Terrorism

[Arraya]

Truman should have listened to his joint chiefs of staff about creating the state of Israel. It was a bad idea from the start.

Israel Shahak warned that the Talmudic Judaism is totalitarian religion where rabbinical law governs every aspect of Jewish behaviour in Israel. Yes they are liberal socially but still very much dangerous extremists that have a lobby in congress and a bunch of nukes.

And any attempts by Western analysts to explain contemporary Israeli politics in purely secular terms such as imperialism are fundamentally flawed.

You can’t discuss the ME fundamentalism with out discussing the zionists and their views. It’s very central to understanding the radicalization of the islamic political body.

Cause and effect

[NotCranky]

Poets priests and politicians have words to thank for their positions. Words that scream for your submission…and no one is jamming their transmissions.(Sting)

So now we have the defense that we are “progressive”. Different from the old religious ways maybe, but that doesn’t present proof that we are a better element of the species to unbiased eyes and open minds or perhaps even to “God”.It doesn’t prove that we are less the propagandist or less indoctrinated…just differently indoctrinated. Our God is one of money and power(British and U.S. Elite and their attaches) and we obey its(their) rules which advocate radical hi-tech warfare, economic warfare and oppression on its(their) behalf, so how progressive is that anyway? Religion is simply less necessary as a tool against the western masses at this time.At the threat of a lower standard of living most of us will abdicate free thinking. So our occupations, war crimes and crusades wear a different disguises and use different propaganda.That we are progressive doesn’t seem like a good excuse and I am sure it matters a rats ass to someone who’s land and economy is and has been enslaved to these outside interests(opposing God) for decades.

Obviously,I tend to see equivalent human beings on the other side of this(not a very good tactic I know). For instance,instead of seeing Osama Bin Laden as a foaming at the mouth civilian killer, I seem to remember that he described why the twin towers were a viable target for war. It had something to do with the the technocrats who worked there and their mission in scheme of world power and economic freedom or removal of same.(probably especially as it related to OBL’S concerns). He did not feel the function of the building was primarily that of normal civilian activities.I am trying to figure out what grade school they bombed, maybe there was a school, or several, on the premises? Then I think about the cavalier attitudes Americans have had about “collateral” damage…No disrespect to the deceased or their survivors of course, just trying to untangle some twisted logic that differentiates the value of collateral damage based on geography and ethnicity.

I am just surprised how some of the very bright pigs are so obviously indoctrinated. I guess that there are many intelligent pigs who don’t show up on these threads that are not. I hope so.

[NotCranky]

Poets priests and politicians have words to thank for their positions. Words that scream for your submission…and no one is jamming their transmissions.(Sting)

So now we have the defense that we are “progressive”. Different from the old religious ways maybe, but that doesn’t present proof that we are a better element of the species to unbiased eyes and open minds or perhaps even to “God”.It doesn’t prove that we are less the propagandist or less indoctrinated…just differently indoctrinated. Our God is one of money and power(British and U.S. Elite and their attaches) and we obey its(their) rules which advocate radical hi-tech warfare, economic warfare and oppression on its(their) behalf, so how progressive is that anyway? Religion is simply less necessary as a tool against the western masses at this time.At the threat of a lower standard of living most of us will abdicate free thinking. So our occupations, war crimes and crusades wear a different disguises and use different propaganda.That we are progressive doesn’t seem like a good excuse and I am sure it matters a rats ass to someone who’s land and economy is and has been enslaved to these outside interests(opposing God) for decades.

Obviously,I tend to see equivalent human beings on the other side of this(not a very good tactic I know). For instance,instead of seeing Osama Bin Laden as a foaming at the mouth civilian killer, I seem to remember that he described why the twin towers were a viable target for war. It had something to do with the the technocrats who worked there and their mission in scheme of world power and economic freedom or removal of same.(probably especially as it related to OBL’S concerns). He did not feel the function of the building was primarily that of normal civilian activities.I am trying to figure out what grade school they bombed, maybe there was a school, or several, on the premises? Then I think about the cavalier attitudes Americans have had about “collateral” damage…No disrespect to the deceased or their survivors of course, just trying to untangle some twisted logic that differentiates the value of collateral damage based on geography and ethnicity.

I am just surprised how some of the very bright pigs are so obviously indoctrinated. I guess that there are many intelligent pigs who don’t show up on these threads that are not. I hope so.

[NotCranky]

Poets priests and politicians have words to thank for their positions. Words that scream for your submission…and no one is jamming their transmissions.(Sting)

So now we have the defense that we are “progressive”. Different from the old religious ways maybe, but that doesn’t present proof that we are a better element of the species to unbiased eyes and open minds or perhaps even to “God”.It doesn’t prove that we are less the propagandist or less indoctrinated…just differently indoctrinated. Our God is one of money and power(British and U.S. Elite and their attaches) and we obey its(their) rules which advocate radical hi-tech warfare, economic warfare and oppression on its(their) behalf, so how progressive is that anyway? Religion is simply less necessary as a tool against the western masses at this time.At the threat of a lower standard of living most of us will abdicate free thinking. So our occupations, war crimes and crusades wear a different disguises and use different propaganda.That we are progressive doesn’t seem like a good excuse and I am sure it matters a rats ass to someone who’s land and economy is and has been enslaved to these outside interests(opposing God) for decades.

Obviously,I tend to see equivalent human beings on the other side of this(not a very good tactic I know). For instance,instead of seeing Osama Bin Laden as a foaming at the mouth civilian killer, I seem to remember that he described why the twin towers were a viable target for war. It had something to do with the the technocrats who worked there and their mission in scheme of world power and economic freedom or removal of same.(probably especially as it related to OBL’S concerns). He did not feel the function of the building was primarily that of normal civilian activities.I am trying to figure out what grade school they bombed, maybe there was a school, or several, on the premises? Then I think about the cavalier attitudes Americans have had about “collateral” damage…No disrespect to the deceased or their survivors of course, just trying to untangle some twisted logic that differentiates the value of collateral damage based on geography and ethnicity.

I am just surprised how some of the very bright pigs are so obviously indoctrinated. I guess that there are many intelligent pigs who don’t show up on these threads that are not. I hope so.

[NotCranky]

Poets priests and politicians have words to thank for their positions. Words that scream for your submission…and no one is jamming their transmissions.(Sting)

So now we have the defense that we are “progressive”. Different from the old religious ways maybe, but that doesn’t present proof that we are a better element of the species to unbiased eyes and open minds or perhaps even to “God”.It doesn’t prove that we are less the propagandist or less indoctrinated…just differently indoctrinated. Our God is one of money and power(British and U.S. Elite and their attaches) and we obey its(their) rules which advocate radical hi-tech warfare, economic warfare and oppression on its(their) behalf, so how progressive is that anyway? Religion is simply less necessary as a tool against the western masses at this time.At the threat of a lower standard of living most of us will abdicate free thinking. So our occupations, war crimes and crusades wear a different disguises and use different propaganda.That we are progressive doesn’t seem like a good excuse and I am sure it matters a rats ass to someone who’s land and economy is and has been enslaved to these outside interests(opposing God) for decades.

Obviously,I tend to see equivalent human beings on the other side of this(not a very good tactic I know). For instance,instead of seeing Osama Bin Laden as a foaming at the mouth civilian killer, I seem to remember that he described why the twin towers were a viable target for war. It had something to do with the the technocrats who worked there and their mission in scheme of world power and economic freedom or removal of same.(probably especially as it related to OBL’S concerns). He did not feel the function of the building was primarily that of normal civilian activities.I am trying to figure out what grade school they bombed, maybe there was a school, or several, on the premises? Then I think about the cavalier attitudes Americans have had about “collateral” damage…No disrespect to the deceased or their survivors of course, just trying to untangle some twisted logic that differentiates the value of collateral damage based on geography and ethnicity.

I am just surprised how some of the very bright pigs are so obviously indoctrinated. I guess that there are many intelligent pigs who don’t show up on these threads that are not. I hope so.

[NotCranky]

Poets priests and politicians have words to thank for their positions. Words that scream for your submission…and no one is jamming their transmissions.(Sting)

So now we have the defense that we are “progressive”. Different from the old religious ways maybe, but that doesn’t present proof that we are a better element of the species to unbiased eyes and open minds or perhaps even to “God”.It doesn’t prove that we are less the propagandist or less indoctrinated…just differently indoctrinated. Our God is one of money and power(British and U.S. Elite and their attaches) and we obey its(their) rules which advocate radical hi-tech warfare, economic warfare and oppression on its(their) behalf, so how progressive is that anyway? Religion is simply less necessary as a tool against the western masses at this time.At the threat of a lower standard of living most of us will abdicate free thinking. So our occupations, war crimes and crusades wear a different disguises and use different propaganda.That we are progressive doesn’t seem like a good excuse and I am sure it matters a rats ass to someone who’s land and economy is and has been enslaved to these outside interests(opposing God) for decades.

Obviously,I tend to see equivalent human beings on the other side of this(not a very good tactic I know). For instance,instead of seeing Osama Bin Laden as a foaming at the mouth civilian killer, I seem to remember that he described why the twin towers were a viable target for war. It had something to do with the the technocrats who worked there and their mission in scheme of world power and economic freedom or removal of same.(probably especially as it related to OBL’S concerns). He did not feel the function of the building was primarily that of normal civilian activities.I am trying to figure out what grade school they bombed, maybe there was a school, or several, on the premises? Then I think about the cavalier attitudes Americans have had about “collateral” damage…No disrespect to the deceased or their survivors of course, just trying to untangle some twisted logic that differentiates the value of collateral damage based on geography and ethnicity.

I am just surprised how some of the very bright pigs are so obviously indoctrinated. I guess that there are many intelligent pigs who don’t show up on these threads that are not. I hope so.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Arraya]Truman should have listened to his joint chiefs of staff about creating the state of Israel. It was a bad idea from the start.

Israel Shahak warned that the Talmudic Judaism is totalitarian religion where rabbinical law governs every aspect of Jewish behaviour in Israel. Yes they are liberal socially but still very much dangerous extremists that have a lobby in congress and a bunch of nukes.

And any attempts by Western analysts to explain contemporary Israeli politics in purely secular terms such as imperialism are fundamentally flawed.

You can’t discuss the ME fundamentalism with out discussing the zionists and their views. It’s very central to understanding the radicalization of the islamic political body.

Cause and effect[/quote]

Arraya: Again, no argument here. Of course, I would argue that there a few points regarding contemporary Israel that bear mentioning: Israel, like much of the ME, isn’t populated entirely by Zionists (and that is a word/term freighted with a lot of baggage that isn’t religious, either) and it is closest to the US and the West in terms of the rule of law and democratic ideals.

I spend a lot of time in Israel on business, mainly in Tel Aviv and Haifa and I will tell you that most Israelis very much want peace and find Bibi as worrisome as the rest of the world does. There is also, however, a very radical element within Israel that I would define as far more Orthodox (from a Judaical standpoint) than Zionist.

I would also opine that, while there are legitimate grievances on both sides, this conversation seems to grant clemency to the Arab (mainly Palestinian) side, without fully exploring the “whys” of what has happened and is happening.

Russ’s take would seem to be that the US and the West are simply following a tried and true pattern of behavior of war and exploitation as regards natives. Perhaps we could coin a protologism for him that would encompass “Empire” and “Corporatism” and “Exploitation” and be used as a quick catchphrase for all of the wrongs that have triggered the apparently justified attacks on the World Trade Center.

Having seen firsthand the effects of a Katyusha rocket on an Israeli grade school, I can understand where he is coming from, but I don’t think this was the grade school he was talking about. That, of course, is the problem with moral equivalency, it robs of you of the very intelligence Russ is supposedly looking for on this board.

What Russ also fails to understand is that History, like relationships, is “complicated” and when you throw out easy answers, you generally fail to capture the truth of the situation. This morass pre-dates all of us and all of our governments and most religions. But the problems won’t be solved by fawning ignorance or willful blindness.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Arraya]Truman should have listened to his joint chiefs of staff about creating the state of Israel. It was a bad idea from the start.

Israel Shahak warned that the Talmudic Judaism is totalitarian religion where rabbinical law governs every aspect of Jewish behaviour in Israel. Yes they are liberal socially but still very much dangerous extremists that have a lobby in congress and a bunch of nukes.

And any attempts by Western analysts to explain contemporary Israeli politics in purely secular terms such as imperialism are fundamentally flawed.

You can’t discuss the ME fundamentalism with out discussing the zionists and their views. It’s very central to understanding the radicalization of the islamic political body.

Cause and effect[/quote]

Arraya: Again, no argument here. Of course, I would argue that there a few points regarding contemporary Israel that bear mentioning: Israel, like much of the ME, isn’t populated entirely by Zionists (and that is a word/term freighted with a lot of baggage that isn’t religious, either) and it is closest to the US and the West in terms of the rule of law and democratic ideals.

I spend a lot of time in Israel on business, mainly in Tel Aviv and Haifa and I will tell you that most Israelis very much want peace and find Bibi as worrisome as the rest of the world does. There is also, however, a very radical element within Israel that I would define as far more Orthodox (from a Judaical standpoint) than Zionist.

I would also opine that, while there are legitimate grievances on both sides, this conversation seems to grant clemency to the Arab (mainly Palestinian) side, without fully exploring the “whys” of what has happened and is happening.

Russ’s take would seem to be that the US and the West are simply following a tried and true pattern of behavior of war and exploitation as regards natives. Perhaps we could coin a protologism for him that would encompass “Empire” and “Corporatism” and “Exploitation” and be used as a quick catchphrase for all of the wrongs that have triggered the apparently justified attacks on the World Trade Center.

Having seen firsthand the effects of a Katyusha rocket on an Israeli grade school, I can understand where he is coming from, but I don’t think this was the grade school he was talking about. That, of course, is the problem with moral equivalency, it robs of you of the very intelligence Russ is supposedly looking for on this board.

What Russ also fails to understand is that History, like relationships, is “complicated” and when you throw out easy answers, you generally fail to capture the truth of the situation. This morass pre-dates all of us and all of our governments and most religions. But the problems won’t be solved by fawning ignorance or willful blindness.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Arraya]Truman should have listened to his joint chiefs of staff about creating the state of Israel. It was a bad idea from the start.

Israel Shahak warned that the Talmudic Judaism is totalitarian religion where rabbinical law governs every aspect of Jewish behaviour in Israel. Yes they are liberal socially but still very much dangerous extremists that have a lobby in congress and a bunch of nukes.

And any attempts by Western analysts to explain contemporary Israeli politics in purely secular terms such as imperialism are fundamentally flawed.

You can’t discuss the ME fundamentalism with out discussing the zionists and their views. It’s very central to understanding the radicalization of the islamic political body.

Cause and effect[/quote]

Arraya: Again, no argument here. Of course, I would argue that there a few points regarding contemporary Israel that bear mentioning: Israel, like much of the ME, isn’t populated entirely by Zionists (and that is a word/term freighted with a lot of baggage that isn’t religious, either) and it is closest to the US and the West in terms of the rule of law and democratic ideals.

I spend a lot of time in Israel on business, mainly in Tel Aviv and Haifa and I will tell you that most Israelis very much want peace and find Bibi as worrisome as the rest of the world does. There is also, however, a very radical element within Israel that I would define as far more Orthodox (from a Judaical standpoint) than Zionist.

I would also opine that, while there are legitimate grievances on both sides, this conversation seems to grant clemency to the Arab (mainly Palestinian) side, without fully exploring the “whys” of what has happened and is happening.

Russ’s take would seem to be that the US and the West are simply following a tried and true pattern of behavior of war and exploitation as regards natives. Perhaps we could coin a protologism for him that would encompass “Empire” and “Corporatism” and “Exploitation” and be used as a quick catchphrase for all of the wrongs that have triggered the apparently justified attacks on the World Trade Center.

Having seen firsthand the effects of a Katyusha rocket on an Israeli grade school, I can understand where he is coming from, but I don’t think this was the grade school he was talking about. That, of course, is the problem with moral equivalency, it robs of you of the very intelligence Russ is supposedly looking for on this board.

What Russ also fails to understand is that History, like relationships, is “complicated” and when you throw out easy answers, you generally fail to capture the truth of the situation. This morass pre-dates all of us and all of our governments and most religions. But the problems won’t be solved by fawning ignorance or willful blindness.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Arraya]Truman should have listened to his joint chiefs of staff about creating the state of Israel. It was a bad idea from the start.

Israel Shahak warned that the Talmudic Judaism is totalitarian religion where rabbinical law governs every aspect of Jewish behaviour in Israel. Yes they are liberal socially but still very much dangerous extremists that have a lobby in congress and a bunch of nukes.

And any attempts by Western analysts to explain contemporary Israeli politics in purely secular terms such as imperialism are fundamentally flawed.

You can’t discuss the ME fundamentalism with out discussing the zionists and their views. It’s very central to understanding the radicalization of the islamic political body.

Cause and effect[/quote]

Arraya: Again, no argument here. Of course, I would argue that there a few points regarding contemporary Israel that bear mentioning: Israel, like much of the ME, isn’t populated entirely by Zionists (and that is a word/term freighted with a lot of baggage that isn’t religious, either) and it is closest to the US and the West in terms of the rule of law and democratic ideals.

I spend a lot of time in Israel on business, mainly in Tel Aviv and Haifa and I will tell you that most Israelis very much want peace and find Bibi as worrisome as the rest of the world does. There is also, however, a very radical element within Israel that I would define as far more Orthodox (from a Judaical standpoint) than Zionist.

I would also opine that, while there are legitimate grievances on both sides, this conversation seems to grant clemency to the Arab (mainly Palestinian) side, without fully exploring the “whys” of what has happened and is happening.

Russ’s take would seem to be that the US and the West are simply following a tried and true pattern of behavior of war and exploitation as regards natives. Perhaps we could coin a protologism for him that would encompass “Empire” and “Corporatism” and “Exploitation” and be used as a quick catchphrase for all of the wrongs that have triggered the apparently justified attacks on the World Trade Center.

Having seen firsthand the effects of a Katyusha rocket on an Israeli grade school, I can understand where he is coming from, but I don’t think this was the grade school he was talking about. That, of course, is the problem with moral equivalency, it robs of you of the very intelligence Russ is supposedly looking for on this board.

What Russ also fails to understand is that History, like relationships, is “complicated” and when you throw out easy answers, you generally fail to capture the truth of the situation. This morass pre-dates all of us and all of our governments and most religions. But the problems won’t be solved by fawning ignorance or willful blindness.

[Allan from Fallbrook]

[quote=Arraya]Truman should have listened to his joint chiefs of staff about creating the state of Israel. It was a bad idea from the start.

Israel Shahak warned that the Talmudic Judaism is totalitarian religion where rabbinical law governs every aspect of Jewish behaviour in Israel. Yes they are liberal socially but still very much dangerous extremists that have a lobby in congress and a bunch of nukes.

And any attempts by Western analysts to explain contemporary Israeli politics in purely secular terms such as imperialism are fundamentally flawed.

You can’t discuss the ME fundamentalism with out discussing the zionists and their views. It’s very central to understanding the radicalization of the islamic political body.

Cause and effect[/quote]

Arraya: Again, no argument here. Of course, I would argue that there a few points regarding contemporary Israel that bear mentioning: Israel, like much of the ME, isn’t populated entirely by Zionists (and that is a word/term freighted with a lot of baggage that isn’t religious, either) and it is closest to the US and the West in terms of the rule of law and democratic ideals.

I spend a lot of time in Israel on business, mainly in Tel Aviv and Haifa and I will tell you that most Israelis very much want peace and find Bibi as worrisome as the rest of the world does. There is also, however, a very radical element within Israel that I would define as far more Orthodox (from a Judaical standpoint) than Zionist.

I would also opine that, while there are legitimate grievances on both sides, this conversation seems to grant clemency to the Arab (mainly Palestinian) side, without fully exploring the “whys” of what has happened and is happening.

Russ’s take would seem to be that the US and the West are simply following a tried and true pattern of behavior of war and exploitation as regards natives. Perhaps we could coin a protologism for him that would encompass “Empire” and “Corporatism” and “Exploitation” and be used as a quick catchphrase for all of the wrongs that have triggered the apparently justified attacks on the World Trade Center.

Having seen firsthand the effects of a Katyusha rocket on an Israeli grade school, I can understand where he is coming from, but I don’t think this was the grade school he was talking about. That, of course, is the problem with moral equivalency, it robs of you of the very intelligence Russ is supposedly looking for on this board.

What Russ also fails to understand is that History, like relationships, is “complicated” and when you throw out easy answers, you generally fail to capture the truth of the situation. This morass pre-dates all of us and all of our governments and most religions. But the problems won’t be solved by fawning ignorance or willful blindness.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=surveyor][quote=sdduuuude]
Has nothing to do with Muslim or not Muslim. The quesiton is – what was this guy trying to accomplish and did he demand anything first ?[/quote]

Bzzzzt! Wrong, sorry, thank you for playing.
[/quote]

How could I be wrong ?
I asked a question – did he demand anything first ?

Just because he wants the people to sing the praises of Islam doesn’t mean that he actually asked them to before or after the violence. In other words, hey may have wanted to terrorize – that is, scare the people into converting, but did he actually terrorize ? That’s all I’m saying.

Unless you issue demands, you are just a killer, not a terrorist.

I’d label this a hate-crime or a fundamental religious nut-job, but not terrorism the way I believe it is defined.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=surveyor][quote=sdduuuude]
Has nothing to do with Muslim or not Muslim. The quesiton is – what was this guy trying to accomplish and did he demand anything first ?[/quote]

Bzzzzt! Wrong, sorry, thank you for playing.
[/quote]

How could I be wrong ?
I asked a question – did he demand anything first ?

Just because he wants the people to sing the praises of Islam doesn’t mean that he actually asked them to before or after the violence. In other words, hey may have wanted to terrorize – that is, scare the people into converting, but did he actually terrorize ? That’s all I’m saying.

Unless you issue demands, you are just a killer, not a terrorist.

I’d label this a hate-crime or a fundamental religious nut-job, but not terrorism the way I believe it is defined.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=surveyor][quote=sdduuuude]
Has nothing to do with Muslim or not Muslim. The quesiton is – what was this guy trying to accomplish and did he demand anything first ?[/quote]

Bzzzzt! Wrong, sorry, thank you for playing.
[/quote]

How could I be wrong ?
I asked a question – did he demand anything first ?

Just because he wants the people to sing the praises of Islam doesn’t mean that he actually asked them to before or after the violence. In other words, hey may have wanted to terrorize – that is, scare the people into converting, but did he actually terrorize ? That’s all I’m saying.

Unless you issue demands, you are just a killer, not a terrorist.

I’d label this a hate-crime or a fundamental religious nut-job, but not terrorism the way I believe it is defined.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=surveyor][quote=sdduuuude]
Has nothing to do with Muslim or not Muslim. The quesiton is – what was this guy trying to accomplish and did he demand anything first ?[/quote]

Bzzzzt! Wrong, sorry, thank you for playing.
[/quote]

How could I be wrong ?
I asked a question – did he demand anything first ?

Just because he wants the people to sing the praises of Islam doesn’t mean that he actually asked them to before or after the violence. In other words, hey may have wanted to terrorize – that is, scare the people into converting, but did he actually terrorize ? That’s all I’m saying.

Unless you issue demands, you are just a killer, not a terrorist.

I’d label this a hate-crime or a fundamental religious nut-job, but not terrorism the way I believe it is defined.

[Author]

Posts