:eek7

thread hijacker! :1orglaugh

Dar al Harb. The House of War. 46 dead in India today.

How many more targets in the non-Islamic world do we have to watch be destroyed by Islamic bombers? When will we wake up to the Holy War?

YOU are an infidel. The Muslims are Coming! The Muslims are Coming!

NO!!! You're wrong! ISLAM IS PEACE!!!!! Western Media is brainwashing you! You think ISLAM = TERRORISM?? Then you = brainwashed!! Islam = Peace And Love for all Humans!







There. I just responded on behalf of over 60% of GFYers in here.

you mean 0.6%

Allah = Satan

religion is even better then politics

Well there are only 1.2 Billion Muslims. So we still outnumber them 5 to 1.

:)

You got a reason to be angry at the world, when your camel puts out more than your wife.

no we are not

Who exactly is "we" ?

why do this fucking bombers hit innocent civilians? what kind of religion they are fighting for? i don't get it, they're just getting publics attention. how many more?

I thought I was clear. Dar al Harb.

i'm officially neutral in that war.

the only war i'm fighting is the war against poverty.

my own poverty.

They are fighting the "Holy War". I think they lost its point long time ago. (if they did have a point to it)

what % of all muslims would ever kill another person you think?

these arguments doent sound any less idiotic than categorizing black people as criminals.

Oh come on, Lane. How can you insist upon such a total lack of categorization? A majority of Germans didn't kill anyone during World War II. Is it then wrong for me to say that Germany attacked Poland if the majority of Germans stayed at home?

One arrives at pretty funny conclusions if a complete lack of categorization is insisted upon. There is an American war on Iraq whether or not a majority of Americans would actually kill an Iraqi. Maybe the war is not really on Iraq though but only on the Ba'ath regime? In that sense there is no war at all.

I don't suppose you think some Vietnamese were sitting at home back in 1970 saying there wasn't really a war because only a small minority of Americans were willing to come and kill them.

All countries hit innocents anyway..

That's where intent comes into play.

Germany had a leader who gave the orders. So does the USA.

Same with terrorist organizations, and I bet their leaders are not even believers. Religion is being used to brainwash people, just like it was in the middle ages. Those countries in middle east are way behind in the cultural evolution, thats why those methods still work.

Islam doesnt turn anyone into a terrorist, it's only used as a tool by some evil leaders.
Do you still blame germans for Hitler and what he did? But you and others seem to be blaming muslims themselves, or even the french people.

Would you be afraid of a muslim who was raised in a modern culture?

here is my hint: it all comes down to the leaders

So when can you "categorize" a group, in your opinion? If 99 out of 100 muslims had pure evil intentions, would it be ok for us to say Islam is evil? I would think so. But that's obviously not a factual figure. What percentage, then, would be considered not categorizing them.

99 out of 100?

i see what the media does to you.

there are over a billion muslims. imagine what would happen if 1% of them had intentions of killing non-muslims? do the math, and check with the actual numbers.

blacks are 6 times more likely to go jail than whites, (i believe its over 30% of blacks). how do people feel when you try to categorize all blacks as criminals?

You should read my entire post before you reply. I said it clear that it was not a factual number.

maybe you should read mine as well, you seem to got stuck on my first line

"Media got to me" is where I stopped because if you read my post, what does the media have to do with anything??

Me? No. I am not afraid of ANY Muslims.

whatever you're thinking about the muslims in the middle east, would you think the same about him? thats where i was trying get

muslims are cute

Let me ask something. Please point out to me a Islamic leader, in the arab world that doesn't affiliate himself with terror groups?
I would love to see his peace loving website.

media has to do with what % of muslims you think are evil.

so tell me if 1% is enough for you? because its far less.

you're proving my point, its only about leaders, and a lot of the leaders in the middle east are puppets, that were not elected by their own people

In my perception leaders gain power through politics and followers. If they are so bad for Islam I would think the natural thing to do is to remove such a bad influence and poor example from any kind of Islamic leadership role and public life.

It is not just nations that go to war. It is ideologies. Communism was at war with much of the world. Sometimes conflicts erupted between nations and sometimes within nations. Conflicts were both physical and political.

When do you equate "them" with "Them"?

When the competing ideology already believes they are at war, what should it take to recognize and label the Other as an enemy?

I argue that it depends on how far that side has gone and how dangerous of a threat people perceive themselves being in. A blown up building or battleship here or there and we identify The Opposition as a rogue group - the result of terrorist actions. Nuke a US city and you would quite likely see the majority of Americans declare Holy War on the entire Islamic world. I'd bet on that.

From your posts, YOU ARE the one with the problem with people categorizing groups, not me. To me, if 4 out of 10 people in a group have evil or malicious intentions, then I would have NO problem categorizing that group as a problem group. Since you're dodging the whole point of my posts, if 9 out of 10 people in a particular group were evil or malicious, you would consider it WRONG to categorize the group at ALL except the group is just LIKE any other group. Correct?

maybe because people are sheep? at that point Bush maybe would even have peoples support to setup gas chambers for the american muslims.

do you approve of the actions taken against a very large group because of the actions of relativle tiny organizations?

That's a really good question. I don't know the answer to such things.

I am so sick of you nut balls who compare Nazi Germany to the US. Let me put this foward. The president of France should be held for crimes against humanity becuase he allowed 10,000 of his own people to die before he came back from vacation. In the US its called grave indifference.

4 out of 10? 9 out of 10? I would maybe categorize them, after giving a serious thought. Does that answer your question?

Now tell me, how does it relate to the current situation? Tell me if you would categorize muslims as terrorists if 1% of them ever participated in terrorist attacks?

that was not meant to be a comparison. it was regarding Colin's post where he mentioned about both USA soldiers in Vietnam and Hitler's Germany. I said they both followed their leaders.

Maybe but I've never anyone that has been able to stand far enough from the flock to tell the black sheep from the white ones.

Gas chambers? Maybe so. Probably much less. Nearly every national crisis sets in motion a retraction in civil liberties and protectionist measures.

From the Alien and Sedition Acts of the Revolution to suspension of Habeas Corpus by Lincoln, FDR's World War II Internment camps, McCarthyism, and most recently the Patriot Act. Such things come and go in response to perceived outside threats.

Literally.

so you're saying "shit happens" when nations feel threatened.

do you agree with such solutions?

Depends on the circumstances. Sometimes I approve of actions for no reason other than blatant self-interest. At other times, I approve of actions which I believe will benefit society as a whole and might even be harmful to my life. In some cases I even support actions which benefit only a subsection of society.

For example, I might believe in a particular version of affirmative action though I think it benefits only a very minority of society and possibly to the detriment of the rest of society.

I'm saying it is very obvious that it happens and there are many such examples comfirming it.

For the most part, no. To be fair though, given the history of how angry and threatened people feel when under attack I might be more like them than I think. Maybe I'd flip to the dark side in an instant if I felt threatened. Maybe not.

Then I must say the human nature is fucked-up itself. No matter how much we evolve, we will follow our instincts at the end. Without giving a thought about what kind of people muslims are, many will choose to see terrorits as their representatives and act on them as a whole based on that.

It plain disturbs me. We're goin back to the middle ages. Yes, history does repeat itself.

Human nature has not had enough time to evolve to a level which you apparently would like it to evolve. Humans have only been out of the caves for approximately 30,000 years. Evolution in nature often involves millions of years.

Since almost everything that has ever lived is now extinct...and extinction is still taking place...I seriously doubt that the human animal will be around long enough to evolve to the level that you would like.

As for you...Colin...your posts...as usual...are on point and striking the nail directly on its head.

The leaders of:

Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia, Turkey, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, United Arab Emirates.

How is it that everyone is so sure that its islam groups perpetrating these bombings? Because bush/blair/western media say so? Are you even so sure about who was behind 9/11? The "evidence" pointing to bin laden is circumstantial at best and there is a mountain of evidence that looks as if someone wanted everyone to think arabs were behind it. Yet everyone just automatically believes it was osama because the govt says so. But look at who really benefits from these things, 9/11 was great for bush, and also resulted in the usa doing a lot of things israel wants. You dont think its possible that the mossad (whose motto is "war by means of deception") or the cia was/is behind some of this stuff? The mossad has evidently already been caught posing as al-qaeda and recruiting palestinians, although its not likely this kind of thing will ever be covered by western media. It would be easy to recruit angry palestinians and guide the poor suckers into doing whatever you wanted, especially if they thought the orders were coming from al-qaeda, hamas, etc.
History is replete with cases of fake terror such as the lavon affair by israel. I dont know who or what is behind a lot of this stuff but if you think you do just from watching news reports then you are a fool.