Is the London attack........

[OPTIDONN]

Could you pleases highlite some of his skin-head comments? I don't think that I have seen any. I do have one question. If you are passionate about something does that make you an extremist?

[shanbaum]

Could you pleases highlite some of his skin-head comments? I don't think that I have seen any. I do have one question. If you are passionate about something does that make you an extremist?

In this thread:

"The whimsy of cultural diversity may kill us all."

"Have we become so accomodating to those with cultural and religious differences that we are losing our own Christian-nurtured culture in the U. S., as Britian and Europe have?"

"Call it what you want, I am beginning to believe that this is a 'us against them' conflict and it will not be resolved until there is no longer any of "them" willing to lift arms against us. Therefore it's time to change the rules of the game. Raising son's and daughter's to lift arms against Americans and American interest must have a price that has yet to be paid."

"The appeasers be d***. Japan and Germany had their fanatical followers and only though the annihilation of a lot of their civilian population and their culture was peace established for the last 60 years and counting."

The emphasized bits all advocate the commission of mass murder to achieve cultural purity. The achievement of cultural purity is itself a skinhead (or neo-Nazi) doctrine.

In addition, the article he referenced was written by a fascist, as can be seen more clearly in the article by the same author that I cited.

And no, being passionate about something doesn't make one an extremist; I am passionate about a number of things, about which I am not extreme: liberty, reason, and (tee-hee) moderation.

[Spexvet]

No, I have stated that I think the military should change tactics. Nothing else.

Answering your question any other way is a federal crime punishable by life imprisonment. I am sure you know that -better luck next time, If you doubt it, check todays paper.

Rep

...Call it what you want, I am beginning to believe that this is a "us against them" conflict and it will not be resolved until there is no longer any of "them" willing to lift arms against us. Therefore it's time to change the rules of the game. Raising son's and daughter's to lift arms against Americans and American interest must have a price that has yet to be paid.

The appeasers be d***. Japan and Germany had their fanatical followers and only though the annihilation of a lot of their civilian population and their culture was peace established for the last 60 years and counting...
Rep

I'll alert the authorities...

[RGC_man]

Put things in perspective. There have been an average of 150 traffic deaths in Northern Ireland since 1997 vs 100 deaths due to the conflict. Do you still think it is a huge conflict? - or is it a small conflict that has gone on for years with an average annual death rate of 100.

Well that's OK then. All the killings, kneecappings, beatings banishments, and gangsterism are no worse than road traffic accidents. That must be a real comfort to the relatives. You might as well say US WW2 deaths are no worse than deaths from smoking. Personally, I have more respect than to discount such suffering.

But Northern Ireland is a good comparison in another way. Would you rather live behind huge "peace" lines in religously segregated Belfast where you can be killed for pronouncing the letter H incorrectly (showing which side you're from). Or would you rather live in a tolerant city like London where you can be anything you want, as long as you mind your own business, and live and let live.

The London bombing was not Islamists attacking the West. It was extremists attacking moderates, many of who were Muslims. Muslim and Christian fundamentalists sound like two side of the same intolerant coin. Still, it's amusing listening to nervous whites talking in code.

[rsandr]

Has anyone noticed that the British have stated that "appearently all the bombers were suicide bombers and were killed in the blast."
The British have also stated that they have recovered "timing devises" from the bombing sites.
Now, just what does a suicide bomber need with a "timing devise" on his bomb. Want time to say prayers to Allah before it goes off?

Chip

Further to my last post on this matter, Chip, you brainiac , if you were going to carry a bomb onto a busy bus or train and you wanted it to go off at a specific time to co-ordinate with three of your accomplices how would you go about it?

Would you tap the guy next to you on the shoulder, ask him the time and then start to dig the device out of your rucksack?

Rick

[rsandr]

Northern Ireland has been a long protracted conflict, some say since the 1921 peace accord. The average deaths per year during the period your chart covers is about 100.
Put things in perspective. There have been an average of 150 traffic deaths in Northern Ireland since 1997 vs 100 deaths due to the conflict.

OK Rep....
In the UK about 5000 people per year die as a result of MRSA, a hospital superbug.
So as long as I only kill 4999 people per year who I take exception to is that OK?

I mean dammit, im stll safer than the hospitals, right?

Rick

[Joann Raytar]

Or would you rather live in a tolerant city like London where you can be anything you want, as long as you mind your own business, and live and let live.

The London bombing was not Islamists attacking the West. It was extremists attacking moderates, many of who were Muslims. Muslim and Christian fundamentalists sound like two side of the same intolerant coin. Still, it's amusing listening to nervous whites talking in code.

Probably the closest post to what is actually going wrong and going on.

But even extremist foot soldiers are trapped. All you need is a charismatic leader or group of leaders telling folks beaten down from decades of war, who don't know what their identities are because they keep being misplaced by one party or another that if they follow them everything will be fixed for their future generations - throw in the word of that cultures god/God and you have the makings for guerilla warfare. That's how leaders big and small manipulate, Jim Jones, Charles Manson, David Koresh, not to mention all of the political leaders who got away with talking their people into commiting genocide.

We need to find these leaders and cut off the command centers. We need better means of getting intelligence.

[drk]

My take on the religious aspect:

There seems to be inheirent in Islam and the Arab world a desire to unite and form some sort of political/religious state (the so-called Pan-Arabic-whatever).

(There are the militant Arabs, like Saddam [although he was nominally Muslim] that simply want power. Nothing unique there, so they shouldn't be included in this discussion.)

A reasonably high percentage take their religion rather seriously, more so than in the soon-to-be completely secular West. Their religion seems to have the tenet that all are to be Muslim or at least to live under their Muslim law (shar-something?). Their sense of holiness dictates that. It is a easily offended religion, I think, as recent history has shown.

The religious Muslims seem to understand what western culture can do to destroy their holy laws/culture, and they take umbrage to Western presence and culture. And I understand that: lots of popular Western culture, especially American, is trash. Muslims and Christians would agree, here.

I don't have a problem if Islam wants to keep itself isolated from external forces, but that is increasingly unlikely to occur (same in the US/West). It's how we interact with our neighbors that count, though, and these killers are giving Islam a very bad name, worldwide. In segments of Islam, it's acceptable to kill the neighbors.

(As a comparison, in defense of fundamentalist Christianity, its response to neighbors is to proselytize. At least in Christianity, there is an understanding that Christianity is voluntary. Yes, to those cynics that will complain of fundamentalist Christianity's attempt to interact with the world's culture, it is voluntary. So I would claim that at least fundamentalism in Christianity leads to no bloodshed [the rare wacko abortion-bomber is not a Christian].)

What I'm preaching here, is religious tolerance. If we could script the way the world works, I would recommend a situation where religions co-exist, and leave all the "fighting" to peaceful discourse between religions. There's no need to kill in the name of religion.

Having said all that about religion, I would say there is at least an equal amount of worldly/secular/military/economic/power-related force behind the conflict between the Arabs and the Western Civilizations. I would say even that's a conservative estimate. That's not to be ignored; a lot of bad stuff is done in the name of religion, and no matter how tolerant and respectful we might be towards their religion, that would by no means end the friction.

Warning! Warning! Warning! Only read the below if you are not offended by a conservative:

Rush Limbaugh doctrine (and I paraphrase): Regrettably, history has shown that peace rarely comes with negotiations and treaties, but rather from one side militarily enforcing it's will on another's.

I fear that is true, and that that will never change. We must be realistic.

[cinders831]

My take on the religious aspect:

There seems to be inheirent in Islam and the Arab world a desire to unite and form some sort of political/religious state (the so-called Pan-Arabic-whatever).

(There are the militant Arabs, like Saddam [although he was nominally Muslim] that simply want power. Nothing unique there, so they shouldn't be included in this discussion.)

A reasonably high percentage take their religion rather seriously, more so than in the soon-to-be completely secular West. Their religion seems to have the tenet that all are to be Muslim or at least to live under their Muslim law (shar-something?). Their sense of holiness dictates that. It is a easily offended religion, I think, as recent history has shown.

The religious Muslims seem to understand what western culture can do to destroy their holy laws/culture, and they take umbrage to Western presence and culture. And I understand that: lots of popular Western culture, especially American, is trash. Muslims and Christians would agree, here.

I don't have a problem if Islam wants to keep itself isolated from external forces, but that is increasingly unlikely to occur (same in the US/West). It's how we interact with our neighbors that count, though, and these killers are giving Islam a very bad name, worldwide. In segments of Islam, it's acceptable to kill the neighbors.

(As a comparison, in defense of fundamentalist Christianity, its response to neighbors is to proselytize. At least in Christianity, there is an understanding that Christianity is voluntary. Yes, to those cynics that will complain of fundamentalist Christianity's attempt to interact with the world's culture, it is voluntary. So I would claim that at least fundamentalism in Christianity leads to no bloodshed [the rare wacko abortion-bomber is not a Christian].)

What I'm preaching here, is religious tolerance. If we could script the way the world works, I would recommend a situation where religions co-exist, and leave all the "fighting" to peaceful discourse between religions. There's no need to kill in the name of religion.

Having said all that about religion, I would say there is at least an equal amount of worldly/secular/military/economic/power-related force behind the conflict between the Arabs and the Western Civilizations. I would say even that's a conservative estimate. That's not to be ignored; a lot of bad stuff is done in the name of religion, and no matter how tolerant and respectful we might be towards their religion, that would by no means end the friction.

Warning! Warning! Warning! Only read the below if you are not offended by a conservative:

Rush Limbaugh doctrine (and I paraphrase): Regrettably, history has shown that peace rarely comes with negotiations and treaties, but rather from one side militarily enforcing it's will on another's.

I fear that is true, and that that will never change. We must be realistic.

I enjoyed reading this post. I concur.

[Spexvet]

...
(As a comparison, in defense of fundamentalist Christianity, its response to neighbors is to proselytize. At least in Christianity, there is an understanding that Christianity is voluntary. Yes, to those cynics that will complain of fundamentalist Christianity's attempt to interact with the world's culture, it is voluntary. So I would claim that at least fundamentalism in Christianity leads to no bloodshed [the rare wacko abortion-bomber is not a Christian].)

I was thinking how closely your description fit Christian fundamentalists. Please - voluntary? Trying to pass an ammendment prohibiting same-gender marriage? Taking away a woman's right to choose? Posting the ten commandments on our halls of justice? (as if it's illegal to covet!). YOU say abortion clinic bombers are not Christian, but they are, and they do it in the name of Christ.

Rush Limbaugh doctrine (and I paraphrase): Regrettably, history has shown that peace rarely comes with negotiations and treaties, but rather from one side militarily enforcing it's will on another's.

And how's that working? War in Iraq and Afghanistan sure stopped the terrorism, didn't it? No?

I fear that is true, and that that will never change. We must be realistic.

When you continue to do the same old things, you get the same old results.

[cinders831]

I was thinking how closely your description fit Christian fundamentalists. Please - voluntary? Trying to pass an ammendment prohibiting same-gender marriage? Taking away a woman's right to choose? Posting the ten commandments on our halls of justice? (as if it's illegal to covet!). YOU say abortion clinic bombers are not Christian, but they are, and they do it in the name of Christ.



And how's that working? War in Iraq and Afghanistan sure stopped the terrorism, didn't it? No?



When you continue to do the same old things, you get the same old results.

I will just say that NO they may claim to be christians but I am nearly sure that when they meet God he will say he did not know them, God is of love and forgiveness and mercy not of killing people for thinking differently then you. They are wackos claiming to be Christian just like there are wackos claiming to be muslim but I am nearly positive that they do there evils in the name of religion as a scape goat or because they really honestly have no idea the trueness and core of there religion. I as a Christian dislike the anti abortionist tactics when blowing up buildings...I imagine there are muslims who dislike the behavior of those bombing people and places as well. I cant believe that its hard to see that people need a reason for there craziness, its unfortunate but true...

[OPTIDONN]

WOW! I just have to say what a thread! Ranting and not making any points for pages can be really annoying but geeze! This is a few pages of some good thought provoking stuff!!:cheers:

[Spexvet]

I will just say that NO they may claim to be christians but I am nearly sure that when they meet God he will say he did not know them, God is of love and forgiveness and mercy not of killing people for thinking differently then you. They are wackos claiming to be Christian just like there are wackos claiming to be muslim but I am nearly positive that they do there evils in the name of religion as a scape goat or because they really honestly have no idea the trueness and core of there religion.

Sounds like George W Bush

[drk]

Word to the wise, judge any religion apart from those who profess to adhere to it. Adherence is the tough part!

Spex, you surely see the distinction between Christians using the legal and governmentally-approved means to promote their positions versus using violence, don't you?

[rep]

demonizing views different from your own..................

I posted an article and asked some questions. I never said they were my views but that I wanted some comments. I also made some statements in response to those who responded.

Here are the responses from Robert the self proclaimed Optiboard "moderate":

"I am passionate about a number of things, about which I am not extreme: liberty, reason, and (tee-hee) moderation"

rep is quite the ignoramus; it's a pretty typical characteristic amongst extremists.

rep persists in posting comments that are borderline skinhead.

those kinds of comments come only from the profoundly ignorant and deeply disturbed.

we are in rep's debt for pointing out the kinds of warped and twisted people we have to watch out for..

and the ultimate sign of reason and moderation.......link someone to being a Nazi.

It's what I would have done had I been in pre-Nazi Germany in the early 30's (before hightailing it out of there, after my comments fell on deaf ears). In any case, it's the same kind of crap.

Reason and moderation? Right.....................

Thanks for the lesson.


Rep