Printable View
Well this is an unpleasant little tale;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/2252361.stm
Its not like either side in this arguement are worth supporting, but it does show how facism can gain footholds amongst normal people.
God I hope this isn't a glimpse of something to come. It will be VERY upleasant if it is.
I can only hope the police now have several extremists listed and under observation. Whichever side they're on.
Hmmm...scary.
The thing is, I don't think it's "fundamentalism meets nazism", I think it's more "religious fundamentalism meets political fundamentalism".
There's a common thing there...something I've maintained for a long time; that fundamentalism, of any stripe: religious, political, social, whatever, is (dare I say it?) fundamentally dangerous.
I don't think you need to worry about suicide bombings in the UK, though. There's not enough radical Muslims to organise into any serious threat (and let's face it, suicide bombers tend to collapse into a Darwinian heap fairly quickly - strapping yourself with 20 kg of C4 and pushing the button isn't a particularly good survival mechanism!).
Radical terrorists (in numbers) don't grow out of stable, democratic nations with a high living standard. They're a product of poverty, disenfranchisement and generations of hatred. I daresay the majority of Muslims in the UK are like the majority in Australia - relatively comfortable working/middle-class citizens, with too much to lose to go blowing themselves back to Allah.
There's always be a few nutters, of course - someone like Tim McVeigh springs to mind as an exception to my 'rule' up above; but fortunately, lunatics like that are the exception, rather than the rule.
Ah, so the varied US militias aren't part of a stable, democratic society? Last I checked they were listed as terrorists...
Thing is, practically any group has a militant faction if you look deep enough. If the Christian church hadn't had a fundamentalist faction we'd have never seen the Crusades or the Inquisition.
Now, I can't stand racists. The sort of person who thinks someone is "inferior" based on the colour of their skin is beneath my contempt, but I accept I'm unlikely to change their views by reasoned debate. As long as they don't take that racism and turn it into action by beating someone up, I'll live and let live. I accept that people can have fundamentalist views. When they try to impose those views by force or when they use them as justification for an attack, that's when I get pissed.
It's true there are Fundamentalists in the Christian Church -- two extremely creepy ones are Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson. These two claimed the September 11 attacks occurred because God turned his back on America, due to homosexuality, promiscuity, yadda yadda yadda -- they have a rather tedious list of things they dislike.
Thing is, except for some nutters, we don't take them real seriously. Also, to the best of my knowledge, they've never actually come out and instructed their followers to kill people. They've kinda sorta come close on a couple of occasions, when discussing the morality of murdering abortion service providers, whom they despise.
Both the Crusades and the Inquisition were really more about theft than about converting the unbelievers. Sure, spreading the faith was the story, but the Inquisition was about maintaining the power of the Spanish monarchs (through enrichment), and the Crusades were about capturing portable wealth and bringing it back to Europe.
Compare that to these Wahhabists. Basically, they'll settle for nothing less that a world governed by Sharia law. That's because their particular brand of the faith apparently requires this.
But this crowd is probably relatively harmless. I'm quite sure Scotland Yard had folks there, photographing everyone who entered. I'm also sure dossiers are being built on these people, and they're probably watched from time to time. These guys make a lot of noise, and stir up a lot of outrage, but ultimately, they're likely to die unfulfilled -- no dozens of virgins, no sumptious feasts, no sitting at the feet of Allah. What a shame.
The dangerous ones are the ones you never see until its too late.
WARNING! Incoming message from a Zionist supporter.
All I see is a bunch of cowards, they don't even have the guts to show their faces when 'guarding' this 'peaceful' conference.
And of course they wouldn't let the press in, I may sound paranoid here but, this has "terrorist sleeper cell" written all over it.
I also like how terrorists like to put fancy titles on their organization to make them sound legitimate;
The Commission for the Defence of 'Legitimate' Rights???? So, what this joker is saying is "if you are not a 'true devoted muslim' (note I am seperating the 90%, or so, peace loving Muslims from this group) you haven't got the right to live. Yeah, peaceful. Right. I think the SAS should go in there throw a bag over this guy and his buddy and ship them back Yeman to be executed as the running, cowardly mad dogs they are.
And just how are the Americans supporting Israel anyway? Everything I see tells me the Americans aren't supporting Israel enough.
Well, it took at least 19 last year...Quote:
Originally posted by Aldaron
I don't think you need to worry about suicide bombings in the UK, though. There's not enough radical Muslims to organise into any serious threat (and let's face it, suicide bombers tend to collapse into a Darwinian heap fairly quickly - strapping yourself with 20 kg of C4 and pushing the button isn't a particularly good survival mechanism!).
Hmmm...one word sums up what I think of them...froot loops.
Anyone who speaks against the state and says that if Britain does this or that then suicide attacks will occur on its territories; should immediately have the pleasure of experiencing prison hospitality.
Its sickening how they distort the religious beliefs of Islam into something as perverse as this. Send them back to the Middle East and let them experience what decades of fundamentalism, intolerance and mismanagement have done to the states int he region.
If I understand the news releases I am receiveing correctly, the stable, open democracy in Australia doesn't have much of a problem with Muslim terrorists. However, the 2% or so Muslim population also makes up the vast majority of the Australians going to prison for RAPE and other crimes against women. This isn't (believe it or not) a dig against Australia, but a point to be made.Quote:
Radical terrorists (in numbers) don't grow out of stable, democratic nations with a high living standard. They're a product of poverty, disenfranchisement and generations of hatred. I daresay the majority of Muslims in the UK are like the majority in Australia - relatively comfortable working/middle-class citizens, with too much to lose to go blowing themselves back to Allah
The excuse used time and again by the animals in question is "she was asking for it." They rationalize that the dress, mannerisms, and liberated life styles of Australian women provoked the poor, innocent, hapless, peace-loving and pious Muslim men into the crime!
If this sort of witlessness thrives in a modern, open democracy like Australia, it's no wonder the Third World is tearing itself apart.
This is the same witless BULLSH@T that authorized the gang-rape of a thirteen year old girl by town elders because her BROTHER was accused of violating Muslim relgious law! He was seen !!!gasp!!!! talking with a girl his own age without the permission of the girl's family! So as a point of honor, and to make a point about the importance of sexual morals, the town council decided to repeatedly RAPE his little sister.
In another peace-loving little Muslim country (one that happens to commit acts of genocide and slavery against "fundamentalist" Christians), a widow was RAPED by her brother-in-law. When she turned up pregnant as a result of being ASSAULTED, they arrested HER for ADULTERY, punishable by DEATH. The only reason this woman wasn't executed was the provision of an obscure Muslim law that decreed a woman could be impregated by her husband up to SEVEN YEARS after the deed was done or the actual act committed!
I am not saying that all Muslims are evil, nor am I saying that Islam itself is evil. I don't know enough about them to say definitively one way or the other. But the point is, this kind of evil exists in the hearts of men (and women) regardless of what rationalizations we may dream up to justify it.
The main difference between THESE Muslims and the boogey-man of the Fundamentalist Christian is that for the most part- we keep our idiots in check!
Fundamentalist Christians don't murder two year olds by hijacking planes in order to kill even MORE people. We don't justify it by propping up corrupt leaders who stash billions while our people starve, then blame a third party for all our ills. Fundamentalist Christians do not strap bombs to their sons and daughters and promise them seventy virgins and an all-you-can-eat-buffet once you get to heaven if they could just kill a few of the infidels.
When a Christian goes off the reservation and does something monstrous, those screaming the loudest for justice are the rest of the Christians! As a general rule, Christians DON'T dance in the streets passing out candy and fire guns in the air when one of our own does something stupid! Nor do most religions.
If being a Fundamentalist Christian means there are some principles I will not bend upon, count me in. If being a Fundamentalist Christian means that I won't let you rape my daughters, count me in. If being a Fundamentalist Christian means that I will fight for my freedom and that of my neighbors (including the freedom to be wrong), count me in.
I have a fundamental belief that the world is round. Does that make me a bad person? Perhaprs to a fundamentalist flat-earther. There is nothing wrong with being a fundamentalist. just like there's nothing wrong with being a vegetarian, a painter, a scholar or a lawyer (okay, maybe the last one is a bit of a stretch.;) ) It all depends upon what you're a fundamentalist about.
As a final retort, I would point out that the most monstrous examples of terrorists and evil to raise their venomous heads in the last ten to fifteen years, most if not all, have come from wealthy families. Contrary to myth, they are well educated, well-funded, and well-spoken. They may recruit mules and lackies from the poor and downtrodden, but the ringleaders are from the upper-crust. Just like the corrupt regimes that harbor them.
That's two words. :D Sorry, attempted humour I couldn't resist. ;)Quote:
Originally posted by Lt.Khrys Antos
Hmmm...one word sums up what I think of them...froot loops.
Selek. Right on My friend.
BTW why don't they run out of virgins? If every so -called marytr gets 70 virgins in the after life won't they run out? I mean they're almost extinct on this side of the dimension, how do they keep the supply up to the demand? :D
Slightly off topic, I feel that Froot Loops are being discriminated against! You notice we never call these nutcases " Cheerios"!!!!:D
Somewhere today, my limited onboard RAM cannot recall precisely where, I saw the comment that if there IS any justice in the universe (after all, Voyager WAS cancelled), then the virgin waiting for Osama Bin Laden will be Janet Reno.;)
On the subject of martyrdom and virgins; a while back I asked a local Muslim speaker at the Mosque what the interpretation was.
He told me that a martyr gets 70 or 72 (can't remember exactly) virgins for service to Islam. These women are eternally virgins. Something in their culture makes them value virgins much more highly than other women.
Posted by Phantom:
I only had nasty things to say about these guys, so I substituted it with fruit loops - the most disgusting cereal known to man!:D :) ;)Quote:
That's two words. Sorry, attempted humour I couldn't resist.
I'm reminded of the line from the Adventures of Baron Munchausen:
The Pasha: "And the virgins...what about the virgins!"
The Right Honorable Horatio Jones: "Forget about the virgins...we're OUT of virgins!"
On the other hand, I thought objectifying women and treating them like property was a WESTERN (read American) sin.
Where are the feminists and the rest on issues like the ones I mentioned in the earlier posts?
Is it remotely possible that they only find these things objectionable when it serves to brow-beat their opponents and gives them political capital? So far, there's been not a peep on Saddam's latest tactic of BEHEADING women in front of their children for not towing the political line. Guess if their not members of NOW, they're not really members of the feminist sisterhood. I guess that's a different sort of fundamentalism.
I'm going to duck and cover before they come out with the SHARP knives. Although the DULL ones hurt more;)
The only fundamentalist Christian that I felt had disgraced my religion is David Koresh and his Waco Compound cult. The fact that he believe he is Christ's second coming and have been allowed to bed with female worshippers (married or not, or age or not) has given me nothing but a shiver in my spine. His cult has also been stockpiling weapons. Why?
AFAIC, he hijacked my religion that day.
They are indeed. That's why I was saying you don't usually get terrorists in stable, democratic nations in numbers. Now, the militias may well be well-armed, and noisy, and violent, etc.Quote:
Originally posted by Capt.Hunter
Ah, so the varied US militias aren't part of a stable, democratic society? Last I checked they were listed as terrorists...
But there's not a helluva lot of 'em, to my knowledge. At the very least, they're not out blowing up three buses full of school-kids a week, and necessitating the USAF launch rocket attacks on and drive tanks into Michigan to stop them.
My point is that the average person will look at what they've got, look at what they've got to gain, and weigh up whether the difference is worth potentially dying for.
The smaller the difference, the less chance someone's going to start toting an AK-47 about and practicing how to blow up airliners.
In answer to a couple of other points made...
Yes, many of the ring-leaders of the terrorist groups are from well-to-do families, well-educated, etc (Osama bin Laden is a good example). But he's only one man. The overwhelming majority of his bombers, assassins, plane-hijackers et al are basically Arab hillbillies with nothing to live for, nothing to look forward to except martyrdom and so poorly educated that radical religious indoctrination is p*ss-easy.
They are the one's I'm talking about.
Generals don't fight wars, privates do.
Osama bin Ladens and Yasser Arafats don't fight terrorist wars, their bombers and snipers do.
Without them, the well-to-do leaders remain like the more radical Islamic leaders in the UK and Australia - loud-mouthed, annoying pests.
Re: rape cases in Australia.
Yes, it is a problem - a big one, especially around Sydney (my home town). The problem isn't so much the Islamic population per se, IMO, it's the 18 - 22 year-old sons who grow up thinking they must have their way, right or wrong, because they've always enjoyed a priveleged position in their families (in comparison to their mothers and sisters, anyway).
This may work in a country where you get beheaded for committing rape, but not here - and this is what is being reflected in the criminal rates that have been brought out lately.
In the most recent and certainly most publicised case, the ring-leader of the gang of rapists was given 55 years gaol (fair sentence, I think) and his cohorts got around 22 years each, on average, IIRC.
With a few more sentences handed out like that, it might make 'em think twice. We're not talking about spur-of-the-moment crimes here, or a bit of snogging getting out of hand and becoming date-rape; these were premeditated, stalking crimes, organised via mobile phones to bring in the 'rest of the gang' once the victim was caught.
My point remains: yes, you will get criminals. Yes, you will get occasional lunatics like McVeigh. Yes, you will get a group targeting another group specifically (like the gang rapists in Sydney) - but you don't get large, organised terrorist rings working in stable, democratic nations.
Like I said earlier - when the majority of people are fairly comfortable, with a roof over their heads, food on the table every night and an outlet for their displeasure (TV, radio, voting), they just feel they have too much to lose by starting a revolutionary war.
And, by contrast, when people feel oppressed, have nothing to live for, and have seen their family members die at the hands of a people they've never actually met any representatives of, they tend to find it easier to rationalize killing them. Hence Palestine. These people have repeated said that, once the Israelis are gone from the Occupied Territories, the terror attacks will cease. And we keep not listening. Sure, there are the radicals there who fight because they want all Jews dead. But the majority of the people who support them just want the Israelis out of their homeland. Give 'em that, and I strongly believe support for the radicals will fall off. After all, if you've got what you really wanted, why risk getting attacked again by pissing the Israelis off further?