CurlTalk

Terrorism will exist as long as certain conditions exist.

urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
I had the honor of hearing Archbsihop Desmond Tutu speak yesterday evening and he talked about this.
Terrorism

"When you know that there are things like poverty, disease and inequalities in the world today, I am not surprised that terrorism has emerged but why it has taken so long. There comes a time when even a humble and most peace-loving person says I have had enough. My view is that we won't win the war against terror as long as there are conditions that make feelings desperate."
/home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.squidoo.com%2Fdesmond-tutu%2F" class="Popup

So that is one reason why this so-called "war on terror" is unjust. If terrorism is truly what one is concerned about, wouldn't it make more sense to focus on something like, oh, I don't know, poverty?

Do you think that Bush understands this good and well, but would never actually acknowlege it because of his desire to have the war for other, dubious reasons? I mean, I don't know how intelligent the man is, but he certainly has intelligent people around him advising him.

Maybe I am the dumb one. I bet he does know, or at least has the capacity to understand, that what he is doing, this war, will not help the conditions that cause terrorism (some say it is making them worse). He just doesn't care about the conditions people are living in elsewhere. He doesn't even seem to care about it here. Why am I even giving him the benefit of the doubt?
"It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

Password= urban
«1

Comments

  • battinlashbattinlash Posts: 1,850Registered Users
    Cross-posting a little here from what I mentioned earlier...

    I believe it's all about greed and global domination. This is the first step (or at least the most obvious) to controlling resources in a very powerful part of the world. Terrorism is a convenient and believable excuse and everyone has fallen for it. People may call me a conspiracy theorist but I don't care; I have conducted a lot research on this and the more I learn, the more afraid I become.

    As I've said before, Bush is dangerous. He is a snake without a conscience, he's rich, and he's extremely well-connected. There is no end to the damage he can cause.
  • urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
    I think you're right, Tantrum. I don't like to believe it's true (Bush's true goals and intentionally manipulating people by planting fear into them, or stoking what was already there-- that's a fascist technique) because it sickens me and makes me so angry, but denial is pretty dangerous.

    Is that what most Americans are in; denial? 40 some percent of us still think that Bush is doing a good job.

    What do you think will happen after the next president is elected? Do you think Bush's wrath will continue? I know that Bush is continuing on with Reagan's wrath as far as domestic policy is concerned.
    "It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

    Password= urban
  • wild~hairwild~hair Posts: 9,890Registered Users
    I'm not such a conspiracy theorist. I think it's business as usual. When has Washington, or any other government in history, decided to help people instead of kill people to deal with a threat? It's in human nature to react in such a way, but it doesn't have to be. We have free will.

    I saw a piece recently on Dennis Kucinich's U.S. Department of Peace initiative. He wants there to be a cabinet member for peace. How absolutely wonderful would that be?

    The problem is, there are some people in this world, many of them working in goverment, and certainly a lot of people advising Bush, who scoff at the idea of peace. They interviewed a congressman from AZ for the piece and he literally laughed at the concept. He smirked throughout the whole interview as though the whole thing was a joke. That's how jaded and pathetic a lot of people are.

    Here's a transcript of the story and you can watch it there too.

    In the story, one woman said that it's a lot easier to drop a bomb than to go in and deal with problems through dialog and working with people. Easier in the short run that is. In the long run, bombs and guns cause way more problems, of course. The hatred they sow is immeasurable and manifests in countless ways. And it's not just pain for our enemies but us too. Look at the thread on PTSD on these boards. That hurts our country for many years, affecting many lives, not just those of the soldiers, but their families and friends.

    Unfortunately, we have an idea in this country that everything should be resolved quickly and cheaply. So that's another hurdle to get past.
  • urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
    I agree with you as well, sfcurlee. For me it's a matter of semantics whether it's conspiracy or long-practiced sick dysfunctionality.

    My SOs mom heard Kucinich speak recently! It's so depressing to me that a congressman, or anyone, would roll their eyes at the thought of a Department of Peace. But at least there are politicians who would suggest such a thing. Thank you for the link!!

    SOs mom or maybe it was his dad also used this analogy of world conflict as knots in a rope. Instead of taking the time to carefully unknot it, therefore not permanently harming any of the threads and fibers, the US just comes along with a hack-saw and fire and slashes and burns its way through it. Consequently causing irreparable damage to all sides.

    And do you really think it's human nature to react with violence rather than with compassion and negotiations? If it is, I think it's barbaric and that many of us have evolved past that. Unfortunately, I guess most people who are in power are still at or operating from that level.
    "It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

    Password= urban
  • wild~hairwild~hair Posts: 9,890Registered Users
    I do think it's human nature. In our animal nature, we have the fight or flight response. When it comes to global struggles, these seem to prevail. I think our gut instincts kick in -- fight or flight?! -- and then some general says that war is the answer. Or a political leader says we have to ignore the problem because we cannot afford to get involved. And one gut reaction gets reinforced and we're either off to war or ignoring atrocities. It happens all the time.

    I agree with you that many individuals have evolved past this. I really think that if people start acting peacefully and proactively in their own lives and this becomes the norm, we will eventually have peace between nations.

    It has to start at the individual level, because government always follows the people, not the other way around.

    However, I do think a Dept of Peace could be a positive thing for an otherwise fairly militaristic, greedy and self-absorbed nation. It could plant a seed.
  • AmnerisAmneris Posts: 15,117Registered Users
    Urban, that's what I've been saying forever! I love Tutu!
    Get used to me. Black, confident, cocky; my name, not yours; my religion, not yours; my goals, my own; get used to me. -Muhammad Ali


    .png


    534Pm5.png





  • urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
    Amneris wrote:
    Urban, that's what I've been saying forever! I love Tutu!

    :D
    "It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

    Password= urban
  • Peace2Peace2 Posts: 23Registered Users
    Okay I have to say something. Are you people oblivious to what Jihad is? People who exist in a state of Jihad do not want to come "talk with you to work things out." There IS NO working things out. They believe that if you are not following the Koran, they are at war with you. That is "the state of Jihad". If you are not a Koran following Muslim, then the radical Muslim believes you are in a state of Jihad with them. It doesn't matter what color you are, what country you are in, what language you speak, if you do not follow the Koran, they are AT WAR with you and as an infidel, you must die. it doesn't matter if you are Arab, if you are not a Koran-following Arab, they are in a state of war with you and unless you convert you must die.

    This is how Islam originally spread if you recall: Muhammad and his armies conquered the areas around them.

    I just cannot stomach when people start saying that we need to "go and talk" with these people. There is no going and talking. Their creeds clearly state that if you are not a Koran following person and will not convert, YOU MUST DIE. You are an infidel and must die. What part of "must die" do you not understand?

    This is not a new thing. Radical Muslims have been blowing up people and killing people around the world for years. France and Spain are terrified of the large influx of radical muslims in their country who PUBLICALLY SPEAK in their countries about taking over the government. This is not an American problem, this is not an Israeli problem, this is not a European problem: it is a Global Problem.

    And then you go and say "lets just talk with them". If President Clinton (God bless him, yes I voted for him but yes he made mistakes) did not let Bin Laden go (yes Bin Laden was detained and Clinton let him go) because he was so much into "talking and working things out" with radical extremists, we wouldn't be in such a big mess.

    Listen please. I implore you: These people will DIE for their cause which is KILLING YOU to please Allah. If you think for one second that you can TALK to someone who has been trained to die for their cause to kill you, then I beg you to re-think.

    Terrorism is not new. It has been here for decades, increasing in tenacity, boldness, and technological means. People have been dying around the globe. America has been hit around the globe and it wasn't until it hit American soil that Americans really began paying attention. Terrorism has not recently emerged and it is well-financed. These people are terrorizing because you are an infidel and you must die.

    I've said my peace. I just couldn't believe that you all were saying "lets go and work things out --la la la -- with the radical extremists."

    /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.heraldsun.news.com.au%2Fprintpage%2F0%2C5481%2C16815555%2C00.html" class="Popup

    My 50% Cherokee/50% African-American pedigree produced: 3B/3C/4A, corkscrew curls, easy to detangle, Medium, thin-normal, dark brown hair.
  • CherishCherish Posts: 1,847Registered Users
    How did I miss this thread?!! I have a busy ahead but I will be back.
  • urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
    Peace2,

    Capturing a specific terrorist and declaring war are two very, very different things.

    That's all I can muster at the moment! :lol: Hopefully Cherish and others will add their views and ideas too.

    Oh, and the way you say Islam spread, "Muhammad and his armies conquered the areas around them," didn't Christianity gain quite a few members that way too?
    "It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

    Password= urban
  • LucilleLucille Posts: 588Registered Users
    Even if it were possible to end poverty in countries over which you have no authority, poverty is not the only cause of terrorism. It is a contributor to the numbers for certain, but it is not the only cause. You may recall the Madrid bombings. In the statement about why Spain was bombed, one of the reasons given was in retaliation for the Crusades. The CRUSADES that happened a thousand years ago. That ain't poverty. That's the extreme inability to let go of a grudge. Make the Hatfields and McCoys look down right reasonable for how long their dispute lasted.
  • urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
    I agree with you Lucille; poverty isn't the only cause of terrorism.
    "It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

    Password= urban
  • LucilleLucille Posts: 588Registered Users
    That was easily the fastest response in the history of the Politics forum.
  • urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
    :lol: And to agree with someone as well!
    "It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

    Password= urban
  • Peace2Peace2 Posts: 23Registered Users
    Capturing a specific terrorist?

    There are thousands of terrorists. I hope you are not simply referring to Osama alone. He commands armies and declared war publically on the U.S. in the 1990's. War declaration had already been pronounced against US. And then, they attacked us on our own soil. The first strike in New York City was cruel, callous, and very well calculated.

    We are not in a war against a specific person but against thousands of persons.

    Declare war? We are responding to the declaration that is on us. As I said, it is a global fight we have world-wide.

    As for Christianity gaining members as a result of force or violence, that began to happen in medieval times once Christianity became corrupt. As you only need to look into history to become aware of the deep perversions that became rooted in the ROman church, but if you go back to ancient history and that is what early Christianity is, ancient history, not medieval history, which is when Islam began to spread (about 600-700 AD as compared to 0 AD which is when Christianity began to srpead), you will find that early Christianity was in no way spread through violence or coercion. In fact people died and were fed to beasts in the Coliseum as punishment for their Christian faith by the Roman Empire. Remember Nero? So no, we're talking about distinct differences here. We're talkinga bout Islam, since its inception, gaining converts through violence and Christianity gaining converts through peaceful resistance amidst persecution (remember Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?)

    So, one cannot argue and say Islam is corrupt and became violent and now it's what it is. We can say that about Christianity, that at one point it became violent and at one point, it converted people through force. However, nowhere in the New Testament from cover to cover will you ever see the use of violence being encouraged as a means of gaining converts.

    In contrast, the Koran in its original form does advocate the use of violence for gaining converts, to the point of death, and this is true (and practiced) to this day. To such an extent that Islam desires gaining an Islamic state world-wide so that there will be no infidels and Allah will be pleased. They are willing to die for this.

    In fact, let's quote the Koran.

    "Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and deal harshly with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate." (Sura 9.73)

    "When you meet the unbelievers in jihad, chop off their heads. And when you have brought them low, bind your prisoners rigorously. Then set them free or take ransom from them until the war is ended." (Sura 47.4)

    **Note that these people are doing exactly what their scriptures say: chopping off the heads of the infidels.

    "Mohammed is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Sura 48.29)



    Peace

    My 50% Cherokee/50% African-American pedigree produced: 3B/3C/4A, corkscrew curls, easy to detangle, Medium, thin-normal, dark brown hair.
  • CherishCherish Posts: 1,847Registered Users
    urbancurl wrote:
    I had the honor of hearing Archbsihop Desmond Tutu speak yesterday evening and he talked about this.
    Terrorism

    "When you know that there are things like poverty, disease and inequalities in the world today, I am not surprised that terrorism has emerged but why it has taken so long. There comes a time when even a humble and most peace-loving person says I have had enough. My view is that we won't win the war against terror as long as there are conditions that make feelings desperate."
    /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.squidoo.com%2Fdesmond-tutu%2F" class="Popup

    I have much respect for Desmond Tutu, but other than the sentence I bolded, it's evident he knows very little about terrorism, and perhaps should look into it closer because addressing it publicly.

    Peace2 is correct that terrorism is not new. I've posted before that long before the US had 9/11, many of lived with it as a daily reality, albeit in the form of smaller attacks. There is/was the IRA, PLO, basque separatists and many others in various countries. So when he says why it's taken so long, I have to say: where have you been?!

    It's not poverty... it's greed. When one country takes the land of another and calls it theirs leading to decades of bitterness and hate that festers and is passed from one generation to the next, the facts can sometimes become blurry because one only sees the hate, but not the root cause. And this is why it's so important to refer to history.
  • CherishCherish Posts: 1,847Registered Users
    Peace2 wrote:
    Okay I have to say something. Are you people oblivious to what Jihad is? People who exist in a state of Jihad do not want to come "talk with you to work things out." There IS NO working things out. They believe that if you are not following the Koran, they are at war with you. That is "the state of Jihad". If you are not a Koran following Muslim, then the radical Muslim believes you are in a state of Jihad with them. It doesn't matter what color you are, what country you are in, what language you speak, if you do not follow the Koran, they are AT WAR with you and as an infidel, you must die. it doesn't matter if you are Arab, if you are not a Koran-following Arab, they are in a state of war with you and unless you convert you must die.

    This is how Islam originally spread if you recall: Muhammad and his armies conquered the areas around them.

    I just cannot stomach when people start saying that we need to "go and talk" with these people. There is no going and talking. Their creeds clearly state that if you are not a Koran following person and will not convert, YOU MUST DIE. You are an infidel and must die. What part of "must die" do you not understand?

    This is not a new thing. Radical Muslims have been blowing up people and killing people around the world for years. France and Spain are terrified of the large influx of radical muslims in their country who PUBLICALLY SPEAK in their countries about taking over the government. This is not an American problem, this is not an Israeli problem, this is not a European problem: it is a Global Problem.

    And then you go and say "lets just talk with them". If President Clinton (God bless him, yes I voted for him but yes he made mistakes) did not let Bin Laden go (yes Bin Laden was detained and Clinton let him go) because he was so much into "talking and working things out" with radical extremists, we wouldn't be in such a big mess.

    Listen please. I implore you: These people will DIE for their cause which is KILLING YOU to please Allah. If you think for one second that you can TALK to someone who has been trained to die for their cause to kill you, then I beg you to re-think.

    Pure propaganda. I can't believe they fed you this and you swallowed.
    Terrorism is not new. It has been here for decades, increasing in tenacity, boldness, and technological means. People have been dying around the globe. America has been hit around the globe and it wasn't until it hit American soil that Americans really began paying attention. Terrorism has not recently emerged and it is well-financed. These people are terrorizing because you are an infidel and you must die.

    I agree with this. It's nothing new and they do mean business, but they can be reasoned with, especially if the US would stop taking sides with Israel for one. Many, especially Maggie Thatcher, used to say one doesn't negotiate with terrorists because they are not reasonable people. Well, her time is long gone and the IRA disarmed thanks to peace talks - Clinton was involved in those talks btw.
  • CherishCherish Posts: 1,847Registered Users
    Peace2 wrote:
    As for Christianity gaining members as a result of force or violence, that began to happen in medieval times once Christianity became corrupt. As you only need to look into history to become aware of the deep perversions that became rooted in the ROman church, but if you go back to ancient history and that is what early Christianity is, ancient history, not medieval history, which is when Islam began to spread (about 600-700 AD as compared to 0 AD which is when Christianity began to srpead), you will find that early Christianity was in no way spread through violence or coercion. In fact people died and were fed to beasts in the Coliseum as punishment for their Christian faith by the Roman Empire. Remember Nero? So no, we're talking about distinct differences here. We're talkinga bout Islam, since its inception, gaining converts through violence and Christianity gaining converts through peaceful resistance amidst persecution (remember Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.?)

    So, one cannot argue and say Islam is corrupt and became violent and now it's what it is. We can say that about Christianity, that at one point it became violent and at one point, it converted people through force. However, nowhere in the New Testament from cover to cover will you ever see the use of violence being encouraged as a means of gaining converts.

    In contrast, the Koran in its original form does advocate the use of violence for gaining converts, to the point of death, and this is true (and practiced) to this day. To such an extent that Islam desires gaining an Islamic state world-wide so that there will be no infidels and Allah will be pleased. They are willing to die for this.

    In fact, let's quote the Koran.

    "Prophet, make war on the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and deal harshly with them. Hell shall be their home: an evil fate." (Sura 9.73)

    "When you meet the unbelievers in jihad, chop off their heads. And when you have brought them low, bind your prisoners rigorously. Then set them free or take ransom from them until the war is ended." (Sura 47.4)

    **Note that these people are doing exactly what their scriptures say: chopping off the heads of the infidels.

    "Mohammed is Allah's apostle. Those who follow him are ruthless to the unbelievers but merciful to one another." (Sura 48.29)

    Peace

    If you're going by what the Quran says to do to non believers, then what about Sodom and Gomorrah, and Noah's Ark? Those are examples of non believers being "justly" wiped out.

    Also, trying to argue timelines of ancient vs medieval makes no sense in this context. People have been killed in the name of both religions, so your "yes, but..." argument is not valid.
  • Peace2Peace2 Posts: 23Registered Users
    Obviously you did not read my post. I said that nothing in the New Testament ever teaches the use of violence. Sodom and Gomorrah is in the Old Testament, which is referring to ancient Judaism, NOT Christianity.

    Also, with Sodom and Gomorroah and Noah's Ark, God did not issue a command for "believers" (i.e. human agents) to wipe out the unbelievers. Rather, according to the Bible God did this through the use of natural disasters. Quite different it is for people to die in natural disasters, attributed to nature, than people to die at the hand of others under the command of God.

    Secondly, again, the Koran makes explicit claims that people should be killed for the sake of Allah. The New Testament does not. Whether people mishandle the Bible and use it for evil is not the fault of the Bible or Christianity but the fault of those who are handling it. There is no mishandling in a Muslim's killing others who are unbelievers; they are directly following commands from the Koran.

    Even stilll, you do not see Christian countries waging war against unbelievers; you do see Muslim countries waging war against unbelievers. And this is our current peril; this is the danger we face.

    Peace

    My 50% Cherokee/50% African-American pedigree produced: 3B/3C/4A, corkscrew curls, easy to detangle, Medium, thin-normal, dark brown hair.
  • CherishCherish Posts: 1,847Registered Users
    Peace2 wrote:
    Obviously you did not read my post. I said that nothing in the New Testament ever teaches the use of violence. Sodom and Gomorrah is in the Old Testament, which is referring to ancient Judaism, NOT Christianity.

    Also, with Sodom and Gomorroah and Noah's Ark, God did not issue a command for "believers" (i.e. human agents) to wipe out the unbelievers. Rather, according to the Bible God did this through the use of natural disasters. Quite different it is for people to die in natural disasters, attributed to nature, than people to die at the hand of others under the command of God.

    Secondly, again, the Koran makes explicit claims that people should be killed for the sake of Allah. The New Testament does not. Whether people mishandle the Bible and use it for evil is not the fault of the Bible or Christianity but the fault of those who are handling it. There is no mishandling in a Muslim's killing others who are unbelievers; they are directly following commands from the Koran.

    The Quran is just as subject to misinterpretation as your bible. How do you know the killing was literal? I don't know a single violent Muslim, though you seem to know many.

    If the old testament is not supposed to be believed and not about christianity, then it should have been excluded.
    Even stilll, you do not see Christian countries waging war against unbelievers; you do see Muslim countries waging war against unbelievers. And this is our current peril; this is the danger we face.

    Peace

    If colonizing them, taking their land, taking their natural resources, while "civilizing them" by bringing them christianity or "civilizing them" by bringing democracy, etc etc is not waging war for the "good" and "the way" and "family values" is not waging christian wars then I don't know what is.
  • Peace2Peace2 Posts: 23Registered Users
    "Pure propaganda. I can't believe they fed you this and you swallowed. "

    Pure propaganda? Read the Muslim publications who claim that they are entitled to the land of Israel because they are the one true religion. Not only are they entitled but they must use violence to reclaim it.

    Osama himself said that this is a holy/religious war and that the infidels must be killed. You can watch his tapes. Is this media propaganda?

    How can it be media propaganda if the Muslim publications themselves are teaching these ideas? Who are the Muslims propagandizing to and for what purpose?

    You can go to Muslim stores here in New York city and the Muslims are proud of Osama and hope he escapes and fill his goals.

    On 9/11, one of my roommates and my co-workers saw Muslims dancing in the streets of Manhattan overjoyed at the bombings, while they were walking their long walk home. Is this propaganda? My current roommate formerly lived with Muslims who had no remorse or sadness over 9/11.
    She read their publications and saw their teachings in print for herself. This was not the writing of so-called right-wingers desiring to villify Islam, but it was the writing of Muslims geared toward a Muslim audience.

    Perhaps you ought to read Muslim publications yourself. I am curious as to what would make you think that this is pure propaganda?


    Peace...

    My 50% Cherokee/50% African-American pedigree produced: 3B/3C/4A, corkscrew curls, easy to detangle, Medium, thin-normal, dark brown hair.
  • urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
    Cherish, I think you and I are agreeing in many ways.

    I don't think that Desmond Tutu meant that terrorism is a new thing-- surely the man is educated enough to know that. In the larger context of his speech, I think he meant international terrorism affecting America to the extent it has as of late is relatively new. So, my fault for not making that clear; I apologize.

    And I stand by his words that terrorism is indeed caused by situations that make people feel deperate. Mixed with extreme 'We're good, they're evil' sentiment, of course, and I'm guessing mental illness too.

    Some things that are found in areas where terrorism is prevalent is that the groups are resentful that we are supporting nearby repressive regimes; they experience exploitation by their own government and/or by ours; they feel powerless, like they have no voice or say; and an increase in terrorism is common in countries that are transitioning from a more autocratic society to a more democratic society, such as Iraq and Russia. And yes, poverty is often found along with these things and most experts agree that though it would not solve the problem, it would still help.

    I don't want to downplay the horrificness of terrorist attacks. But I also think it is our responsibility to look for any part we may be playing in it and find ways to help that do not harm innocent pepole.

    Peace2, I appreciate your enthusiasm and I believe you are coming from a good place, but it is hard to read your posts because you are saying stuff that sounds so anti-Islam and it seems like you have bought into the "fear" thing. I don't usually say this, and I'm still glad for the discourse, but I doubt that we will find much common ground.
    "It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

    Password= urban
  • CherishCherish Posts: 1,847Registered Users
    Peace2 wrote:
    "Pure propaganda. I can't believe they fed you this and you swallowed. "

    Pure propaganda? Read the Muslim publications who claim that they are entitled to the land of Israel because they are the one true religion. Not only are they entitled but they must use violence to reclaim it.

    Osama himself said that this is a holy/religious war and that the infidels must be killed. You can watch his tapes. Is this media propaganda?

    How can it be media propaganda if the Muslim publications themselves are teaching these ideas? Who are the Muslims propagandizing to and for what purpose?

    You can go to Muslim stores here in New York city and the Muslims are proud of Osama and hope he escapes and fill his goals.

    On 9/11, one of my roommates and my co-workers saw Muslims dancing in the streets of Manhattan overjoyed at the bombings, while they were walking their long walk home. Is this propaganda? My current roommate formerly lived with Muslims who showed no remore over 9/11.
    She read their publications and saw their teachings in print for herself. This was not the writing of so-called right-wingers desiring to villify Islam, but it was the writing of Muslims geared toward a Muslim audience.

    Perhaps you ought to read Muslim publications yourself. I am curious as to what would make you think that this is pure propaganda?


    Peace...

    I don't need to read anything. I grew up in a Muslim and Christian household so I know. It's always funny how people talk about the "others", assuming those they are addressing can't possibly be one of those "others".

    By your logic Timothy McVeigh represents the typical American.

    ETA: Didn't Israel steal the land of the Palestinians anyway? So because Osama et al are highly pissed about it and are blowing stuff and people, they have no point?
  • Peace2Peace2 Posts: 23Registered Users
    Urbancurl:

    I also enjoy the discourse. It seems however, that everything you offer in reply is speculation; I wish you would respond with facts. Of course I am not saying that everyone is a terrorist in Islam. There are a great deal of Muslims who are "folk Muslims" and have no idea what the Koran says. However, there are a great deal of rigid extremists.

    Let's say that only a small percentage of Muslims are extremists - that still translates into millions of people.

    ...and that's something to worry about.

    My 50% Cherokee/50% African-American pedigree produced: 3B/3C/4A, corkscrew curls, easy to detangle, Medium, thin-normal, dark brown hair.
  • CherishCherish Posts: 1,847Registered Users
    Peace2 wrote:
    Urbancurl:

    I also enjoy the discourse. It seems however, that everything you offer in reply is speculation; I wish you would respond with facts. Of course I am not saying that everyone is a terrorist in Islam. There are a great deal of Muslims who are "folk Muslims" and have no idea what the Koran says. However, there are a great deal of rigid extremists.

    Let's say that only a small percentage of Muslims are extremists - that still translates into millions of people.

    ...and that's something to worry about.

    Maybe they got tired of being kicked around like garbage and being cheated out of their land. Sucks when the little guy doesn't just roll over.
  • Peace2Peace2 Posts: 23Registered Users
    I don't need to read anything. I grew up in a Muslim and Christian household so I know. It's always funny how people talk about the "others", assuming those they are addressing can't possibly be one of those "others".

    Cherish, I'm not accusing you and your family of being radical extremists. However, just because your family did not consist of radical extremists, does not mean that others do not.

    And also Cherish, just by the fact that you grew up in a household where Christianity and Islam co-existed indicates that your family must not have been staunch in their beliefs, because according to Islam that co-existence is "haram". My roommate's Muslim roommates who were Hijabis and very religous would NEVER have gone for that.

    I am not talking about you personally or Muslims who are able to co-exist with others, but rather those who claim daily that the infidel non-believers must be killed and train daily to do so.

    And what about the Muslim publications? They do exist - written by Muslims for other Muslims. Do you discredit them?

    Peace

    My 50% Cherokee/50% African-American pedigree produced: 3B/3C/4A, corkscrew curls, easy to detangle, Medium, thin-normal, dark brown hair.
  • urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
    Peace2,

    I can back up what I'm saying with quotes from respectable sources on the Internet, or books, would that help? I don't think so. Most of what we all say is our interpretation of facts or some other combo of fact and fiction. I think we just have to live with that. Because from my point of view, much of what you are saying is not fact.



    I also just want to add, going back to my first post or 2, that regardless of the cause of terrorism and what we can do to help, IMO the war in Iraq is not being fought to free people from terrorism. I was just trying to retrace how we got here.
    "It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

    Password= urban
  • Peace2Peace2 Posts: 23Registered Users
    "Maybe they got tired of being kicked around like garbage and being cheated out of their land. Sucks when the little guy doesn't just roll over"

    They weren't the littile guy. Israel was the little guy. Israel had no land until it was appointed to them. Furthermore, Palestinian attacks against Irael existed long before Israel was made into a nation state. So I am not quite sure what you mean about "being cheated out of their land".

    And there are lots of people in the world who live in poverty in the world and they are not necessarily running around and terrorizing half the world. In fact, we took away the land from the Native Americans in this country and they are not around daily bombing us. And they truly do live in abject poverty. It's because it's not in their belief system to blow people up, unlike the radical Muslims.

    It is NOT because of their poverty (although many in Palestine live in poor conditions, the bombers are well-financed). It is because of the commands issued by their scriptures - their ideology. The Muslim extremists themselves have said so. Do you simply choose not to believe them? And what gives you that right and authority to choose not to believe them?


    Peace...

    My 50% Cherokee/50% African-American pedigree produced: 3B/3C/4A, corkscrew curls, easy to detangle, Medium, thin-normal, dark brown hair.
  • Peace2Peace2 Posts: 23Registered Users
    "I can back up what I'm saying with quotes from respectable sources on the Internet, or books, would that help?"

    Urbancurl:

    Actually it would. I would love to see your non-partisan sources. In life, just like in academics, we ought to back up our claims with other sources.

    Peace...

    My 50% Cherokee/50% African-American pedigree produced: 3B/3C/4A, corkscrew curls, easy to detangle, Medium, thin-normal, dark brown hair.
  • urbancurlurbancurl Posts: 980Registered Users
    Funny, I usually do post links, and I did on this subject on the main board where we were discussing terrorism. I'm too sleepy right now to do a search for that. But below, from my bookmarks, is one of the places I cited. Seemed rather balanced and informative to me. Doesn't mean you will think so though! I also found interesting stuff on terrorism on the Dept. of Homeland Security's webiste. (Don't know if I'd call that one balanced, ha ha!) Now I really have to go to bed, as I said about a 1/2 hour ago on another thread! Goodnight! :P

    The Council on Foreign Relations, "Terrorism Q&A"
    /home/leaving?target=http%3A%2F%2Fcfrterrorism.org%2Fcauses%2Fregimes.html" class="Popup
    "It is wrong to use moral means to preserve immoral ends." MLK, Jr.

    Password= urban
«1

Leave a Comment