Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Political/War Lounge > "voting is apostasy"

"voting is apostasy" (Page 2)
Thread Tools
SimpleLife
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2004
Status: Offline
Apr 26, 2005, 08:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by Zimphire
I don't think that is a projection. They did studies in Iraq a lone.

70 to 80% of the muslim population supported terrorists and their actions against the infidel.
Well I'll be damn!

That was worth a couple 100 Billions of U.S. monies!
     
SimpleLife
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2004
Status: Offline
Apr 26, 2005, 08:18 PM
 
Originally Posted by eklipse
Retaliatory actions against an infidel invading and occupying force? Absolutely.
That is the beauty of True Freedom and Democracy I suppose...
     
SimpleLife
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2004
Status: Offline
Apr 26, 2005, 08:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacNStein
Hell yeah! Drop a bomb on that baby!
Fixinated.
     
SimpleLife
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2004
Status: Offline
Apr 26, 2005, 08:21 PM
 
Originally Posted by lil'babykitten
The Muslim Council of Britain has of late been doing a very good job at educating the general public about Islam and in encouraging Britain's Muslims to recognise their responsibilities. I would say that the most important vehicle for informing the public - the media - is failing at following this up. Editors seem to prefer running headlines that scream negativity and have no real substance rather than those that actually indicate something more detailed and progressive.

Which brings me back to von wrangell's earlier point about the media's influence. Recently I've been involved in an organisation based in East London called TELCO which brings together people from all races, colours and religions to improve their communities. We organised an election campaign event that sought to ascertain what each candidate standing for election in that constituency would do for the East London communities. It was a high profile event with a strong media prescence. Yet because it involved two particular candidates who are running against each other there - Oona King and George Galloway - every evening news piece and newspaper report focussed on the fact that the event ran very smoothly, as opposed to a few nights before where the same radical Islamic group featured above had threatened both candidates. Nevermind the fact that this was an event that brought together Christians, Muslims and Jews of all races to call their MPs to account for issues of common interest.

Reductionist reporting is only serving to exacerbate existing tensions and misconceptions, which for the most part are a product of sheer ignorance.
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Apr 26, 2005, 09:16 PM
 
Originally Posted by SimpleLife
Well I'll be damn!

That was worth a couple 100 Billions of U.S. monies!
America had nothing to do with it. Their blind hatred towards Israel did.

Do you always argue this dishonestly?
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Apr 27, 2005, 05:15 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks
Let's talk about this. In the Al-Moayad trial:

http://www.nytimes.com/2005/02/25/ny...tml?oref=login

Dr. Bernard Haykel is a professor of Islamic Studies at New York University.

He says: "There are a billion plus Muslims in the Arab world, 90 percent of whom support Hamas," he testified. "If they were all terrorists, we would be in dire trouble."

Dr. Haykel says they are not all terrorists. But if they support Hamas, they are terrorist sympathizers, and in many cases, terrorism enablers.

So 90% of a billion-plus is a tiny minority?
What a nonsense, there are only about 280-300 million arabs in the world, so that idea of billion muslims in the arab world falls flat right away. How much credibility can a "doctor" have when he gets the most basic information wrong?

Source: http://www.middleeastnews.com/intoarab101.html

Taliesin
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Apr 27, 2005, 05:53 AM
 
Originally Posted by MacNStein
So much for "one religion united in peace".
Peace doesn't have to mean pacifism, Islam was never pacifistic oriented, the Quran undoubtedly calls the muslims that are attacked, driven out or waged war against to react with jihad, meaning a defensive war.

During that defensive war it is allowed, though not prescripted, according to the Quran to execute retaliation, meaning killing as many civilians from the enemy group as that group killed among the own civilians.

Throughout the whole Israel-Palestine-conflict, Israel always killed more palestinian civilian than palestinian killed among israeli civilians, until 67 the ratio was about 50 to 1, after 67 the ratio was about 10 to 1, after 2000 the ratio was about 5 to 1.

Most of the wars between Israel and the surrounding arabic countries were started by Israel, with espescially brutal results in the numerous Lebanon-wars.

All in all throughout over hundred years, since 1881 when the first (east-)european zionists appeared in Palestine, until this very day, about 24,000-30,000 jews/israelis, most of them soldiers, were killed by palestinians/arabic armies, while Israel was able to kill about 20,000 lebanese/palestinian civilians in just a few months of 1982, not to count the casualties of the previous wars and the ones during the first intifada...

Many don't know it anymore, but the first suicide terrorist attack against civilians was not committed by palestinians but by a jew with the name of Baruch Goldstein, when he entered a mosque and killed 29 praying people injuring scores of others in 1994.

Many also don't know it anymore but Israel supported the Hamas and its mother-organization as a tool to undermine the popular support for the secular nationalistic PLO.

That said it is important to note, that while the Quran allows, but not prescripts, just and kind retaliation, the Quran doesn't allow muslims to commit suicide regardless of the reasons, so suicide-bombings, while understandable from a guerillia point of view are not condoned by the Quran, even when they are committed for the purpose of retaliation, and therefore someone committing suicide-bombings has no guarantee to paradise, en contraire must fear punishment for having commited suicide, and can't claim to be a martyr.

Taliesin
     
SimpleLife
Mac Elite
Join Date: Nov 2004
Status: Offline
Apr 27, 2005, 06:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by Zimphire
America had nothing to do with it. Their blind hatred towards Israel did.

Do you always argue this dishonestly?
Maybe you should read.

You mention
a study about Iraq a lone. 70 to 80% of the muslim population supported terrorists and their actions against the infidel.
Does it make sense to you now?
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
Apr 27, 2005, 06:55 AM
 
Originally Posted by SimpleLife
Does it make sense to you now?
Oh it makes sense what you were TRYING to do. It's STILL dishonest.

You must be proud of yourself.
     
vmarks  (op)
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Apr 27, 2005, 08:28 AM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin
Peace doesn't have to mean pacifism, Islam was never pacifistic oriented, the Quran undoubtedly calls the muslims that are attacked, driven out or waged war against to react with jihad, meaning a defensive war.

During that defensive war it is allowed, though not prescripted, according to the Quran to execute retaliation, meaning killing as many civilians from the enemy group as that group killed among the own civilians.

Throughout the whole Israel-Palestine-conflict, Israel always killed more palestinian civilian than palestinian killed among israeli civilians, until 67 the ratio was about 50 to 1, after 67 the ratio was about 10 to 1, after 2000 the ratio was about 5 to 1.
[/b]
Sure, and you compare wars started by surrounding Arab countries with a war started by Palestinians, and then call their combatants by the word civilians. you're comparing participants and instigators that are different in a several ways.
Most of the wars between Israel and the surrounding arabic countries were started by Israel, with espescially brutal results in the numerous Lebanon-wars.
False.
1948 was started by Egypt, Syria, and piled on by others. 1956 was Egypt. 1967 was Egypt, piled on by Syria, Jordan. Egypt told the UN they planned to launch war and to leave so that they could. The UN complied. The Lebanon war was in part an effort to go after the vicious PLO that committed the acts in Jordan and fled to Lebanon to set up a Palestinian country there, after failing to do so in Jordan. It also was a sensible attempt to fight attackers on their land on Israel's terms instead of always having to be attacked and fight within Israel, as a means of preventing civilian loss.
All in all throughout over hundred years, since 1881 when the first (east-)european zionists appeared in Palestine, until this very day, about 24,000-30,000 jews/israelis, most of them soldiers, were killed by palestinians/arabic armies, while Israel was able to kill about 20,000 lebanese/palestinian civilians in just a few months of 1982, not to count the casualties of the previous wars and the ones during the first intifada...
Again you're dishonest. You're counting deaths caused by Lebanon's Christians as deaths caused by Israel. You're calling Israeli civilians as soldiers because they had at one time been in the army (army service is mandatory) even if they weren't on active duty.
Many don't know it anymore, but the first suicide terrorist attack against civilians was not committed by palestinians but by a jew with the name of Baruch Goldstein, when he entered a mosque and killed 29 praying people injuring scores of others in 1994.
Incorrect.

The first suicide bombing was 1981 by Hizballah against American soldiers in Beirut. After that they and other groups started using it against civilians. Baruch Goldstein, the lone nut, was not an innovator, but copied Palestinian bombers in their attacks on Israeli buses carrying schoolchildren. Israel prosecutes any Israeli who commits or attempts to commit such an act. Palestinians revere such evil as heroes.

Many also don't know it anymore but Israel supported the Hamas and its mother-organization as a tool to undermine the popular support for the secular nationalistic PLO.
You keep saying that, but never can provide proof other than wacko websites that repeat it without evidence.

That said it is important to note, that while the Quran allows, but not prescripts, just and kind retaliation, the Quran doesn't allow muslims to commit suicide regardless of the reasons, so suicide-bombings, while understandable from a guerillia point of view are not condoned by the Quran, even when they are committed for the purpose of retaliation, and therefore someone committing suicide-bombings has no guarantee to paradise, en contraire must fear punishment for having commited suicide, and can't claim to be a martyr.

Taliesin
A poster here who used to call himself Logic always said that the soul of the suicide bomber leaves for heaven before the body dies, and because the soul never dies, the bomber is in fact a martyr.

Several Imams and Sheiks seem to agree. The videos of the Friday prayers beseeching, inviting, encouraging suicide bombers are readily available for viewing here: http://pmw.org.il/tv%20part10.html - are these Sheiks simply misunderstanding Islam? Are they just a tiny minority of extremists too?

For added measure, videos of mothers who rejoice at their child's "death for Allah" - http://pmw.org.il/tv%20part4.html

and http://pmw.org.il/tv%20part1.html which shows that Palestinian children are taught to believe that becoming suicide bombers will lead to the great afterlife.
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
Apr 27, 2005, 09:18 AM
 
Originally Posted by SimpleLife
Fixinated.
I know that you like to equate the two, but you'd be wrong. Your sympathies for the terrorists are well noted.
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
gadster
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Sydney, Australia
Status: Offline
Apr 28, 2005, 09:34 AM
 
I'm just flabbergasted that in this day and age people are still clinging to these ancient, archaic man made texts. All peoples have their traditional creation myths in either written or oral form. Some more bizarre than other, true. It's probably always been so.

So many to choose from, so little time. *sigh*

How to choose? Well, you could just go with whatever Mom and Pop believe. Or you could be a rebel and choose something a bit more exotic. Or you could just look at the whole smorgasbord and take a bit of this and a bit of that. Roll your own, so to speak.

Or you could just look at the diversity of 'religious' doctrines that abound and decide that they're all just myths. Primitive attempts to give meaning to our insignificant little lives. The values and messages are generally valid, but the gritty detail is most likely a fiction.

But to use a belief system as a platform to attack people who truly believe different, that's so not cool.

We have much more in common, as humans, than we have differences. It's just that a lot of us let our belief systems get in the way of meaningfully connecting with each other.

Peace.
e-gads
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 07:50 AM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks
Sure, and you compare wars started by surrounding Arab countries with a war started by Palestinians, and then call their combatants by the word civilians. you're comparing participants and instigators that are different in a several ways.

False.
1948 was started by Egypt, Syria, and piled on by others. 1956 was Egypt. 1967 was Egypt, piled on by Syria, Jordan. Egypt told the UN they planned to launch war and to leave so that they could. The UN complied. The Lebanon war was in part an effort to go after the vicious PLO that committed the acts in Jordan and fled to Lebanon to set up a Palestinian country there, after failing to do so in Jordan. It also was a sensible attempt to fight attackers on their land on Israel's terms instead of always having to be attacked and fight within Israel, as a means of preventing civilian loss.
Sigh, are you still clinging to the "Israel is the victim"-propaganda? We know nowadays thanks to opened archives of Israel that most wars were started by Israel in order to use the different opportunities given by words or acts of surrounding arabic countries in order to gain more land and to crouch nearer to the goal of "Greater Israel". Throughout the fifities, sixties and seventies the idea of "Greater Israel" dominated the thinking of the leaders of Israel and dictated their foreign policy most of the time, while they propagated the justification of preventing a new holocaust in order to convince the not-overly-ideological part of Israel and off course the world-public, espescially the US-public.

Here is a nice nearly unbiased (has a slight pro-Israel-stance but ok) summary of the numerous wars after the 48-war:

The Sinai Campaign - Following the overthrow of King Farouk of Egypt by the free officers headed by Naguib and Nasser, Egypt made some moves toward peace with Israel. However, in 1954, an Israeli spy ring was caught trying to blow up the US Information agency and other foreign institutions in Egypt. The goal was to create tension between the US and Egypt and prevent rapprochement. In Israel, both Defense Minister Pinhas Lavon and Prime Minister David Ben Gurion disclaimed responsibility for the action, and blamed each other. This incident came to be known variously as "the Lavon affair" and "the shameful business." (click here for details). Egypt became suspicious of Israeli intentions, and began negotiating to purchase large quantities of arms. When they were turned down by the West, the Egyptians turned to the Eastern bloc countries and concluded a deal with Czechoslovakia. Egyptian President Gamal Nasser also closed the straits of Tiran and Suez Canal to Israeli shipping. Israeli strategists believed that Egypt would go to war or force a diplomatic showdown as soon the weapons had been integrated, and began looking for a source of arms as well. Israel concluded an arms deal with France. A series of border incursions by Palestinians and by Egyptians from Gaza evoked increasingly severe Israeli reprisals, triggering larger raids. The assessment of Israeli "activists" like Moshe Dayan was that Israel should wage preventive war before Egypt had fully integrated the new weapons.

In the summer of 1956, Israel, France and Britain colluded in a plan to reverse the nationalization of the Suez canal. Israel would invade the Sinai and land paratroopers near the Mitla pass. Britain and France would issue an ultimatum, and then land troops ostensibly to separate the sides. The plan was carried out beginning October 29, 1956. Israel swiftly conquered Sinai. The US was furious at Israel, Britain and France. UN General Assembly Resolution 997 called for immediate withdrawal. Israeli troops remained in Sinai for many months. Israel subsequently withdrew under pressure from the UN and in particular the United States. Israel obtained guarantees that international waterways would remain open to Israeli shipping from the US, and a UN force was stationed in Sinai.
And:

The 1967 6-Day War - Tension began developing between Israel and Arab countries in the 1960s. Israel began to implement its National Water Carrier plan, which pumps water from the Sea of Galilee to irrigate south and central Israel. The project was in accordance with a plan proposed by US envoy Eric Johnston in 1955, and agreed to by Arab engineers. Arab governments refused to participate however, because of the implied recognition of Israel. In secret meetings, Israel and Jordan agreed to abide by the water quotas set by the plan.

The newly formed Palestinian Fatah movement seized on the Israeli diversion as an "imperialist event" that would catalyze their revolution, and Yasser Arafat began calling for war to eliminate Israel. In the Fatah newspaper, Filistinunah, ("our Palestine") Arafat ridiculed Egyptian President Nasser and other Arab leaders for their impotence, and called for effective action against Israel. Nasser decided to found the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) as a "tame" alternative to the Fatah, and placed Ahmed Shukhairy, an ineffective and bombastic diplomat at its head.

The Syrians, who had broken with Nasser's pan-Arabism, countered by supporting Fatah and attempted to take over the Fatah group. Syrian army intelligence recruited terrorists for actions against Israel, giving credit for the operations to Fatah. The first of these actions was announced on December 31, 1964, an attack on the Israel water carrier at Beit Netopha, but in fact no attack had taken place. A second attempt was made on January 2, 1965, but the explosives charge was disarmed. However, successful attacks soon followed on January 14 and February 28. These minor terrorist activities received great publicity in the Arab world, and were contrasted with the lack of action and bombastic talk of Gamal Nasser, challenging Nasser's leadership. This ferment is considered the catalyst of the events that brought about the 6-day war. It is a moot point whether it is to be attributed to Syrian rivalry with Nasser, or as Yasser Arafat and the Palestinians claim, to the Fatah movement. Faced with the "heroic" deeds of the Palestinians under Syrian tutelage, Nasser was pushed to an increasingly bellicose stance.

In several summit conferences beginning in 1964, Arab leaders ratified the establishment of the PLO, declared their resolve to destroy Israel, and decided to divert the sources of the Jordan river that feed the Sea of Galilee, to prevent Israel from implementing the water carrier plan. The Syrians and Lebanese began to implement the diversions. Israel responded by firing on the tractors and equipment doing the work in Syria, using increasingly accurate and longer range guns as the Syrians moved the equipment from the border. This was followed by Israeli attempts to cultivate the demilitarized zones (DMZ) as provided in the armistice agreements. Israel was within its rights according to the armistice agreements, but Moshe Dayan claimed many years later that 80% of the incidents were deliberately provoked. The Syrians responded by firing in the DMZs (Click here for a map of the demilitarized zones). When Israelis responded in force, Syria began shelling Israeli towns in the north, and the conflict escalated into air strikes. The USSR was intent on protecting the new Ba'athist pro-Soviet government of Syria, and represented to the Syrians and Egyptians that Israel was preparing to attack Syria. As tension rose, Syria appealed to Egypt, believing the claim of the USSR that Israel was massing troops on the Syrian border. The claim was false and was denied by the UN.

Against this background, in Mid-May, 1967, Egyptian President Gamal Nasser began making bellicose statements. On May 16, 1967, a Radio Cairo broadcast stated: "The existence of Israel has continued too long. We welcome the Israeli aggression. We welcome the battle we have long awaited. The peak hour has come. The battle has come in which we shall destroy Israel." On the same day, Egypt asked for the withdrawal of the UN Emergency Force (UNEF) from Sinai and the Gaza Strip. UN Secretary General U Thant agreed to remove the troops on May 18. Formally, the troops could only be stationed in Egypt with Egyptian agreement. However, for a long time it was believed that Nasser had really hoped U Thant would not remove the troops, and that he could use the presence of the UN troops as an excuse to do nothing.

On May 23, Nasser closed the straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping. The United States failed to live up to its guarantees of freedom of the waterways to Israel. A torrent of rhetoric issued from Arab capitals and in the UN. At the UN, PLO Chairman Ahmed Shukhairy announced that "if it will be our privilege to strike the first blow" the PLO would expel from Palestine all Zionists who had arrived after 1917 and eliminate the state of Israel. In a speech to Arab Trade Unionists on May 26, 1967, Nasser justified the dismissal of the UNEF, and made it clear that Egypt was prepared to fight Israel for Palestinian rights. He also attacked the Jordanians as tools of the imperialists, stepping up the constant pressure on Jordan's King Hussein.

Despite the bellicose rhetoric, analysts such as Avi Shlaim (The Iron Wall) and others believe that each country was dragged into the conflict by inter-Arab rivalry and did not contemplate a war. Nasser never intended to attack Israel according to Shlaim. He had been dragged into the conflict by Soviet maneuvers and Syrian fears and his need to claim leadership of the Arab world according to them. Be that as it may, according to Michael Oren, recently declassified documents reveal that the Egyptians in fact planned to attack Israel on May 28, 1948. The plan, codenamed operation Dawn, was discovered by Israel. The Israelis told the Americans. US President Johnson told Soviet Premier Kosygin, and Kosygin wrote to Nasser. Nasser understood that he had lost the element of surprise and called off the attack. Nonetheless, on May 29, 1967, Nasser was still speaking of confrontation with Israel. He told members of the Egyptian National Assembly, "God will surely help and urge us to restore the situation to what it was in 1948."

IDF officers began pressuring the civilian establishment to declare war, because it was considered that an Arab attack might be imminent, and because Israel's ability to maintain its army fully mobilized is limited, but Prime Minister Eshkol was reluctant to take action, and Foreign Minister Abba Eban opposed unilateral action, which he believed would be against the wishes of the United States. Ariel Sharon now admits that he and others, including Yitzhak Rabin, had discussed the possibility of a sort of coup, in which government officials were to be locked in a room, while the army started the war, but the idea never got passed the stage of thinking out loud.

On May 30, Jordan signed a defense pact with Egypt, readying itself for war. King Hussein stated: "The armies of Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Lebanon are poised on the borders of Israel...to face the challenge, while standing behind us are the armies of Iraq, Algeria, Kuwait, Sudan and the whole Arab nation. This act will astound the world. Today they will know that the Arabs are arranged for battle, the critical hour has arrived. We have reached the stage of serious action and not declarations."

On June 4, Iraq likewise joined a military alliance with Egypt and committed itself to war. On May 31, the Iraqi President Rahman Aref announced, "This is our opportunity to wipe out the ignominy which has been with us since 1948. Our goal is clear--to wipe Israel off the map."

US and Israeli assessments were that Israel would win any war handily, despite the huge superiority in armor, aircraft, and troops favoring the combined forces of the Arab countries. Prior to 1967, Israel had gotten almost no military aid from the United States. Egypt and Syria were equipped with large quantities of the latest Soviet military equipment. Israel's main arms supplier was France. On paper, Israel had almost as many aircraft as the Egyptians, but the Israeli aircraft were mostly old, and even the Super-Mirages were no match for the Mig-21 fighters acquired by Egypt from the USSR. On paper, the IDF had a large number of "tanks" matching or almost matching the arms of the Arab countries. However, while Syrians and Egyptians were equipped with late model Soviet heavy tanks, many of the Israeli "tanks" were in fact tiny French AMX anti-tank vehicles, and the heavy tanks were refurbished WWII Sherman tanks fitted with diesel engines. Israel had also been allowed to purchase about 250 M-48 Patton tanks from the US in 1965. The Israeli and Jewish public, and some in the government, believed that there was a mortal threat to Israel. Thousands of graves were dug in Tel Aviv public parks in anticipation of the heavy casualties.

The Israeli government probably did not want war, and some at least were fearful of war. Ben Gurion berated Chief of Staff Itzhak Rabin for making aggressive statements that had, according to him, escalated the conflict and gotten Israel into trouble. Israeli Prime Minister Levi Eshkol appeared hesitant, and stuttered in a dramatic radio speech to the nation. Under great public pressure from opposition parties, a unity government was formed. Foreign Minister Abba Eban tried in vain to obtain from the US a guarantee that they would reopen the straights of Tiran. At first, President Johnson promised an international flotilla, and warned Israel not to attack on its own. However, the US was unable to initiate any international action, and reversed its position, hinting broadly that Israel would have to handle the problem itself.

Israel could not maintain total mobilization indefinitely. When it became apparent that Egypt would not stand down, Israel attacked the Egyptians beginning on June 5, 1967. In the first hours of the war, Israel destroyed over 400 enemy aircraft to achieve total air superiority. Israeli troops quickly conquered the Sinai Peninsula and Gaza. Jordanian artillery began firing at Jerusalem on the first day of the war, despite a warning by Israeli PM Levi Eshkol to stay out of the war, and then the Jordan Legion advanced and took over the headquarters of the UN (Governor's house - Armon Hanatziv ) in Jerusalem. After warning King Hussein repeatedly to cease fire and withdraw, Israel conquered the West Bank and Jerusalem. During the first days of the war, Syrian artillery based in the Golan Heights pounded civilian targets in northern Israel. After dealing with Egypt, Israel decided to conquer the Golan heights, despite opposition and doubts of some in the government, including Moshe Dayan, who had been appointed defense minister. (see map of territories occupied in 1967) and despite the fact that the UN had already called for a cease fire. Israel agreed to a cease fire on June 11, 1967 after conquering the Golan Heights. UN Resolution 242 called for negotiations of a permanent peace between the parties, and for Israeli withdrawal from lands occupied in 1967.


What about the aftermath of the 67-war:

While Israel had acquired territories and a military victory, it also marked a new day for Palestinian aspirations. The defeat brought about a million Palestinian Arabs under Israeli rule. After the war, the fate of the Palestinians came to play a large role in the Arab-Israeli struggle. The Fatah organization (The Movement for Liberation of Palestine) was founded about 1957 (though it was formalized much later), and the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) was founded in 1964. Both had the declared aim of destroying Israel. After the 6-day war, Ahmad Shukairy, who had headed the PLO, was replaced as chairman by Yasser Arafat who headed the Fatah. Fatah and the PLO now had freedom of action, without the restraints of the discredited Arab regimes. Since all parts of Palestine were now under Israeli control, Fatah actions did not directly threaten Arab governments. In time, the Palestine Liberation Organization became recognized by all the Arab states and eventually by the UN as the representative of the Palestinian people. PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat addressed a session of the UN General Assembly in 1974. Israel strongly opposed the PLO because of its terrorist acts against Jews and because of its charter aims of destroying the state of Israel and expelling Jews who had arrived after 1917.

That's the most ironic outcome of the 67-war: By conquering the Westbank and Gaza, Israel has basically brought itself more problems than it could/can handle, because then it exposed itself as an occupying force, that negates citizen-rights to millions of palestinians living in the occupied areas and setting free a nationalistic movement, whose goal was the abolishment of the state of Israel and the expelling of all jews/zionists that came to Palestine after 1917.

In order to somehow outweigh or counteract that huge strategic disadvantage, the Allon-plan got created:

The Israeli government originally declared that it was ready to return all of the territories except Jerusalem in return for peace treaties with its Arab neighbors. However, religious and nationalist groups began agitating for annexation and settlement of areas in the West Bank and Golan heights. In the summer of 1967, Moshe Dayan, who was in charge of administering the West Bank, turned down a petition by West Bank notables for self-rule. By July 1967, Yigal Alon had submitted his "Alon Plan" which called for Israeli retention of large parts of the West Bank in any peace settlement for strategic reasons. An increasing number of settlements were established as it became evident that Arab states would not negotiate with Israel. A decisive turning point was the Khartoum Arab summit, in August and September of 1967, which seemed to shut the door on the possibility of negotiations with Israel or recognition of Israel in any form. The Khartoum resolutions may not have been an insurmountable barrier to peace. In 1970, King Hussein of Jordan supposedly offered to make peace in return for Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and return of the holy places, but the offer was politely turned down.

...

Meanwhile however, settlement expansion became official Israeli policy after the opposition revisionist Likud party came to power in 1977, and continued during the Oslo accords. As of 2003, about 220,000 Israelis had settled in areas of the West Bank and Gaza, and an additional 200,000 were settled in areas of Jerusalem and environs conquered in 1967. About 15,000 Jews were settled in the Golan heights taken from Syria. (Click for Map of Israeli West Bank Settlements-2002)

... to be continued

Taliesin
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 07:51 AM
 
...

On to the next war, the war of attrition and the eventually following Yom-Kippur-war:

The War of Attrition - After the 6-Day war, Egyptian president Nasser launched the war of attrition on the Suez canal, breaking the cease fire. In Israel, Prime Minister Levi Eshkol had died and was replaced by the hawkish Golda Meir. The sides fought to a standstill in increasingly bloody exchanges that included participation by Soviet pilots on the Egyptian side. Under US pressure, a second cease fire was signed in August 1970, with both sides declaring officially their acceptance of UN Resolution 242. Nasser died shortly thereafter, and was replaced by Anwar Sadat. Sadat tried repeatedly to interest Israel in partial peace deals in return for partial Israeli withdrawal, and the US and UN tried to mediate peace through the offices of Gunnar Jarring. Nothing came of these peace efforts, partly owing to the stubborn attitude of Israeli PM Golda Meir, who insisted that Israeli troops would not budge until there was a peace agreement in place. Sadat continued to alternate peace plans with threats of war, but he was not taken seriously in Israel. Israeli army intelligence as well as the government were convinced that Israel had absolute military superiority and that Egypt would not dare to attack until it had rebuilt its army. Therefore, the best course seemed to be to wait until the Arab countries met Israel's terms.

The October War (Yom Kippur War) - In October 1973, Egypt and Syria launched another war against Israel, after the Israeli government headed by Golda Meir rebuffed Egyptian President Anwar Sadat's offers to negotiate a settlement. The Egyptians crossed the Suez Canal on the afternoon of October 6, Yom Kippur, the holiest day in the Jewish religious calendar. The Israeli government had ignored repeated intelligence warnings. They were convinced that Israeli arms were a sufficient deterrent to any aggressor. Sadat had twice announced his intention to go to war, but nothing had happened. When the intelligence reports were finally believed, on the morning of the attack, PM Meir and Defense Minister Moshe Dayan decided not to mobilize reserves.

The Israelis were caught by surprise in more ways than one. Egyptians poured huge numbers of troops across the canal unopposed and began setting up beachhead. The Israel Army had neglected basic maintenance tasks and drill. As troops mustered, it became apparent that equipment was missing and tanks were out of commission. The line of outposts built as watch posts along the Suez canal - the Bar Lev line, was used instead as a line of fortifications intended to hold off the Egyptians as long as possible. A tiny number of soldiers faced the Egyptian onslaught and were wiped out after stubborn resistance. The Soviets had sold the Egyptians new technology - better surface to air missiles (SAM) and hand held Sager anti-tank weapons. Israel had counted on air power to tip the balance on the battlefield, and had neglected artillery. But the air-force was initially neutralized because of the effectiveness of SAM missiles, until Israel could destroy the radar stations controlling them. Futile counterattacks continued in Sinai for several days as Israeli divisions coped with traffic jams that prevented concentration of forces, and with effective Egyptian resistance.

Meanwhile, less than 200 Israeli tanks were left guarding the Golan heights against far superior numbers. Syrians made serious and at first unopposed inroads in the Golan as Egyptians crossed the Suez canal and retook a strip of the Sinai peninsula. After suffering heavily losses, Israel reconquered the Golan. Click for map of Syrian Front

In Sinai, Israel troops crossed the canal. General Ariel Sharon, disobeying the orders of cautious superiors, ran ahead of logistics and support to develop the bridgehead on the Egyptian side of the Suez canal, cutting off the entire Egyptian third army. Click for map of Egyptian front Cease-fires ended most of the fighting within a month. About 2,700 Israeli soldiers and 8,500 Arab soldiers died in the war As a result of the war, the Golda Meir was forced to resign as Prime Minister of Israel, making way for Izhak Rabin, who had been Israeli ambassador to the US and previously Chief of staff of the IDF.
There you have it, the Yom-Kippur-war, the only one started by the arabic countries after Golda Meir refused to negotiate a peace-settlement with the arabic countries.

But what about the 1982-Lebanon-war and its preceding events:
The PLO in Lebanon and the Lebanese Civil War -

Lebanon became increasingly unstable as Maronite Christians found their once--dominant position threatened by demographic changes which gave Muslims an increasingly large majority. Tensions between different religious groups were exacerbated by clan rivalry. Lebanon also has a relatively large population of Palestinian refugees, who incurred the animosity of native Lebanese, especially the Christians. A revolt by the PLO against the Jordanian government led to the expulsion of the PLO from Jordan in 1970. PLO fighters streamed into Lebanon, incited tension between Muslims and Christians and turned Lebanon into a base for attacks on Israel. In 1975, an attack by Christian Phalangist militias on a bus carrying Palestinians ignited the civil war. the Christian Phalangists and Muslim militias massacred at least 600 Muslims and Christians at checkpoints, beginning the 1975-1976 civil war. Full-scale civil war broke out, with the Palestinians joining the Muslim forces, controlling an increasingly lawless West Beirut. Lebanese political and social life descended into chaos, characterized by a grim routine of car bombs, assassinations and harassment and killing of civilians at roadblocks set up by warring militias.

On January 20, 1976, PLO fighters, possibly reinforced by a Syrian PLO contingent that had entered Lebanon in 1975, destroyed the Christian towns of Jiyeh and Damour, massacring about 500 people. In March, Major Saad Haddad formed the Southern Lebanese Army (SLA), a militia intended to protect Christian residents of southern Lebanon, which was allied with Israel In June, 1976, with the Maronites on the verge of defeat, President Elias Sarkis called for Syrian intervention. With the agreement of the Americans and the Israelis, the Syrians entered Lebanon ostensibly to protect the Christians and the fragile Lebanese multi-ethnic multi-religious constitution, but also to further long-standing Baathist ambitions to make Lebanon as part of Greater Syria. On August 13, 1976, under the protection and with the probable active participation of the Syrian army, the Christian Phalangist militia attacked the Tel al-Za'atar refugee camp and killed as many as 3,000 civilians.

After an attack on a bus on the Haifa-Tel-Aviv road, in which about thirty people were killed, Israel invaded Lebanon in March 1978, occupying most of the area south of the Litani River in Operation Litani. In response, UN Security Council resolution 425 called for the immediate withdrawal of Israeli forces and the creation of an UN Interim Force in Lebanon (UNIFIL), charged with maintaining peace. Israeli forces turned over positions inside Lebanon along the border to the SLA. The SLA and Israel set up a 12-mile wide security zone to protect Israeli territory from attacks across the border, and to protect local residents from the PLO, which had been occupying their villages and using them as bases for shelling Israel. Israel and the PLO. This southern area became an "open border" area separated by the "good fence," allowing Lebanese residents to find work in Israel. Attacks and counter attacks along the northern border of Israel led in July of 1981 to a cease-fire between Israel and the PLO brokered by the US, that was generally honored by both sides. Nonetheless, the PLO continued to gather strength and dig in in southern Lebanon.


The 1982 War in Lebanon (Peace for the Galilee) -

On June 3 1982, terrorists of the Abu Nidal faction, not controlled by the PLO, shot Israeli Ambassador Shlomo Argov in the head in London. In response, Israel invaded Lebanon in force. Most analysts believe that the shooting of Argov served only as an excuse for an operation planned by defense Minister Ariel Sharon with the tacit approval of the US administration. The Iranian Islamist regime sent its Pasdaran revolutionary guards, who had previously organized the takeover of the US embassy in Teheran, into Lebanon, and began organizing a resistance movement, The Hizb Allah (party of Allah) or Hizbolla.

The Israel invasion resulted in expulsion of the PLO from Lebanon to Tunis in August. The war aroused furor in Israel as the army exceeded the official war aims. On September 14, 1982, the Lebanese President-elect, Bashir Gemayel, an Israeli ally, was killed by a large bomb that was apparently planted by Syrian intelligence. Ostensibly to maintain order, the Israeli government decided to move into West Beirut. They allowed or sent their Lebanese Phalangist Christian allies into the Sabra and Shatilla Palestinian refugee camps. The Phalangists committed a massacre in Sabra and Shatilla, killing about 700 people and exciting the wrath of the international community as well as the Israeli public. An Israeli commission of inquiry led by judge Kahan indirectly implicated Israeli Defense Minister Ariel Sharon and several others in the massacres, noting that they could have foreseen the possibility of the violence and acted to prevent it. The Kahan report resulted in the resignation of Sharon as defense minister. Israel subsequently extricated itself slowly from Lebanon. As Israel withdrew, Lebanon became increasingly lawless. Beirut life came to be characterized by gunfire, kidnappings and bombings. Attempts by the US to restore order failed owing to large scale suicide bombings of a marine barracks and the US embassy. The US withdrew and Lebanon, especially Beirut, deteriorated into chaos. Order was restored only after Lebanon became essentially a satellite of Syria. Israel continued to maintain a presence in south Lebanon until 2000, when the last Israeli troops were withdrawn by PM Ehud Barak.
Source: http://www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm

This was a good summary, despite the slight pro-Israel-bias that is obvious because the summary makes no mention of the secret Sharon-led-Unit-101-massacres among the palestinians, and also doesn't mention the huge casualties of civilians among the palestinians and lebanese in Lebanon due to the use of cluster-bombs through the israeli airforce, etc...


Originally Posted by vmarks
Incorrect.

The first suicide bombing was 1981 by Hizballah against American soldiers in Beirut. After that they and other groups started using it against civilians. Baruch Goldstein, the lone nut, was not an innovator, but copied Palestinian bombers in their attacks on Israeli buses carrying schoolchildren. Israel prosecutes any Israeli who commits or attempts to commit such an act. Palestinians revere such evil as heroes.

We are both wrong on that topic, but first of all the Hezbollah-suicide-bombings were directed at military installations and personnel, and can't therefore be grouped together with the suicide-attacks against mere civilians. That said the first suicide-attacks were made by Japan with the kamikaze-strategy, and later on japanese rebel-groups imported suicide-attacks into Palestine/Israel in the 70's, and the arabic leaders were so impressed by the effect that could be achieved with it against a superior army, that they tried to convince the palestinians to use those tactics, too. Here is a nice and interesting reading about the history of the use of suicide-attacks:
http://www.qantara.de/webcom/show_ar.../_nr-82/i.html

Interesting to note though, is that Baruch Goldstein inspired/provoked Hamas to use suicide-attacks, too.


Originally Posted by vmarks
You keep saying that, but never can provide proof other than wacko websites that repeat it without evidence.



A poster here who used to call himself Logic always said that the soul of the suicide bomber leaves for heaven before the body dies, and because the soul never dies, the bomber is in fact a martyr.

Several Imams and Sheiks seem to agree. The videos of the Friday prayers beseeching, inviting, encouraging suicide bombers are readily available for viewing here: http://pmw.org.il/tv%20part10.html - are these Sheiks simply misunderstanding Islam? Are they just a tiny minority of extremists too?

For added measure, videos of mothers who rejoice at their child's "death for Allah" - http://pmw.org.il/tv%20part4.html

and http://pmw.org.il/tv%20part1.html which shows that Palestinian children are taught to believe that becoming suicide bombers will lead to the great afterlife.
What is religiously allowed and what not in times of war or otherwise is laid down by God's words in the Quran, and those rules don't depend on the opinion of a few posters in this forum, sheiks or imams, with no religious authority to speak of, and the Quran makes clear that suicide is not allowed and a sin, regardless of the reasons, and espescially doesn't turn anyone into a martyr and is espescially no guarantee for paradise.

Taliesin
     
Millennium
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Nov 1999
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 07:57 AM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin
What is religiously allowed and what not in times of war or otherwise is laid down by God's words in the Quran, and those rules don't depend on the opinion of a few posters in this forum, sheiks or imams, with no religious authority to speak of, and the Quran makes clear that suicide is not allowed and a sin, regardless of the reasons, and espescially doesn't turn anyone into a martyr and is espescially no guarantee for paradise.
This is a very good point. You need to be making it to the people actually doing this, though.

No, seriously. Apparently it's working quite well in Yemen. The US is even looking at bringing this guy (or people trained by him) into Iraq to see if it'll work there.
You are in Soviet Russia. It is dark. Grue is likely to be eaten by YOU!
     
von Wrangell
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Under the shade of Swords
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 08:16 AM
 
Originally Posted by Millennium
This is a very good point. You need to be making it to the people actually doing this, though.

No, seriously. Apparently it's working quite well in Yemen. The US is even looking at bringing this guy (or people trained by him) into Iraq to see if it'll work there.
Great article that shows what goes on within the Muslim community around the world.

Except this part:
An additional cause of friction with the US is that while Yemen successfully discourages attacks within its borders on the grounds that tourism and trade will suffer, it has done little to tackle anti-Western sentiment or the corruption, poverty, and lack of opportunity that fuels Islamic militancy.
that's just pure comedy gold

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid
     
vmarks  (op)
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 09:53 AM
 
Summary:

In a thread about Muslim extremists in Britain trying to disrupt voting, claiming it is against religion, what do we end up with? Taliesin blaming everything on Israel, and von Wrangell calling concerns that Yemen hasn't addressed anti-Western sentiment, corruption, poverty, and lack of opportunity that fuels Islamic militancy as comedy gold.

Once again, the order of the day seems to be drawing attention away from a problem, laughing at anyone who asks about 'root causes', and blaming the West and Israel.
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
     
von Wrangell
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Under the shade of Swords
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 11:28 AM
 
don't forget: a moderator tries to fuel the flames every now and then also. Couldn't be a thread about Islam without that.

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid
     
von Wrangell
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Under the shade of Swords
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 12:59 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks
A poster here who used to call himself Logic always said that the soul of the suicide bomber leaves for heaven before the body dies, and because the soul never dies, the bomber is in fact a martyr.
Are you sure? Do you have a link for that?

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 01:14 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks
A poster here who used to call himself Logic always said that the soul of the suicide bomber leaves for heaven before the body dies, and because the soul never dies, the bomber is in fact a martyr.
Curious - when did he 'always say that'?
     
von Wrangell
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Under the shade of Swords
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 01:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by eklipse
Curious - when did he 'always say that'?
<echo>


To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid
     
vmarks  (op)
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 01:40 PM
 
Originally Posted by eklipse
Curious - when did he 'always say that'?
The 'direct link' function is missing from this latest forums upgrade.

he said in his AbuBakr personality:

"A moderator pushing for a derail.

Ah well. Lets take a look at your extremely loaded and insulting question.
Quote:
Originally posted by the "moderator" vmarks:
Why then is it also used to describe one who kills himself in an effort to kill others- "martyr" "shahid" "shahada" - or is suicide bombing a declaration of faith? How is this not a celebration, a worship, of death?

It isn't. Shuhada is the "act" of becoming a martyr. Shahada is the declaration of faith. No.

It's not a celebration or worship of death because it has nothing to do with death. A martyr goes directly to the gardens of Heaven. The person never dies.

I wouldn't bet on you not following this up with more loaded and insulting question for two reasons. I'm forbidden by my religion to do so and because the odds would not be in my favour."

-- http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...yr#post2303801

There you have it, as I said, he said that the "person never dies."
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 01:44 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks
There you have it, as I said, he said that the "person never dies."
He appears to be talking about martyrs not suicide bombers.
     
Taliesin
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2001
Status: Offline
Apr 29, 2005, 01:52 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks
The 'direct link' function is missing from this latest forums upgrade.

he said in his AbuBakr personality:

"A moderator pushing for a derail.

Ah well. Lets take a look at your extremely loaded and insulting question.
Quote:
Originally posted by the "moderator" vmarks:
Why then is it also used to describe one who kills himself in an effort to kill others- "martyr" "shahid" "shahada" - or is suicide bombing a declaration of faith? How is this not a celebration, a worship, of death?

It isn't. Shuhada is the "act" of becoming a martyr. Shahada is the declaration of faith. No.

It's not a celebration or worship of death because it has nothing to do with death. A martyr goes directly to the gardens of Heaven. The person never dies.

I wouldn't bet on you not following this up with more loaded and insulting question for two reasons. I'm forbidden by my religion to do so and because the odds would not be in my favour."

-- http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...yr#post2303801

There you have it, as I said, he said that the "person never dies."
Since when was Logic=AbuBakr? But ok, now you have only to show that he meant with martyr the suicide-bombers. As I have understood it, Abu Bakr didn't mean the suicide-bombers, but instead real martyrs.

Taliesin
     
vmarks  (op)
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
May 1, 2005, 08:33 AM
 
Originally Posted by Taliesin
Since when was Logic=AbuBakr? But ok, now you have only to show that he meant with martyr the suicide-bombers. As I have understood it, Abu Bakr didn't mean the suicide-bombers, but instead real martyrs.

Taliesin
One of the world�s highest authorities of Sunni Islam, the Grand Shaykh of Egypt�s Al-Azhar University, Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi, has stated that suicide bombers are considered �martyrs� under Islamic law.

The Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi announced on Sunday [ 2 November 2003 ] that suicide-bombers who are defending their land are seen as martyrs in Islamic shari'ah law.

http://www.imra.org.il/story.php3?id=18722

Anybody blowing himself up in the face of an the occupiers of his land is a martyr, said Shaykh Tantawi in response to a question about the Islamic shari'ah stance over the Palestinians who blow up their bodies against the Israelis.

He stressed, however, that Islam did not allow the killing of innocent civilians and children but only invaders and aggressors.

�Invaders and aggressors� are very flexible words, of course, and can also include New York office workers and Russian theater-goers and Aussie nightclubbers.

But remember; it�s just a small minority of fanatic extremists who have hijacked a tolerant, peaceful religion.
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
May 1, 2005, 08:52 AM
 
Is 'Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi' another of Logic's personas?
     
lil'babykitten
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Herzliya
Status: Offline
May 1, 2005, 11:47 AM
 
Originally Posted by eklipse
Is 'Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi' another of Logic's personas?
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
May 1, 2005, 12:54 PM
 
Originally Posted by eklipse
Is 'Grand Shaykh of Al-Azhar Muhammad Sayyid Tantawi' another of Logic's personas?
So that is where he has been.

Not surprising.
     
PacHead
Baninated
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Capital of the World
Status: Offline
May 1, 2005, 02:42 PM
 
Originally Posted by Zimphire
So that is where he has been.

Not surprising.
Care to back that up ?

     
von Wrangell
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Under the shade of Swords
Status: Offline
May 3, 2005, 06:06 AM
 


So v. Are you going to answer the posts here? Or bring up something completely unrelated again?

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid
     
Shaddim
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: 46 & 2
Status: Offline
May 3, 2005, 09:43 AM
 
Originally Posted by eklipse
He appears to be talking about martyrs not suicide bombers.
In the eyes of most ME Muslims, aren't they the same?
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
- Thomas Paine
     
von Wrangell
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Under the shade of Swords
Status: Offline
May 3, 2005, 09:46 AM
 
Originally Posted by MacNStein
In the eyes of most ME Muslims, aren't they the same?
That might well be but vmarks brought up an accusation and when asked to back it up he went into spin mode. Nothing new here but just a bit sad to see. Especially from a moderator.

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid
     
vmarks  (op)
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
May 3, 2005, 12:38 PM
 
I backed up my claim. I posted a quote showing the belief, and then showed a quote from a respected source on Islam, and you tried to make an argument by claiming a difference that I find to be a difference without distinction.

So does MacNStein, or he wouldn't have asked if the two things were the same, which you even agreed that they might well be.

The only thing you've gotten right in this whole thread is your declaration that nothing is new here. When I won't back down or humble myself before you, you fall back on casting aspersions on me, and my status as moderator.
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
     
eklipse
Professional Poster
Join Date: May 2003
Status: Offline
May 3, 2005, 03:00 PM
 
Originally Posted by MacNStein
In the eyes of most ME Muslims, aren't they the same?
It's a possibility, but, vmarks wasn't talking about 'most ME Muslims'.

He was making claims specifically about one Muslim poster on these forums.

Claims he has thus far been unable to back up.
     
von Wrangell
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Under the shade of Swords
Status: Offline
May 3, 2005, 05:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by vmarks
I backed up my claim.
Your claim was that a poster called Logic said suicide bombers went straight to heaven.

You back up that claim by quoting another poster called Abu Bakr.

That post doesn't say that suicide bombers go straight to heaven but that martyrs do.

And you backed up your claim how?

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
May 4, 2005, 12:40 AM
 
Originally Posted by von Wrangell
That might well be but vmarks brought up an accusation and when asked to back it up he went into spin mode. Nothing new here but just a bit sad to see. Especially from a moderator.
You must have been reading a different thread than I.

Care to back that up?
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
May 4, 2005, 12:42 AM
 
Originally Posted by von Wrangell
Your claim was that a poster called Logic said suicide bombers went straight to heaven.

You back up that claim by quoting another poster called Abu Bakr.

That post doesn't say that suicide bombers go straight to heaven but that martyrs do.

And you backed up your claim how?
And these Muslims think that homocide bombers are what.. class? Anyone?

Martyrs.

Heck, their families get payed money for what their relations do.

And yes, they are martyred.
     
von Wrangell
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Under the shade of Swords
Status: Offline
May 4, 2005, 06:22 AM
 
You seem to have a problem understand what the point is. vmarks accused a poster called Logic of saying that suicide bombers would go straight to heaven. Still with me?

Then he posts something posted by a poster called Abu Bakr. Still with me?

Abu Bakr never said that suicide bombers would go straight to heaven. Still with me?

So vmarks threw out an accusation and then failed to back that up.

It's irrelevant if this one or that thinks suicide bombers will go to heaven. That's not the point here. Still with me?

The point is that vmarks threw out a specific serious accusation against a specific poster on here. He hasn't been able to show that poster said that.

Still with me?

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid
     
vmarks  (op)
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
May 4, 2005, 09:39 AM
 
Why OF COURSE I confused Abu Bakr with Logic!

And why wouldn't I!

It wasn't but a few days after Logic disappeared that Abu Bakr appeared, posting the same sorts of venomous opinions, using the same word-order patterns as Logic, and pestering for answers to questions after the answers had been given.

And it wasn't but a few days after Abu Bakr disappeared that Salah al-Din appeared, posting the same sorts of venomous opinions, using the same word-order patterns as Logic, and pestering for answers to questions after the answers had been given.

And I wasn't alone in speculating that Salah al-Din was Logic. eklipse indicated it was so, in this thread:

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...ic#post2380458

In that post, eklipse admits that Logic is around and posting under a different name, and Joshua follows it by posting a picture of Salah al-Din. eklipse doesn't correct Joshua's claim that Logic is posting under the name Salah al-din.

And shortly after Salah al-Din disappeared, Von Wrangell appeared, posting the same opinions and pestering for answers to questions answered previously. And Von Wrangell is certainly interested in this minor point over who Logic is or isn't, and inflating the importance of it.

Either I have confused Logic with a number of other users, which would be reasonable because they all post similarly, with similar bogus arguments, or it is simply a coincidence that four separate users happened to join almost immediately after the other would cease posting, and would post similarly.
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
     
lil'babykitten
Professional Poster
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Herzliya
Status: Offline
May 4, 2005, 09:58 AM
 
If it is Logic, he's still doing a far better job at concealing it than you ever managed, einmakom.
     
vmarks  (op)
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Up In The Air
Status: Offline
May 4, 2005, 11:12 AM
 
http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.p...ge#post1924344

Posted by ThinkInsane:
"Enough with the vmarks=einmakom garbage. Unless someone has figured out how to post from two different countries, on opposite sides of the world, they are not one person. Give it a rest already, it's getting old, and it's really unnecessary."
If this post is in the Lounge forum, it is likely to be my own opinion, and not representative of the position of MacNN.com.
     
von Wrangell
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Under the shade of Swords
Status: Offline
May 4, 2005, 12:43 PM
 
So have you checked the IP's for those you claim are Logic?

And again, you still haven't shown that Logic(lets just assume that Abu Bakr was the same guy) said suicide bombers went straight to heaven. When are you going to do that?

To those against whom war is made, permission is given (to fight), because they are wronged;- and verily, Allah is most powerful for their aid
     
Zimphire
Baninated
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: The Moon
Status: Offline
May 4, 2005, 01:50 PM
 
Originally Posted by von Wrangell
The point is that vmarks threw out a specific serious accusation against a specific poster on here. He hasn't been able to show that poster said that.
hard to tell, said poster has edited said posts before.
     
f1000
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2003
Status: Offline
Jul 9, 2005, 08:19 PM
 
Originally Posted by lil'babykitten
If it is Logic, he's still doing a far better job at concealing it than you ever managed, einmakom.
No kid, you're just slow. I knew Von Wrangell was Logic almost as soon as he started posting.

http://forums.macnn.com/showthread.php?t=248345

Simey picked up on it not long afterwards, but Logic played it cool and didn't break his cover.
     
jbartone
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Status: Offline
Jul 10, 2005, 07:25 AM
 
Originally Posted by Nicko
People have opinions, what is your point?

Well, quite frankly, with an opinion like "democracy sucks", they can piss off home.
     
Macrobat
Mac Elite
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Raleigh, NC
Status: Offline
Jul 14, 2005, 12:45 PM
 
Originally Posted by von Wrangell
So have you checked the IP's for those you claim are Logic?

And again, you still haven't shown that Logic(lets just assume that Abu Bakr was the same guy) said suicide bombers went straight to heaven. When are you going to do that?

And the irony just drips off this post in light of your recent admission that you are Logic, huh?
"That Others May Live"
On the ISG: "The nation's capital hasn't seen such concentrated wisdom in one place since Paris Hilton dined alone at the Hooters on Connecticut Avenue." - John Podhoretz
     
ThinkInsane
Moderator Emeritus
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: Night's Plutonian shore...
Status: Offline
Jul 14, 2005, 05:43 PM
 
This thread should have been left for dead.

And luckily, most of you multiple account types haven't figured out the easiest and most consistently overlooked clue to tell who's who, and I ain't gonna point it out either.
Nemo me impune lacesset
     
 
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 08:03 AM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,