[Eug]

Apparently the airports are now open, as my colleague will be flying in tomorrow. (Not because of the attacks, but because he had previously booked a vacation.)

Over 150 dead, including the recently announced 5 Jews. Dunno about citizens of other countries, but our local news states that one Canadian is confirmed amongst the dead. One Australian celebrity was saying how she was stepping over dead bodies running away from the gunmen, and then eventually hid herself in a cupboard until she was found by Indian police. Similar stories from many who got out, and they said they were very happy with the Indian commandos. Very professional.

A couple of the attackers are Brits of Pakistani origin. At least 9 attackers dead, but there are a bunch more still holed up in the Taj.

[Big Mac]

I hope the remaining terrorists are terminated forthwith. Can I mention these are Muslim terrorists we're talking about or would I run afoul of MacNN rules?

[dcmacdaddy]

I just wanted to say again how terrible this attack was and how all of the terrorists, regardless of their religious beliefs, should be brought to justice and, when found guilty, be executed for these heinous attacks on civilians.

[G Barnett]

Actually, Big Mac, from the reports I've seen it hasn't yet been positively established who these bastards are or what group they're with.

Besides, an extremist is an extremist is an extremist regardless of affiliation.

[Eug]

Most suspect these are radical muslim terrorists, but that hasn't been confirmed yet AFAIK. I don't think anyone has yet claimed responsibility.

[Big Mac]

If you don't think these are Muslim terrorists, you haven't been watching the reports from any of the American cable news networks.

[besson3c]

I just don't understand what you expect one to do knowing that they are Muslim terrorists, Big Mac? Profiling? Segregate ourselves from the entire Muslim world? Acknowledge that there are radical Muslims?

[Hawkeye_a]

I think a group called the 'deecan mujahadeen' has claimed responsibility. besides......

1. the Taj and Oberoi are indian owned and quite major landmarks in Bombay from what i know. if "westerners" were the primary targets, u'd expect places like the Hilton, etc to be the targets. the chosen targets were distinctly Indian, imo.

2. The Jewish center(where im guessing most of the people were of Jewish faith) was a target, so its obvious that religion was the 'motivation'/selection criterion.

And so in conclusion, if religion was one of the main factors, you have to ask yourself:
-which demographic would target Jews today ?
-what kind of extremist take lives based on religion in the world today ?

Be they British, Pakistani or Indian by nationality...i think they identified themselves as Muslim first.

[Big Mac]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I just don't understand what you expect one to do knowing that they are Muslim terrorists, Big Mac? Profiling? Segregate ourselves from the entire Muslim world? Acknowledge that there are radical Muslims?

I'd like some around here to wake up to the reality, besson. That's my goal for hyper-politically people who don't want to recognize truths that makes them uncomfortable. I also wanted to know if there were any people who sided with the terrorists, but that idea got shot down.

[Sayf-Allah]

Munafiqun

That's all I have to say.

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I'd like some around here to wake up to the reality, besson.

What's that reality? That we need more ethnic cleansing like you propose in another thread?

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

I just don't understand what you expect one to do knowing that they are Muslim terrorists, Big Mac? Profiling? Segregate ourselves from the entire Muslim world? Acknowledge that there are radical Muslims?

The point imo, is..... put up a list of world conflicts where innocent human lives are involved. Then figure out what the common factors are(race, socio-economic standing, religion, location, motivation, etc).

Then rank the factor in most to least common. And then start at the top of the list attempting to figure out how to mitigate it.

From my point of view, most world conflicts where civilian lives are PURPOSELY targeted are perpetrated by groups and individuals who identify themselves as muslim, and are doing it in the name of Islam. So there in lies the problem imo.

If im wrong to reach that conclusion from my observations, im open to opposing evidence.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I'd like some around here to wake up to the reality, besson. That's my goal for hyper-politically people who don't want to recognize truths that makes them uncomfortable. I also wanted to know if there were any people who sided with the terrorists, but that idea got shot down.

Huh? Who do you think sides with terrorism as a tactic? That's pretty insulting, Big Mac, don't you think?

Secondly, what reality are you wanting us to "wake up to"? That there are Muslim terrorist groups? What does it matter who here is "awake" (whatever that means) to this? That there are is factual information, not opinion. Who here do you think disputes this?

This just comes across as a pretty unfocused and pointless rant against people that either don't exist in here, or else are an extremely tiny minority. There are probably people in here that think that eating baby carrots makes you gay, but so what?

If you are going to spin your tires, I suggest putting the car in gear.

[The Crook]

While terrorism is aberrant among all major religions, I don't get why Christian conservatives and Islamic conservatives can't get along. I mean, aren't Islamic societies for the most part the goal of Christian conservatives? And if not the goal, don't they have very much in common with each other?

Islamic societies are

• strongly patriarchal
• enforce theocratic law
• very modest in dress

Christian conservatives are

• also strongly patriarchal
• would like to enforce theocratic law
• also very modest in dress

They're the same people, psychologically. It's just an accident of birth that one is an Islamic conservative and one is a Christian conservative.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

The point imo, is..... put up a list of world conflicts where innocent human lives are involved. Then figure out what the common factors are(race, socio-economic standing, religion, location, motivation, etc).

Then rank the factor in most to least common. And then start at the top of the list attempting to figure out how to mitigate it.

From my point of view, most world conflicts where civilian lives are PURPOSELY targeted are perpetrated by groups and individuals who identify themselves as muslim, and are doing it in the name of Islam. So there in lies the problem imo.

If im wrong to reach that conclusion from my observations, im open to opposing evidence.

Okay, but what good does that conclusion do us? How can we act on this?

It would seem to me that our energies are better spent actually trying to solve the problem.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

What's that reality? That we need more ethnic cleansing like you propose in another thread?

The King of Saudi Arabia hosted a thing at the UN recently, regarding religious tolerance in the Middle East...... this from the man ruling a country where before Desert Storm, practice of any other faith was banned, where non muslims are forced to abide by Islamic laws.

Personally, i think his idea of "tolerance" is people tolerating islam everywhere but not the otherway around. A double standard if you may.

There are mosques in Jerusalem, Rome and India. When there is a church, synagogue, hindu temple and Buddhist temple in Mecca/Medina will i take the muslim idea of "tolerance" and "equality" seriously.

So imo, "ethnic cleansing" seems to be quite rampant on your side of the divide, maybe if thats what REALLY concerns you you'd do something about that, unless of course you have a double standard where everyone affords all rights to muslims and muslims are allowed to openly discriminate(and indirectly cleanse) non-muslims from the muslim world.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Okay, but what good does that conclusion do us? How can we act on this?

It would seem to me that our energies are better spent actually trying to solve the problem.

Terrorism is the symptom of the problem, the diagnosis is that religion is causing it. how we solve that, well...... thats the puzzle.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Terrorism is the symptom of the problem, the diagnosis is that religion is causing it. how we solve that, well...... thats the puzzle.

That religion causes problems on this planet is nothing new. We can get into whose religion is more peaceful, more bloody, etc., but at the end of the day it still doesn't accomplish much.

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

If im wrong to reach that conclusion from my observations, im open to opposing evidence.

mmm, yeah.

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by The Crook 

While terrorism is aberrant among all major religions, I don't get why Christian conservatives and Islamic conservatives can't get along. I mean, aren't Islamic societies for the most part the goal of Christian conservatives? And if not the goal, don't they have very much in common with each other?

Islamic societies are

• strongly patriarchal
• enforce theocratic law
• very modest in dress

Christian conservatives are

• also strongly patriarchal
• would like to enforce theocratic law
• also very modest in dress

They're the same people, psychologically. It's just an accident of birth that one is an Islamic conservative and one is a Christian conservative.

They both believe in the (discredited) Clash of Civilisation theory. They both gain from believing in it and they both will do whatever they can to fuel that self-fulfilling prophecy (if taken seriously).

I wish they both (and Jewish conservatives) could take their fight to some deserted island where they could fulfil their own common wet dream of massacring "the unbelievers".

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

The King of Saudi Arabia hosted a thing at the UN recently, regarding religious tolerance in the Middle East...... this from the man ruling a country where before Desert Storm, practice of any other faith was banned, where non muslims are forced to abide by Islamic laws.

Personally, i think his idea of "tolerance" is people tolerating islam everywhere but not the otherway around. A double standard if you may.

There are mosques in Jerusalem, Rome and India. When there is a church, synagogue, hindu temple and Buddhist temple in Mecca/Medina will i take the muslim idea of "tolerance" and "equality" seriously.

From the actions of one tyrant you decide that the "muslim" idea of tolerance and equality is false?

And you wonder why people don't take you seriously?

[Sayf-Allah]

And am I the only one who thinks it looks awfully much like some people actually enjoy this happening because it "proves them right"?

[besson3c]

Sayf: do you think that the Muslim world as a whole and Muslim Americans can or should do more to denounce these sorts of attacks as a means to isolate radicals and to help fight dangerous stereotypes, scapegoating, prejudice, etc.?

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

That religion causes problems on this planet is nothing new. We can get into whose religion is more peaceful, more bloody, etc., but at the end of the day it still doesn't accomplish much.

Different religions teach different ways of life, the fundamental building blocks to human interactions and how to go about it. their application range from being guides(casual) to being taken literally(fundamentalists). thats common to all religions.

If Christian/Jewish/Hindus/etc fundamentalists exist and all religions are 'equal', why aren't more of them taking human lives in the name of religion by selection others ? Im not saying it doesn't happen, but it appears that it's a lot more frequent by people who belong to the muslim faith.

What sets this one apart is the way it deals with people of other faiths. so it's obvious there's a problem in there somewhere that needs to be solved. Terrorism, in this case, is like a surface phenomenon... indicating a much deeper rooted problem.

Be it pride, ignorance, stubbornness, prejudice or whatever that keeps members of that community from addressing the issues within their communities, maybe part of the problem imo. i dont know, i dont have the answers, but i do see a problem.

[dcmacdaddy]

The BBC News website has an interesting analysis looking at the possible motivation for the attacks. The full article is at the link above but I have reproduced below the concluding paragraphs. In summary, this person's argument is that these attacks are an outgrowth/extension of the decades-long India vs. Pakistan conflict that is based on geography (Kashmir) as much as religion (Hindu vs. Muslim). In addition, the author posits that the attacks really are part of the larger India vs. Pakistan conflict but the attackers (likely Pakistani) decided to amplify their methods to cause greater fear outside of as well as within the Indian community. In other words, hurt the Indians by hurting their international reputation as well as their domestic economic situation by making internationals afraid to do business in India.

Originally Posted by BBC News

The tactic is thus not without precedent, but the mayhem in Mumbai may nonetheless mark a new chapter in the evolution of urban terrorism in India.
Bombs planted in markets and on commuter trains kill and maim working-class and middle-class Indians.
The gunmen who attacked two luxury hotels, and a fashionable cafe frequented by visiting Westerners, have brought the "war" - as they see it - to India's elite class, and to affluent Westerners living in or visiting India's most cosmopolitan city.
If reports that the gunmen specifically looked for American and British citizens to take hostage are true, it would suggest that this terrorist spectacular had little to do with the prejudice and discrimination many Muslims do encounter in India.
It is tempting to label the attackers as "crazies". But such a dismissive appellation may be misplaced.
It is more than likely that the masterminds are seasoned operatives and that the foot-soldiers, young as they may have been, had undergone rigorous training for months, perhaps years.
The attacks also show every sign of having been designed to maximise media attention on a global scale.
In other words, there is a method to the madness.

Sumantra Bose is Professor of International and Comparative Politics at the London School of Economics. He is the author of Contested Lands: Israel-Palestine, Kashmir, Bosnia, Cyprus, and Sri Lanka, published by Harvard University Press.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

From the actions of one tyrant you decide that the "muslim" idea of tolerance and equality is false?

And you wonder why people don't take you seriously?

Actually, he is just a prime example(who happens to be the sovereign king of the capital of Islam today), of a much bigger problem. it is my opinion that most if not 99% of the muslim nations do not treat other religious minorities equally (politically, economically, socially, etc)... which usually leads to exodus(what i think is the goal). prove me wrong.

[G Barnett]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

-which demographic would target Jews today ?

Point taken, but also could be cultural Palestinians who happen to be Muslim but who could have reasons outside of religion.

-what kind of extremist take lives based on religion in the world today?

American right-wing Christian abortion clinic bombers come to mind....

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Sayf: do you think that the Muslim world as a whole and Muslim Americans can or should do more to denounce these sorts of attacks as a means to isolate radicals and to help fight dangerous stereotypes, scapegoating, prejudice, etc.?

The media could also give the denouncements more airtime.

There are enough denunciations. Many Muslims don't consider this "their" problem. Because this isn't Islam.

And I don't see what more could be done to denounce this and what effect that would have. There are far bigger problems than "that this isn't denounced enough by the Muslim community".

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Actually, he is just a prime example(who happens to be the sovereign king of the capital of Islam today), of a much bigger problem. it is my opinion that most if not 99% of the muslim nations do not treat other religious minorities equally (politically, economically, socially, etc)... which usually leads to exodus(what i think is the goal). prove me wrong.

Why should I. You are mostly right that "Muslim" nations treat other religions badly. This again has nothing to do with Islam.

One more reason why people don't take you seriously.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Different religions teach different ways of life, the fundamental building blocks to human interactions and how to go about it. their application range from being guides(casual) to being taken literally(fundamentalists). thats common to all religions.

If Christian/Jewish/Hindus/etc fundamentalists exist and all religions are 'equal', why aren't more of them taking human lives in the name of religion by selection others ? Im not saying it doesn't happen, but it appears that it's a lot more frequent by people who belong to the muslim faith.

What sets this one apart is the way it deals with people of other faiths. so it's obvious there's a problem in there somewhere that needs to be solved. Terrorism, in this case, is like a surface phenomenon... indicating a much deeper rooted problem.

Be it pride, ignorance, stubbornness, prejudice or whatever that keeps members of that community from addressing the issues within their communities, maybe part of the problem imo. i dont know, i dont have the answers, but i do see a problem.

Are you talking about right now in human history, or in general - throughout human history? Christianity has plenty of blood on their hands, just not so in recent times. Could it be that the majority, overwhelming Christian voice of the world came to the conclusion that violent dogma and conversion by sword is counter productive? Is it possible that some day the radical Islamic world will come to know this too?

It is also possible that the language in the Koran provides more inspiration to radicals, I don't know that to be true though because I haven't studied it. However, if it weren't for the New Testament I think many Christians would be inspired by acts of violence too.

It could also be that a certain population clings to radical Islamic ideology because it gives them hope, a reason for living, justification, or something of the sort while the more moderate Islamic world just looks at these people as being bat **** crazy the way that most Americans look at the people documented in Jesus Camp (the movie) as being bat **** crazy.

The truth could also be a combination of all of these things and more. When you look at all of these possibilities, ir is very hard to keep score and come to some simplistic, accurate, productive conclusion. I think all we can do as a human race, and this applies to every religion, is to do what we can to sell people on the idea that these terrorism tactics are out of place and inappropriate in the world we live in. Like you said, terror is a tactic, just a means to an end. Trying to quell radical religious viewpoints of any sort will basically result in our chasing our tails, but maybe over time we can convince some that terrorism does not serve a productive purpose.

Look at the KKK in America... Most Americans aren't aware of their political efforts. I know there are rallies in this State, but it mostly just amounts to them saying stuff that few take seriously. They have become a joke. If I was the leader of the KKK and wanted to make inroads with getting people to buy into my ideology, doing something radical like killing Obama would probably end up making my cause an even greater joke that few take seriously. Mind you, I know that there have been racially motivated assassination attempts against Obama, but I can't help thinking that they have failed because they simply don't have the brainpower and resources behind them. How hard would it have been to have orchestrated an assassination attempt against Obama during his campaigning if one had a large enough, highly motivated group?

I'm hoping one day radical religious extremists of any kind will simply be seen as an irrelevant joke.

[Hawkeye_a]

besson,
right now in human history. if your idea is to give them(muslims) time.... i have to disagree with you, cause while we wait, innocent people in my community are put at risk.

Oh i know of what Christians did, we were probably the worst in the middle ages... there's no denying that. but the way our forefathers dealt with it was upto them, and they did. right now, in our time, we have this problem in front of us, and we have to deal with it whether we like it or not imo. The goal from our side is to prevent loss of innocent lives, what the goal from the other side of the divide is...well...really unclear imo.

dcmacdaddy,
the economic/geographic angle has some weight.

India and China have also had border disputes in the last 50 years, when was the last time you heard of a Chineese terrorist attack targeting civilians in India, or an Indian(non-muslim) targeting civilians in China ? Whats the missing ingredient ?

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by G Barnett 

Point taken, but also could be cultural Palestinians who happen to be Muslim but who could have reasons outside of religion.

American right-wing Christian abortion clinic bombers come to mind....

Palestinians ? how did that conflict begin anyway ? when they had the run of the land, they were discriminating based on religion, now when they dont have the run of the land, they have additional motives imo.

And right-wing Christians.....agreed, all religions have "extremists", no religion is 100% clean.

But of that list of conflicts, whats the percentage of Christians fundamentalists, Jewish fundamentalists, Hindu fundamentalists, Buddhist fundamentalists, Athiest fundamentalists, etc.... that follow through with terror and ultimately with the loss of innocent civilian lives ?

Why differentiate ? well, imo not all problems are of the same severity(im defining severity as number of lives lost, frequency of attacks, etc). Prioritizing is probably important, due to limited resources. solve the bigger problems first then work your way down.

Correct me if im wrong here,but the difference with the abortion clinic bombers..... were they brought to justice and by whom ? or did the laws and society they reside in hail them heroes ?

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Correct me if im wrong here,but the difference with the abortion clinic bombers..... were they brought to justice and by whom ? or did the laws and society they reside in hail them heroes ?

1. Yes, by the government where the attack took place (most of the time).
2. No and yes.

Now for the most important part.....

How do you bring a dead person to justice?

See? The reasons keep piling up.

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Palestinians ? how did that conflict begin anyway ? when they had the run of the land, they were discriminating based on religion, now when they dont have the run of the land, they have additional motives imo.

And right-wing Christians.....agreed, all religions have "extremists", no religion is 100% clean.

But of that list of conflicts, whats the percentage of Christians fundamentalists, Jewish fundamentalists, Hindu fundamentalists, Buddhist fundamentalists, Athiest fundamentalists, etc.... that follow through with terror and ultimately with the loss of innocent civilian lives ?

Why differentiate ? well, imo not all problems are of the same severity(im defining severity as number of lives lost, frequency of attacks, etc). Prioritizing is probably important, due to limited resources. solve the bigger problems first then work your way down.

Correct me if im wrong here,but the difference with the abortion clinic bombers..... were they brought to justice and by whom ? or did the laws and society they reside in hail them heroes ?

But profiling this way is the same sort of slippery slope that impedes on the lives and civil liberties of innocent people as wiretapping. It is rarely smart to trade in civil liberties for security, and if nothing more I can see this sort of thing easily becoming a witch hunt. There are many ignorant Americans who cannot identify Muslims from enemy countries/regions.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by Sayf-Allah 

2. No and yes.

-That demon that Israel released in exchange for the remains of Israeli soldiers, who was convicted of killing a father and a child(non muslims)..... who got a hero's welcome in Lebanon(a muslim country). A murderer who gets a hero's welcome.
-The demon who was directly involved with the murder of the Israeli olympic team in Munich, who is still living as a hero and a free man somewhere in the muslim world.
-Idi Amin(spell?), who after committing genocide in the Congo, lived out his life, a free man.... in Saudi Arabia.
-When an engineering student from Lebanon/Syria/Jordan, focuses his mind to building bombs that kill innocent Jews in Israel, the Arab(muslim) authorities do nothing to help Israel stop him.

hint: Why is there a difference between the way the laws, governments and societies dealt with these people?

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

But profiling this way is the same sort of slippery slope that impedes on the lives and civil liberties of innocent people as wiretapping. It is rarely smart to trade in civil liberties for security, and if nothing more I can see this sort of thing easily becoming a witch hunt. There are many ignorant Americans who cannot identify Muslims from enemy countries/regions.

Profiling..... sure it's a bad thing, i agree.

So how do you suggest governments deal with this problem ?(im sincerely asking) And lets not forget the demons who planted bombs in London a few years ago.... born n bread in the U.K.

I dont have the answers, all i know is i dont want innocent civilians to be targeted because of their faith (cause as it stands those seem to be the majority, imo).

[Sayf-Allah]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

.....snipped copy paste from before.....

See, it's impossible to have an honest discussion with you. You skip the parts of the discussion that don't fit your agenda.

Yet more reasons to the list....

[G Barnett]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

Correct me if im wrong here,but the difference with the abortion clinic bombers..... were they brought to justice and by whom ? or did the laws and society they reside in hail them heroes ?

They were indeed brought to justice -- however there are still to this day people who do hail them as heroes. The only major difference is that our society has become moderate enough that these sorts of extremists are quickly marginalized and their ability to effect mass change reduced to almost nothing.

That's an American societal trait, btw, and not one that can be ascribed to our so-called Christian culture. I guarantee that if enough of the extremist Christians got into places of power and influence, such folks would be harder to bring to justice as they'd have a network of fanatical supporters to give them shelter.

In certain regions there actually are enough like-minded folks to allow them to spend a long time uncaught -- how long did Eric Rudolph remain at large before finally being brought in?

The root problem, be it Muslim or Christian or what have you is extremism, and it's not something that's solved by simply throwing bullets, bombs and armies at it. You have to address it at the societal and cultural level and work from within the cultural idioms of the area in question. The use of force has its place, for sure; still it's only one tool among many and we're going to have to use them all if we want to have a hope at making any sort of headway.

[Hawkeye_a]

Barnett,
Agreed 100%. Extremism is the issue.

So when you have so many world conflicts with the same common factor, chances are that that common factor is at the root of the extremism, right ?

And i totally agree with what you said about Christian "extremists" and American government. Thankfully, for whatever reason, thats not the case (at least in the free world for now). But that exact same situation exists almost all over the muslim world. While "Christian extremists" target abortion clinics, "Muslim extremists" seem to target non muslims.

With Christian extremists, im pretty sure the laws that mitigate their influence were voted into effect by.... other Christians.... right ? (not all Christians, but majority anyway). How does the muslim community bring about similar practices/idealogy ?...or better yet.... do they want to ?

[Chongo]

Here a couple of books I will be picking up.


I wondering how long before someone in the media tries to blame the US and/or Israel

[Hawkeye_a]

Chongo,
I read an interview she had a few years ago, but i lost the link and didnt remember her name. you have no idea how long i've been trying to figure it out. Cheers mate.

I have a few Christian Lebanese(former) friends with similar stories about the Muslim invasion of Lebanon and civil wars, who have since fled to the free world (but nooo it wasn't ethnic cleansing, neither was what Iran did to the Zoroastrians, etc </end sarcasm>)

For those interested: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brigitte_Gabriel

Cheers

[Sayf-Allah]

Muslim invasion of Lebanon?

Care to elaborate?

[G Barnett]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

With Christian extremists, im pretty sure the laws that mitigate their influence were voted into effect by.... other Christians.... right ? (not all Christians, but majority anyway). How does the muslim community bring about similar practices/idealogy ?...or better yet.... do they want to ?

At the moment they're mostly dictatorships of one type or another; that's part of it -- disenfranchised groups lashing out under the guise of religion because they can't for some reason yet discern that the religious leaders who encourage their actions against so-called "cultural enemies" are in bed with the dictators/kings who keep them suppressed.

I'm not sure exactly how to get that nasty little feedback loop undone -- but it almost certainly has to come from within. There're probably ways to encourage the sorts who would rein them in, but forcing things at the end of a gun only exacerbates the situation and gives unwitting support to the ones whipping folks into a frenzy.

[ghporter]

All this talk about "religion is responsible for this" and "religion is responsible for that" is nonsense. PEOPLE are responsible for these actions. People who for some reason believe that they are doing something worth doing. I believe that most of these people have been duped, either by "true believers" or (my personal bias here) very cynical men who are using them to forward a cause that these men think will make them powerful.

So anyway, blaming ideas for people's actions is sort of lame. Blame the people for what they do.

[ghporter]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

I hope the remaining terrorists are terminated forthwith. Can I mention these are Muslim terrorists we're talking about or would I run afoul of MacNN rules?

You can mention that news reports are saying this about them. Unless you know them, that is...

And I hope they capture the remaining terrorists. Much better to throw someone behind bars for decades and quietly forget about them than to martyr them...

[TheWOAT]

Ah Yes, I remember the last abortion clinic that was bombed in my state, I believe over 100 poeple were killed along with the perps. Although the cell that carried out the attack was found and disbanded, other clinics are still threatened by extremist Christians and their sleeper cells.

[PB2K]

i will go to india next week..I was hoping to spend my christmas in Goa but since it's along the western coast and really crowded with tourists i might skip it

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by G Barnett 

At the moment they're mostly dictatorships of one type or another; that's part of it -- disenfranchised groups lashing out under the guise of religion because they can't for some reason yet discern that the religious leaders who encourage their actions against so-called "cultural enemies" are in bed with the dictators/kings who keep them suppressed.

I'm not sure exactly how to get that nasty little feedback loop undone -- but it almost certainly has to come from within. There're probably ways to encourage the sorts who would rein them in, but forcing things at the end of a gun only exacerbates the situation and gives unwitting support to the ones whipping folks into a frenzy.

I totally agree with what you say as an explanation of politics and political structures in the middle east. But the issue here is inequity and racism irrespective of political structure. Politics play a role, but in the end it's whats happening on ground level(the common man) that concerns me. With the extremist Christians in the U.S. who target abortion Clinics...... im not implying that democracy was the reason why their threat is mitigated, but the fact that their influence is mitigated by other Christians. You dont see the vast majority of 'moderate Christians' siding with their 'brothers' on issues of murder.

And from what ive heard so far these "extremist Christians" seem to be an issue(where human lives are threatened) primarily in the U.S.. Its not as big an issue in Europe, Australia, etc....right ? Now take "extremist Islamists", theyre a problem(human lives are threatened) in almost ever muslim country on the planet and many nations in the free world, to me...that constitutes a much bigger deeper problem.

Then you have the specific instances ive pointed to above where the demons wo admitted killing innocent civilians are treated like heroes, i dont know any Christians or Jews who would treat members from their communities this way. Even when U.S. soldiers target civilians in Japan, Afghanistan and Iraq they are dealt with appropriately and not treated like heros. the rare Jew who kills muslims in Israel is usually taken down by Israeli forces and you dont have the majority of Jews proclaiming those devils as heroes. Heck, it was the the predominantly Christian nations of Europe and the N.America who came to the aid of Muslims in the balkans by stopping other "Christian" monsters, as opposed to siding with them cause of their religious affiliations.

Whether it's a monarchy like Saudi Arabia, a democracy like Iran, Turkey, Egypt or Indonesia a dictatorship like Libya..... irrespective of political systems, these groups operate and the "moderates"(or anyone in their communities) are doing nothing to stop them. That, to me... begs the question.... do they want to stop it ?

[PaperNotes]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

1. the Taj and Oberoi are indian owned and quite major landmarks in Bombay from what i know. if "westerners" were the primary targets, u'd expect places like the Hilton, etc to be the targets. the chosen targets were distinctly Indian, imo.

I'll chime in because I do business in Mumbai and part own a 1.5 million dollar office property there.

The Hilton and the Marriot have great security whereas the Taj and Oberoi do not. The Mumbai Marriot in Juhu is the best hotel I've been to in the world. Not the biggest or most glamourous, but still very palatial with great hospitality and service. Their cocktail bar and pool room is one of my favourite place to relax in the world.

Visit it!

[ebuddy]

Originally Posted by besson3c 

Okay, but what good does that conclusion do us? How can we act on this?

It would seem to me that our energies are better spent actually trying to solve the problem.

What if it is shown that democracy is the most compelling cure for the system of governance that perpetuates the need for an enemy? If it can be shown statistically that democratic nations are more peaceful, prosperous nations, one could say the problem is fascism and oppression. To solve the problem, regime change is necessary to begin a movement towards another system of governance. Is this too lofty a goal?