300 2005-07-19 06:20:31

Re: Political Potpourri VII - The Seventh Seal?

Board footer