or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › London Terror Attack: Politics
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

London Terror Attack: Politics - Page 4

post #121 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Relic
By the way when the US was fighting the British with these tactics it was considered pretty "normal", so what's with the change of heart? Oh, because it's happening to us now.

Looks like we need to discuss the difference between guerilla tactics and terrorism.

A broad definition of terrorism from Wikipedia:

Quote:
The most common criteria included are:
The motive is political or religious
The target is civilian
The objective is to intimidate
The intimidation is directed at government or society
The perpetrator is non-governmental
The act was unlawful

None of these are universally accepted as being either necessary or sufficent.

The tactics used by some units in the American Revolution were certainly brutal at times, but don't meet the definition of terrorism. In fact, the battles were generally not even considered guerilla warfare. (see below) The targets were British troops and mercenaries, not civilians; the perpetrators were government troops or irregulars working for the government; and the object was not to intimidate, but to defeat the British militarily.

Wikipedia chapter on terrorism.

From the Wikipedia section on the Revolutionary War:

Quote:
While the American Revolutionary War is often thought of as a guerrilla war, guerrilla tactics were uncommon, and almost all of the battles involved conventional set piece battles. Some of the confusion may be due to the fact that generals George Washington and Nathaniel Greene successfully used a strategy of harassment and progressively grinding down British forces instead of seeking a decisive battle, in a classic example of asymmetric warfare. Nevertheless the theater tactics used by most of the American forces were those of conventional warfare. One of the exceptions was in the south, where the brunt of the war was upon militia forces who fought the enemy British troops and their Loyalist supporters, but used concealment, surprise, and other guerrilla tactics to much advantage.

Wikipedia chapter on geurilla warfare in the American Revoloution (See 3.2).
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
You need skeptics, especially when the science gets very big and monolithic. -James Lovelock
The Story of Stuff
Reply
post #122 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by New
But Sammi. You seem more interested in obscure theories than reasonable answers. A good investigator starts out with the most logical explainations, not obsure conspiracies with a political agenda.

Yes, they do. And this "Secret Organization of Al Qaeda in Europe" admission looks as fake as a $7 bill. And, as you said, this is definitely a most obscure theory, but which has attacted the undivided attention of every mainstream outlet from here to the Yangtze Kiang, with all the necessary repetitions to ensure that the history has already been absorbed into the public consciousness.

http://iraqwar.mirror-world.ru/article/56252

extracted: To begin with, Al-Qaida statements come first to Arabic press not from BBC and Reuters. This statement first appear in mainstream press and was subsequently picked up by Arab press, which breaks rank with ever other statement Al-Qaida has ever issued officially. This fact alone should make the validity of this statement suspect. Secondly, the Arabic grammar used in the so-called claim of responsibility is incorrect. Al-Qaida statements have a consistency in the Arabic language that is written in their Mother tongue. Maybe most importantly, is the incomplete and incorrect ayahs from the Quran used in this alleged statement. While grammar could for arguments sake be overlook, incomplete and incorrect versus from the Quran is something the brothers of Tawheed or Holy Warriors who live and die by the word of Allah know intimately. In the ayahs quoted, they simply would not make these mistakes.

Quote:
The answers are there. Radical muslims exists. They have no problem recruiting young, alienated muslim followers.

Of course they do. But that is NO EXCUSE to jump to conclusions, or manufacture fake ones, without rigorously examining the evidence. Lets overturn all the evidence before we get into kneejerking about muslim extremists. I recall this happening with the Oklahoma City bombing...instantly people were baying about Muslims....

....

Then we still have that pesky unexplained issue of how Scotland Yard and the Israeli Embassy knew about the attacks in advance, specifically enough to be able to inform a senior foreign politician to avoid a specific area at a specific time, on account of a bomb, carried on a moving vehicle, which was about to explode. If anyone's going to get into some investigation, a starting point is to look at specifics. Good cops don't ignore evidence, especially such flagrant material as this. Good detective work is transparent, and non-political.

Because this snaggly issue is awkward for the UK (and Israeli) authorities to explain, it now appears as if its been brushed under the carpet. Presumably, terrorist activities must be assigned to Muslims, by default Otherwise we are straying off-message.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #123 of 369
That Netanyahu story, which was based on an anonymous source, has been denied by both the British and the Israelis.

But it sure fits nicely into the Jewish conspiracy theories, doesn't it.
post #124 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
[B]...

[Elwood Blues voice]

I hate Los Angeles Conspiricy Theory Nuts!

[\\Elwood Blues voice]
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #125 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz


The world has, even in the last 100 years become civilized to the point of a near universal condemnation of terror for any reason; the best tools hard-core Islam has to offer are more than ever working against it. Worldwide, we "all know" what is right in ways that would not have crossed borders 100 years ago. We have a solidarity in that knowledge -- and that consensus is growing every day.

Islam's bad guys will feel this process visit them, too

Strange, that noone else has realized what you are saying here, you are saying/thinking a)that the terrorists are the real muslims, that they represent hardcore-Islam, and b) that terrorism is only used by people from the middle-east, and not from governments or people of the west, right?

Wrong: a) The terrorists around Osama Bin Ladin's Al-Qaeeda are not muslims but extreme wahabists, which even in its moderate form is a deviation from Islam, that were instrumentalised against the Soviet-Union by the US, Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan. After the Soviet-Union collapsed they became unemployed, at least until the US decided to put US-military-forces in Saudi-Arabia and other Gulfstates in 1991, which was the justification for Osama Bin Ladin to start his terror-campaign against the US and its interests.

b) Terrorism is a tool that was and is used by a lot of governments and groups. In the last century Germany terrorised british unarmed civilians with its airforce-bombardments, later the allied forces did the same with German towns, also killing unarmed civilians with the idea of retaliation and weakening the will of the Germans, later on the US killed unarmed civilians in Japan with its firebombs and later on the nukes, in order to intimidate Japan so that they surrender unconditionaly and quicker because the Soviets would have invaded Japan otherwise.
Eventhough all these activities including the Napalm-use in Vietnam could be justified as being part of real wars, they are nonetheless terrorism. But even without a war terrorism was used by the US in various CIA- and various paramilitary-operations, including car- and market-bombs, assassinations, coups, secret air-bombing-campaigns, massacres...
But the terror goes even beyond that by training other groups in terror like in the school of the americas or in camps in Pakistan in the eighties, so that these terrorists could train others etc...
Another form of terrorism is also the installation and support of dictatorships that oppress everyone calling for selfgoverning or more freedoms, through indefinite emprisonment, torture and executions... so much that the non-violent resistance gets eradicated while the rest gets brutalised and turns to violence for solutions..

Again another form of terrorism, ie. attacking civilians for political goals are sanctions and embargoes, since they only affect the civilian population, through absence of food and medicine and the encripplement of economy and the resulting unemployment and drop of education-level... while the regime gets stronger by it. For example the 12-years sanctions imposed on Iraq led to the death of approximately 500,000 children through malnutrition and lack of medicine.

Another similar form of terrorism, that works effectively like sanctions and embargoes is occupation like in the case of Israel/Palestine or Russia/Chechnya.


Nightcrawler
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
I disagree, and could prove you're wrong; care to offer any proof that you're not wrong?
Reply
post #126 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
The world has, even in the last 100 years become civilized to the point of a near universal condemnation of terror for any reason; the best tools hard-core Islam has to offer are more than ever working against it. Worldwide, we "all know" what is right in ways that would not have crossed borders 100 years ago. We have a solidarity in that knowledge -- and that consensus is growing every day...it came from a moral sense that is continuing to grow

whatever, dmz. There's been no shortage of christian terrorists in both developed (including the US) and underdeveloped countries in recent decades. In fact, even just in the past 15 years there have been far, far more terrorist attacks on US soil committed by american christians.
post #127 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Nightcrawler
Strange, that noone else has realized what you are saying here, you are saying/thinking a)that the terrorists are the real muslims, that they represent hardcore-Islam, and b) that terrorism is only used by people from the middle-east, and not from governments or people of the west, right?

no, and no.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #128 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
whatever, dmz. There's been no shortage of christian terrorists in both developed (including the US) and underdeveloped countries in recent decades. In fact, even just in the past 15 years there have been far, far more terrorist attacks on US soil committed by american christians.

giant, you are missing my point by a mile.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #129 of 369
No, you're missing it, but that's because you start at the conclusion and look for premises. It's a plague the infects your whole process.
post #130 of 369
Thread Starter 
dmz:

Quote:
hmmmmm....not quite sure why you seized so strongly on the evolution debate, like I noted earlier, we aren't going to agree on this, causally.

I explained quite clearly; your use of "random processes" is a call back to the evolution debate and this everlasting religious v. secular battle in your mind. I noticed you don't actually make any effort to refute the argument I made in the post you quoted, instead you choose to seize on some side issue in an attempt to ignore the point I made.

Quote:
groverat, if this was a matter of education, Las Vegas wouldn't exist. Man is not a political creature, man is a religious creature. People do not learn from experience, they learn from belief.

You're going to have to explain this because it is quite obviously extremely false. You're going to have to define "belief" and it's going to have to mean something more than religious faith in deity.

Quote:
illegal war? I don't think any country would act differently, regardless of ideology. The attacks of 9/11, designed to decapitate our government, and the threat of dirty bombs, bio terror, etc are very real. You should logically expect a response, no matter how scattered or incoherent.

I don't see what any of that has to do with disproving the assertion: "Illegal war". And again, nothing to dispute the actual logic of the post, just more side-tracking.

Quote:
I didn't mention the 'war on terror', I made mention of the growing collective consciousness of the barbaric nature of terror in general.

So you would say then, that the growing anger and resentment towards US policy is evidence that the US itself is against the grain of history in its embrace of terror or is the majority of the world just not in step with our brilliant ideas?

Do not play coy, dmz, it is very very irritating.

Quote:
???

You speak of Osama bin Laden as if you know where he is or what he is thinking; you are not, so stop acting like you are.

Quote:
These are things that we won't see again.

Nagasaki. Hiroshima.
You're right, we won't see that because we have much better technology now. It makes the mass slaughter a lot more anti-septic.

Quote:
Today, Grant would have been tried as a war criminal, and not "because of education" but because of a moral sense that certain behavior under any curcumstances is wrong. This belief has no empirical data -- it came from a moral sense that is continuing to grow, albeit with significant wow and flutter along the way.

Since when is moral progression in any way separated from intellectual progression?

You're the one flogging fantasy gods and you want to talk about "empirical data"?
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
proud resident of a failed state
Reply
post #131 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
That Netanyahu story, which was based on an anonymous source, has been denied by both the British and the Israelis.

But it sure fits nicely into the Jewish conspiracy theories, doesn't it.

The story was deliberately altered. When the Netanyahu affair was first reported, Netanyahu himself, presumably innocently, said that he was informed by the Israeli Embassy, via Scotland Yard. BEFORE the first bomb went off. When people started naturally started asking questions, the original stories were de-linked, and a revised version came out. What is more believeable here?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050707/...n_explosions_1

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=85346

The word "before" commonly means "at an earlier time", by the way.

"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #132 of 369

What a dick.
post #133 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo
The story was deliberately altered. When the Netanyahu affair was first reported, Netanyahu himself, presumably innocently, said that he was informed by the Israeli Embassy, via Scotland Yard. BEFORE the first bomb went off. When people started naturally started asking questions, the original stories were de-linked, and a revised version came out. What is more believeable here?

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20050707/...n_explosions_1

http://www.israelnationalnews.com/news.php3?id=85346

The word "before" commonly means "at an earlier time", by the way.


What is more believable to me is that there were some explosions and Netanyahu was told that he better not leave his hotel, and then someone with a Jewish conspiracy mindset either misinterpreted that or intentionally misled a reporter about it. What is not believable is that the Brits 1) had advanced warning and 2) decided to tell a former Israeli PM to watch out.

And I'd like to know what you think it would prove even if those two highly unlikely points really were true. The Israelis were behind it? If so, why did the Brits have to tell the Israelis? The Brits were behind it, in league with Israelis, and we just caught a glimpse of the conspiracy? Come on, let's hear it.
post #134 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
whatever, dmz. There's been no shortage of christian terrorists in both developed (including the US) and underdeveloped countries in recent decades. In fact, even just in the past 15 years there have been far, far more terrorist attacks on US soil committed by american christians.

let me put it this way --- McViegh(sp?) got the death peanalty. No matter how many kids got gassed and burned at Waco, it is almost universally understood that he rebelled agianst an innate 'rightness' of the social order to extract his vengance.

We 'all know' he got what 'he deserved' --- that innate sense --- and it's is continued growth is my point.

I'm still trying to put things to bed at work, wiping noses and butts.

More later.

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #135 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider

What a dick.

Not a dick, a sociopath who can think clearly in a crisis without emotional confusion. Actually, you need this kind of guy to be a certain percentage of the people in charge, because they can think clearly in the heat of the situation.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #136 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
In fact, even just in the past 15 years there have been far, far more terrorist attacks on US soil committed by american christians.

I'd be interested to have you enumerate these...going back to 1990 (your time frame).
post #137 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
That Netanyahu story, which was based on an anonymous source, has been denied by both the British and the Israelis.

But it sure fits nicely into the Jewish conspiracy theories, doesn't it.

Amazing how under every rock there is a Jewish Conspiracy nut under it? There are idiots like that on every message board I go to.
post #138 of 369
dmz, you are outnumbered. For some reason AI has been inundated with left wing radicals that hate the United States and what it stands for, generally hates the Western World, hates Israel, and thinks terrorism is justified and that Muslim radicals are tre chic.

Its amazing how so many people who would be considered a fringe group in most circles have come together on this website. Even more amazing that they are even moderators now and control this site's Thought Police.

Pretty sad.
post #139 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
And I'd like to know what you think it would prove even if those two highly unlikely points really were true. The Israelis were behind it? If so, why did the Brits have to tell the Israelis? The Brits were behind it, in league with Israelis, and we just caught a glimpse of the conspiracy? Come on, let's hear it.

If the israelis knew, Nethanyahu wouldn't have been there in the first place.
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #140 of 369
Quote:
Its amazing how so many people who would be considered a fringe group in most circles have come together on this website. Even more amazing that they are even moderators now and control this site's Thought Police.

It only seems like they are. To me the moderators seem like the religious right - a different nasty fringe group.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #141 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by steve666
dmz, you are outnumbered. For some reason AI has been inundated with left wing radicals that hate the United States and what it stands for, generally hates the Western World, hates Israel, and thinks terrorism is justified and that Muslim radicals are tre chic.

Its amazing how so many people who would be considered a fringe group in most circles have come together on this website. Even more amazing that they are even moderators now and control this site's Thought Police.

Pretty sad.

No, you are sad.
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
Bill Bradley to comedian Bill Cosby: "Bill, you are a comic, tell us a joke!"
- "Senator, you are a politician, first tell us a lie!"
Reply
post #142 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
It only seems like they are. To me the moderators seem like the religious right - a different nasty fringe group.

You mean because of the censorship?
post #143 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by New
No, you are sad.

Ooh, hard to get happy over that one.
post #144 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
I'd be interested to have you enumerate these...going back to 1990 (your time frame).

You don't know? Chris, how old are you? Why is it that you always ask people to explain any reference to high profile events from 2 or more years ago?
post #145 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Outsider

What a dick.

There's more where that came from: [1] and [2]

One's a racist and another advocating terrorist attacks on Paris and lamenting the fact that it didn't happen there.
post #146 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
You don't know? Chris, how old are you? Why is it that you always ask people to explain any reference to high profile events from 2 or more years ago?

Various abortion clinic bombings. The Oklahoma bomb.

A few others: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/usa-riot.htm
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #147 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Various abortion clinic bombings. The Oklahoma bomb.

A few others: http://users.erols.com/mwhite28/usa-riot.htm

Now, with these Made-in-the-USA terrorist morons, have you, as a people, examined the root causes? Have you determined in what ways you can modify your policies and practices to remove their reasons and justifications for their actions?

Lots of crazy, psychotic idiots of all religious/political stripes. And regardless of our actions, policies and beliefs as a society, there will always be those who feel alienated, powerless or victimized, rightly or wrongly, and there will be those that will be able to convince them to carry out evil, horrible acts of terrorism.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #148 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Tulkas
Now, with these Made-in-the-USA terrorist morons, have you, as a people, examined the root causes? Have you determined in what ways you can modify your policies and practices to remove their reasons and justifications for their actions?

Lots of crazy, psychotic idiots of all religious/political stripes. And regardless of our actions, policies and beliefs as a society, there will always be those who feel alienated, powerless or victimized, rightly or wrongly, and there will be those that will be able to convince them to carry out evil, horrible acts of terrorism.

No. Read the link:

"However, the biggest peculiarity of American political violence is that there's not more of it. Through most of the century, USA has been the world's fourth largest population, yet I can easily name 80 countries that have killed more of their people in political disputes -- and dozens more who can't because they just don't have enough inhabitants to start with. Considering how violent the USA is on a day-to-day basis (compare the American murder rate with any other rich country), it's remarkable that our national dispute resolution system has worked as well as it has."

We don't actually have a terrorism problem (outside of 9/11) - and you can't fix the root cause of every crazy person, it is much better to just kill them.

As to the day-to-day violence, it is caused by the war on drugs.

War on drugs -> higher drug prices -> addict crime and gang violence (to fight over profits)

War on drugs -> profits to terrorists in Afghanistan -> 9/11

War on drugs -> overworked border police, FBI, DEA, etc -> 9/11

War on drugs -> overfull prisions -> more criminals on the street -> more crime

When you look at the differences between Canada and the US, drug laws are what really stand out to explain the violence level differences. There are tons of guns in Canada - everyone in my town had one.
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #149 of 369
I count 37 abortion clinic bombings since the 70s here, many more arsons and 10 murders. OK city bombing. The anthrax was domestic.
post #150 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by BRussell
[B]What is more believable to me is that there were some explosions and Netanyahu was told that he better not leave his hotel, and then someone with a Jewish conspiracy mindset either misinterpreted that or intentionally misled a reporter about it. What is not believable is that the Brits 1) had advanced warning and 2) decided to tell a former Israeli PM to watch out.

You mean Netanyahu himself is of a "Jewish Conspiracy" mindset? Or that the Israel National News website has a "Jewish Conspiracy Mindset"?

Quote:
And I'd like to know what you think it would prove even if those two highly unlikely points really were true. The Israelis were behind it? If so, why did the Brits have to tell the Israelis? The Brits were behind it, in league with Israelis, and we just caught a glimpse of the conspiracy? Come on, let's hear it.

The Israelis arent exactly new to instigating terror attacks, sometimes even attacks upon themselves and blaming other parties, namely Arabs...aka "false flag ops.. ..

Here's a sampling of Israeli terrorism etc. Don't forget that the BBC, wikipedia are wacky conspiracy theory websites bent on anti-American and anti_Jewish propaganda. Just saying this before you do.

Fake "al qaeda" cells in Gaza: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2546863.stm

The Lavon Scandal : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lavon_Affair

Numerous incidents of Israeli terrorism here (usually financed by the US taxpayers:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_terrorism

Attack on a US Navy ship by Israeli military.. http://www.ussliberty.org/

And no, I have not forgotten the issue of those Mossad Agents filming the 9-11 attacks from the New Jersey side, who when arrested by the FBI, were found to have explosive traces, several thousand dollars concealed in a sock, and maps of Manhattan with the WTC ringed in pen. But they weren't worth investigating because ...guess what...they weren't connected to OBL and Al Qaeda...

Of course Israeli terrorism doesnt exist, because these people aren't Arab or Muslim, and are funded by the United States. And anyone who mentions Israeli 'bad behavior' has to be 'antisemitic'. End of discussion.
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
"We've never made the case, or argued the case that somehow Osama bin Laden was directly involved in 9/11. That evidence has never been forthcoming". VP Cheney, 3/29/2006. Interview by Tony Snow
Reply
post #151 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
You don't know? Chris, how old are you? Why is it that you always ask people to explain any reference to high profile events from 2 or more years ago?

Is this your way of evading providing supporting facts to this statement:

"In fact, even just in the past 15 years there have been far, far more terrorist attacks on US soil committed by american christians."
post #152 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
I count 37 abortion clinic bombings since the 70s here, many more arsons and 10 murders. OK city bombing. The anthrax was domestic.

And you said "In fact, even just in the past 15 years there have been far, far more terrorist attacks on US soil committed by american christians."

You are lumping all of these events into one group and claiming the same characterization ("american christians") as the perpetrators.

McVeigh and Co. were just anti-government, not necessarily christians in any real sense. Same goes for the anthrax events.

Regarding the abortion clinic bombings those are certainly terrorist actions. With an important difference. None of them appear to have been targeted or intended to kill any people.

The doctor murders are just that, murders. Arguably "terrorist" acts...but broading the definition a bit I'd argue.

If you want I could go into the "mass murder" or "genocide" committed by the abortion services industry over the past 30 years. So...we can calm the rhetoric a bit, I think.

So you've provided a list. Okay. Now let me address the implication of your statement that "In fact, even just in the past 15 years there have been far, far more terrorist attacks on US soil committed by american christians."...which is that these terrorist acts are in some way far, far worse. Well, by the metric of human fatalities, you'd be wrong. By the comparision of targets (highly controversial abortion clinics which participate in the government-sanctioned act of murdering unborn children vs. a commuter train...an office building...etc.) I'd say you are wrong there too.

Finally, what makes your saying something like "In fact, even just in the past 15 years there have been far, far more terrorist attacks on US soil committed by american christians." any less broad-stroked a statement than if I were to say something like "and all these terrorist attacks carried out by middle eastern muslims"? Where does the "oh islam is a peaceful religion" apologetics go when we are talking about christian extremists?
post #153 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
You are lumping all of these events into one group and claiming the same characterization ("american christians") as the perpetrators.

McVeigh and Co. were just anti-government, not necessarily christians in any real sense. Same goes for the anthrax events.

I have to agree with Chris. McVeigh & co. weren't religiously motivated, AND since when did the Antrax cases turn out to be home-grown? I distinctly rememer Atta(?) being shown houses by the wife of the owner of the Nasty Enquirer, the first place hit by the anthrax mailers. (but if I'm full of it, you guys let me know)

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply

In our desire to impose form on the world we have lost the capacity to see the form that is there;
and in that lies not liberation but alienation, the cutting off from things as they really are. --...

Reply
post #154 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by sammi jo


The Israelis arent exactly new to instigating terror attacks, sometimes even attacks upon themselves and blaming other parties, namely Arabs...aka "false flag ops.. ..

...

Of course Israeli terrorism doesnt exist, because these people aren't Arab or Muslim, and are funded by the United States. And anyone who mentions Israeli 'bad behavior' has to be 'antisemitic'. End of discussion.

The sad part, is that who knows, you could be right, maybe it was the jews. The tragic part is that there are dozens of potentially more reasonable and more likely explainations, including islamist radicals, but you latch onto the first that mentions Israel and and are completely to accept or twist anything to then fit this concept.

For instance, in your first post in this thread, regarding the website claim of responsibility, you quote "that the statement in which the group claimed responsibility for the attacks contained an error in one of the Quranic verses it cited" from which you conclude "An obviously fake "al qaeda" "admission", full of Koranic errors and misspellings etc, from a website, the URL of which has NOT remains unknown and remains unpublished." Nice leap.

Please, give a rest.

To the Londoners and Brits here, on both sides on our little political debates, I remain amazed at the strength and resolution of you and you countrymen.

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply

"My 8th grade math teacher once said: "You can't help it if you're dumb, you are born that way. But stupid is self inflicted."" -Hiro. 

...sometimes it's both
Reply
post #155 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by Chris Cuilla
And you said "In fact, even just in the past 15 years there have been far, far more terrorist attacks on US soil committed by american christians."

And it's simply true, regardless of whether it hurts your little world-view. Just looking at the abortion clinic attacks, count up the bombings or count up the arsons or count the murders or, like any normal person, add them all up and no matter what you do you have many more individual attacks by these american radicals than the ones from the middle east, even since the 90s (15 bombings, btw). And the murders absolutely are part of the anti-abortion terror campaign, period. It's pathetic watching you try to justify terror attacks, particularly terror murders of innocents.
Quote:
by the metric of human fatalities

This is just pathetic. So since there were more attacks you have to find something to justify it to yourself. I guess al-qaeda should say, "well, we only attacked you 1/18 (or 1/200+ depending on what you count) the number of times as anti-abortion terrorists, so we aren't as bad." Dishonest people always try to find a way to put uncomfortable facts in a pleasant light.
Quote:
less broad-stroked a statement

It's not 'broad-stroked,' it's a simple fact that you find inconvenient.

And, dmz, yeah, the anthrax was domestic. That's ooooold news. Stop reading crackpot websites that tell you lies like that. Bust out lexisnexis and read any of the thousands of news articles on this or check out a summary.

I really have to wonder, dmz: how could you not know that a story like that is such total obvious BS? The only difference between the nuts on the left and the nuts on the right is that the ones on the left are "fringe."
post #156 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by dmz
I have to agree with Chris. McVeigh & co. weren't religiously motivated, AND since when did the Antrax cases turn out to be home-grown? I distinctly rememer Atta(?) being shown houses by the wife of the owner of the Nasty Enquirer, the first place hit by the anthrax mailers. (but if I'm full of it, you guys let me know)

No. The anthrax case appears to be the work of an individual who worked at the Frederick, MD, bio-weapons/ er um/ level 5 biosafety research facility...

The fact is that Frederick, MD happens to be a very conservative very Christian area, when I worked on the base there at the NCI, most locals wore little feet pins as some political statement against abortion. This is where the anthrax terrorist came from; not to suggest that the anthrax mailings were the work of a Christian zealot, but that insomuch as a terrorist from Kabul would be immediately associated with a certain religion, the same should be true for the anthrax case...
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
"In a republic, voters may vote for the leaders they want, but they get the leaders they deserve."
Reply
post #157 of 369
There seem to be three constants in the "War on Terror"

1. The WoT "Fanboys" - why do u h8 America?

2. The WoT Anti-Fanboys - OMG America is teh bad

3. Continued acts of terror

I am sick of this shit.
post #158 of 369
Quote:
You are lumping all of these events into one group and claiming the same characterization ("american christians") as the perpetrators.

Every abortion bombing was probably done by a christian.

The pro-choice, pro-life camps divide pretty nicely along religious lines. If you believe that a soul is invested in the zygote as soon as the sperm fertilises the egg, then you are against both 1st trimester abortion and stem cell research. If you don't believe in a soul, neither of these is a problem because it is not murder until the brain of the fetus starts up.

In terms of the "not intended to kill people" claim:

http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abo...rviolstats.htm

Abortion Provider Violence Statistics:

* 7 Murders
* 17 Attempted Murders
* 41 Bombings
* 168 Arsons
* 82 Attempted Bombings/Arsons
* 373 Invasions
* 1048 Incidences of Vandalism
* 591 Incidences of Trespassing
* 125 Incidences of Assault and Battery
* 357 Death Threats
* 3 Kidnappings
* 76 Incidences of Burglary
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
45 2a3 300b 211 845 833
Reply
post #159 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by giant
And it's simply true, regardless of whether it hurts your little world-view. Just looking at the abortion clinic attacks, count up the bombings or count up the arsons or count the murders or, like any normal person, add them all up and no matter what you do you have many more individual attacks by these american radicals than the ones from the middle east, even since the 90s (15 bombings, btw). And the murders absolutely are part of the anti-abortion terror campaign, period. It's pathetic watching you try to justify terror attacks, particularly terror murders of innocents.

I wasn't trying to justify anything. Quit being a moron. I was trying to illustrate that what you are implying is wrong. I agreed that the bombings/arsons are an act of terror...with the important difference that no people were killed or targeted in them. And the murders were just that murders. Terrorist in nature, sure.

Quote:
Originally posted by giant
It's not 'broad-stroked,' it's a simple fact that you find inconvenient.

No, it is as broad-stroked as anyone trying to imply that all muslims are terrorist. That is the point I was trying to make (if you would care to pay attention).

And, dmz, yeah, the anthrax was domestic. That's ooooold news. Stop reading crackpot websites that tell you lies like that. Bust out lexisnexis and read any of the thousands of news articles on this or check out a summary.

Quote:
Originally posted by giant
The only difference between the nuts on the left and the nuts on the right is that the ones on the left are "fringe."

Of course. And all Christians are terrorists too. We should round them up, lock them up and keep them away from the "normal" people.

post #160 of 369
Quote:
Originally posted by e1618978
Every abortion bombing was probably done by a christian.

The pro-choice, pro-life camps divide pretty nicely along religious lines. If you believe that a soul is invested in the zygote as soon as the sperm fertilises the egg, then you are against both 1st trimester abortion and stem cell research. If you don't believe in a soul, neither of these is a problem because it is not murder until the brain of the fetus starts up.

In terms of the "not intended to kill people" claim:

http://womensissues.about.com/cs/abo...rviolstats.htm

Abortion Provider Violence Statistics:

* 7 Murders
* 17 Attempted Murders
* 41 Bombings
* 168 Arsons
* 82 Attempted Bombings/Arsons
* 373 Invasions
* 1048 Incidences of Vandalism
* 591 Incidences of Trespassing
* 125 Incidences of Assault and Battery
* 357 Death Threats
* 3 Kidnappings
* 76 Incidences of Burglary

You are mixing, jumlbing and quoting me out of context. In my quote about the "lumping together" I was specifically referring to the McVeigh and anthrax things.

Second, in reference to the "not intended to kill people" I was referring to the specific bombings/arson list that has been previously posted. Your list doesn't change things really either.

It is interesting that this list of "violent" acts includes "burglary" and "vandalism".
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › London Terror Attack: Politics