[Shaddim]

Originally Posted by Laminar 

I find the fact that you considering yourself some sort of intellectual giant whose opinions actually matter hilarious.

To be quite frank about it Lam, the same can be said about you or any of us. We wouldn't be in here if we thought our beliefs didn't have merit, but the fact is we're just shooting the breeze around here, we aren't policy makers.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

It isn't a "handful". The majority of the populations of these countries are quite pleased with terrorist attacks against the West, they get downright jovial; dragging the bodies through the streets, cheering, burning pictures, etc..

Maybe so, but those civilians aren't actually committing the acts of terrorism. Once you say that civilians are responsible for the actions of a minority of their population you set a precedent for targeting *American* civilians based on the actions of the American military and government. Are you certain you want that?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Yeah, I suppose every act of war is terrorism. He's a clue, if you kill a few to incite or suppress the rest, that's terrorism. If you bomb the hell out of a place for attacking your people (or endorsing said attacks), that's war. I'm not talking about threats, I'm talking about destruction.

What places should we "bomb the hell out of for attacking [us]"? Besides Afghanistan, of course. That is a given seeing how they were harboring/supporting Al Qaeda which was responsible for the 9/11 attacks. Who else has attacked us since 9/11 such that we should be "bombing the hell out of" their country?

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

It isn't a "handful". The majority of the populations of these countries are quite pleased with terrorist attacks against the West, they get downright jovial; dragging the bodies through the streets, cheering, burning pictures, etc.. Well, it'll end at some point, we (or Israel) will reach our fill of it, and there will be a lot less Islamic militants around to extol the virtues of their beliefs.

More generalities. When you say "The majority of the populations of these countries are quite pleased with terrorist attacks against the West" what are "these countries" to which you refer?

And when it comes to "bombing the hell out of [countries]" are we going to focus on the countries that have directly attacked us or the countries that support the groups that attack us?

--Since the Viet Nam war the countries that have directly attacked us are Israel (the USS Liberty attack), Libya (Pan Am 103), and Afghanistan.
--Since the Viet Nam war the countries that have supported the groups that attacked us are Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Lybia, and possibly Egypt and possibly Iran.

What would be your prioritised list for "bombing the hell out of" these countries for attacking or endorsing attacks on the US?

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Wiskedjak 

Maybe so, but those civilians aren't actually committing the acts of terrorism. Once you say that civilians are responsible for the actions of a minority of their population you set a precedent for targeting *American* civilians based on the actions of the American military and government. Are you certain you want that?

In a more general sense--since this thread started out talking specifically about religion--should we hold responsible all the world's Muslim's for the actions of a small percentage of them?
If so, when do we get to indict all of Christianity for the actions of the small percentage of them that commit abortion clinic bombings/killings?
Or heck, when do we get to hold responsible all the world's Catholics for the small percentage of Catholic priests involved in sexual abuse of children?
Or what about the Golden Temple attack/destruction in India in the mid(?) 1990s? When do we get to hold responsible all the world's Hindus for that attack? Or the resulting counter-attacks by Sikhs? What about them?

If Shaddim is serious about holding responsible all of a religion's believers for the acts of a small segment of that religion's believers, we've got a lot of accountability to put in place.

[Hawkeye_a]

Originally Posted by dcmacdaddy 

Exactly.

The willingness to commit violence is present in fundamentalists of every religious persuasion. At this point in time/history the only difference among the Judeo-ChrIslamic faiths in regards to the use of violence is that among Muslim fundamentalists there is a much lower threshold (compared to the other Abrahamic faiths) for deciding how/why to commit violence in the name of their religion. It's not like fundamentalist Christians or Jews (or fundamentalist believers in polytheistic faiths like Hinduism) are not now committing violence in the name of their religion. Adherent of those faiths simply have--at this point in time/history--a much higher threshold for when they will commit acts of violence on behalf of their religious beliefs. That is the only difference at play here; It is a difference of degree and NOT a difference of kind.

So your point is that it's a scale of many grays and not just black and white. No people, no religion, nothing in the domain of creation is perfect, IMHO.

I think the point of the OP is to highlight the gross outlier on the scale of religiously motivated/sponsored terrorism in the world today.

As i said, no religion or people are perfect, but there just seems to be a disproportionate number of terrorists who are muslim, or who use Islam's teaching as justification/teachings to deprive people of life.

The whole abortion-doctor killings is just a needle in the haystack of 'terrorism' headlines.... and im proud to say that it's our laws, our police forces from within our community who discourage, hunt down, and bring to justice those terrorists/criminals, and the majority in our society (including you and i, i think) who deem them criminals and treat them as such. The same cannot be said of the Muslim world, neither on the legislative nor social level.

So yeah, there are people who use Christianity, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, Atheism, etc...as justification to commit terror. Now if you had to prioritize them in order of magnitude/severity in the world today, which one would be at the top of the list ? And should our energies/resources(as a world community, not us vs them) be allocated to fixing them in that order or not ?


Cheers

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Hawkeye_a 

The whole abortion-doctor killings is just a needle in the haystack of 'terrorism' headlines.... and im proud to say that it's our laws, our police forces from within our community who discourage, hunt down, and bring to justice those terrorists/criminals, and the majority in our society (including you and i, i think) who deem them criminals and treat them as such. The same cannot be said of the Muslim world, neither on the legislative nor social level.

It's been pointed out before, the grand total of people killed in US abortion clinic attacks stands at a whopping... 8. No, really, EIGHT.

Not that ANY people killed is acceptable, but really... a little perspective is in order. 8 people.

Your average, run of the mill crazy jihadist would consider that a failure for a SINGLE terror attack, let alone the grand total.

As you pointed out, no one, not Christians or anyone else, made martyrs out of anyone who killed any of those 8 people. Whole sections of any community didn't hide them from authorities, and/or attack anyone who came to round the perpetrators up.

The reality is, there's virtually NO moral equivalence what-so-ever to abortion clinic bombings and terrorism carried out by Muslim extremists over everything from cartoons to 'being disagreed with' to women being educated or showing skin, to you name it. None.

But never let that stop those who -for some unfathomable reason that's never been adequately explained- go out of their way to make up excuses for radical Islam, and try DESPERATELY to excuse it via 'moral equivalence' arguments that are so lopsided it's beyond pathetic.

I've asked the question myself many times what exactly is this obvious NEED to try and make these excuses, rather than the infinitely easier task of just acknowledging the simple reality of: "Yeah, there's an extremely disproportionate amount of terror and violence that comes from the radical Islamic world, and many times brought on by VERY trivial stuff like cartoons, " and then just moving on.

There's really no rational need to make up excuses for that fact, or try and sweep it under a rug via lame moral equivalence arguments, and yet that's exactly what happens every time this subject comes up.

I can only conclude that it must be either a compulsion brought on by the disease of political correctness, or just another kneejerk reaction that's so ingrained it now just happens on autopilot.

[hyteckit]

There have been over 200 abortion clinic bombings.

I say it's a lack of bomb making skills by Christians terrorist.

[Shaddim]

As any fool can plainly see, (well, maybe not any fool) most abortion clinic bombers are trying to destroy the structure, not kill the people who work there. Of course, anyone that does such a thing needs to go to prison for a very long time, and it's still a bad thing.

To address previous comments directed at me, if a country is found to support, condone, or generally ignore their terrorists they need to be bombed further back into the stone age than they already are. Then, we make more bombs and keep bombing until the people that are left will never consider those types of attacks again.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

As any fool can plainly see, (well, maybe not any fool) most abortion clinic bombers are trying to destroy the structure, not kill the people who work there. Of course, anyone that does such a thing needs to go to prison for a very long time, and it's still a bad thing.

To what purpose? What other goal could there be other than to try to use violence to coerce people away from performing or having abortions?

Terrorism does not boil down to a head-count. Terrorism is using violence, or *the threat of violence*, as a tool to coerce people. People need not die for an action to be terrorism.

[Shaddim]

Umm, to destroy the building? I talked with a clinic bomber years ago, doing his time in Brushy Mtn. He was very concerned about making sure that no one had been in the place when the bomb went off, and no one was, he simply wanted the place closed down. It was still wrong of him, and he deserved his sentence.

I care less about property damage and more about people being killed or maimed. Islamic terrorists seem to be all about the body count, celebrating, and then defiling those they murder. Sorry, their own people need to stamp this out or they can all go up at 3,000C.

[Wiskedjak]

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

Umm, to destroy the building? I talked with a clinic bomber years ago, doing his time in Brushy Mtn. He was very concerned about making sure that no one had been in the place when the bomb went off, and no one was, he simply wanted the place closed down. It was still wrong of him, and he deserved his sentence.

Destroying a building is still a very violent act and suggests that, should they try to rebuild, he might not be as careful next time to ensure that nobody is in the building.

Originally Posted by Shaddim 

I care less about property damage and more about people being killed or maimed. Islamic terrorists seem to be all about the body count, celebrating, and then defiling those they murder. Sorry, their own people need to stamp this out or they can all go up at 3,000C.

This is all moot, however. *No* elected official, not even the most hawkish Republican politician you can find, is *ever* going to target a civilian population to "encourage" them to stamp out the radical few in their population.

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Still more lame attempts at moral-relativism. I'm leaning towards: "a compulsion brought on by the disease of political correctness."

Now once more, for a little real-world perspective: the topic here is about threats of violence, not against anyone involved in taking anyone else's life, unborn or otherwise, but against creators of A CARTOON.

By all means peanut gallery, keep letting those knees jerk, driven by some inexplicable inability to deal with the reality of the actual subject matter, because political correctness on crack compels you to make excuses for radical Islam. I've said it before: it's just weird.

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Still more lame attempts at moral-relativism.

You must be talking about Shaddim's call to kill all the Muslims as punishment for them not killing the extremists among them for us.

Now once more, for a little real-world perspective: the topic here is about threats of violence, not against anyone involved in taking anyone else's life, unborn or otherwise, but against creators of A CARTOON.

Also against an entire population, not even for doing something (drawing a cartoon) but for NOT doing something (hunting and killing the extremists in their midst).

By all means peanut gallery, keep letting those knees jerk...

Until you can be just as critical of those on your own side of the peanut gallery, you don't have a leg to stand on, jerk-kneed or otherwise.

[BadKosh]

This should be interesting. No violence here.

Cartoonist overwhelmed by response to "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day"

By JAMIE GRISWOLD
MyNorthwest.com

After a Seattle artist's cartoon went viral, she says she's not going with it.

Molly Norris drew up a sketch declaring May 20th "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" after Comedy Central cut a portion of a South Park episode following a death threat from a radical Muslim group.

Norris explained her motivation on an appearance on KIRO Radio's Dave Ross show. "As a cartoonist I just felt so much passion about what had happened I wanted to kind of counter Comedy Central's message they sent about feeling afraid."

Producers of South Park had announced Thursday that Comedy Central removed a speech about intimidation and fear from their show after a radical Muslim group warned that they could be killed for insulting the Prophet Muhammad.

The group said it wasn't threatening South Park producers Trey Parker and Matt Stone, but it included a gruesome picture of Theo Van Gogh, a Dutch filmmaker killed by a Muslim extremist in 2004, and said the producers could meet the same fate. The website posted the addresses of Comedy Central's New York office and the California production studio where South Park is made.

The momentum drawn from Norris' cartoon was more than the artist had anticipated and by Sunday Norris had posted the following message on her website:

"I am NOT involved in "Everybody Draw Mohammd Day!" I made a cartoon that went viral and I am not going with it. Many other folks have used my cartoon to start sites, etc. Please go to them as I am a private person who draws stuff"

On her website Norris originally explained the campaign was not meant to disrespect any religion, but rather meant to protect people's right to express themselves.

In her present post Norris directs those interested in submitting drawings to the other sites who've taken up the campaign.

Cartoonist overwhelmed by response to "Everybody Draw Mohammed Day" - Seattle News - MyNorthwest.com

[CRASH HARDDRIVE]

Originally Posted by Uncle Skeleton 

You must be talking about Shaddim's call to kill all the Muslims as punishment for them not killing the extremists among them for us.

Yes,because everyday we read about Shaddim killing all Muslims. Happens all the time, right?

That knee of yours really must have smacked your jaw hard, to have dazed you enough to compare ONE PERSON on a message board to an extreme sect of an entire religion that actually carries out its threats in REALITY. Good show.

Also against an entire population, not even for doing something (drawing a cartoon) but for NOT doing something (hunting and killing the extremists in their midst).

Yes, because that actually happened. Shaddam killed all the Muslims, just as sure as extremists actually killed Theo Van Gogh, and have gone apeshit over Dutch cartoons and South Park. Your grasp of reality is stunning.

Until you can be just as critical of those on your own side of the peanut gallery, you don't have a leg to stand on, jerk-kneed or otherwise.

So basically you're so PC-brainwashed that 'your own side' is the Muslim extremists that you feel compelled to make up excuses for, and to compare their REAL actions, with the statements of someone on a message board? One has to ask, what compels you to 'side' with the *ACTUAL* extremists other than some form of PC insanity?

[Uncle Skeleton]

Originally Posted by CRASH HARDDRIVE 

Yes,because everyday we read about Shaddim killing all Muslims. Happens all the time, right?

That knee of yours really must have smacked your jaw hard, to have dazed you enough to compare ONE PERSON on a message board to an extreme sect of an entire religion that actually carries out its threats in REALITY. Good show.

Your post which I quoted specifically said THREATS of violence. So neither side is talking about "actually carrying out its threats in REALITY." As for comparisons, it's perfectly rational to give more attention to people you're actually interacting with than to people whom you'll never meet, online or off.

extremists actually killed Theo Van Gogh, and have gone apeshit over Dutch cartoons and South Park. Your grasp of reality is stunning.

No one defends the actual killings, when they rarely do happen, but keep in mind the topic of this thread is merely idle THREATS (both the OP and what Shaddim is doing). The only pushback is when people like Shaddim (or you? can't tell) try to use "moral-relativism" to claim that all Muslims should share responsibility for what the extremists do. That sentiment, while widespread, is unjust and counter-productive.

So basically you're so PC-brainwashed that 'your own side' is the Muslim extremists

No, "my own side" is the billion+ NON-extremist Muslims, which you would apparently be happy turning into extremists.

BTW, the name-calling doesn't become you, it's what people do when they don't have the facts on their side.

[hyteckit]

Going along with badk0sh's idea.

I think we should replace national day of prayer with national day of pissing on your less favorite religion.

[BadKosh]

Make sure your drawing is really big and sprayed on the side of a bridge or interstate sound barrier so even people in planes can see them.

[hyteckit]

Facebook Group 'Praying' For President Obama's Death Passes 1 Million Members


Good olé Christians and their lack of bomb making skills.


Too be fair, Christians have a big restriction that Muslims don't have. Christians think suicide is a sin, so maybe that's why their bombs are limited, so they won't kill themselves while blowing up an abortion clinic.

[Weyland-Yutani]

Originally Posted by Big Mac 

So, the Arab/Islamic terrorist website revolutionmuslim.com has issued a thinly veiled death threat against South Park creators Parker and Stone over the 200th episode of the show. The site apparently warns that something violent will likely happen to them and have reportedly referenced the murder of Danish director Theo Van Gogh, warning that the penalty for offenses against Mohammed is death.

Ironically, these fearless Muslim warriors hide behind a private domain name registration. . .

Thoughts?

Van Gogh was Dutch, not Danish, is my initial thought and Islam is a natural enemy of the Western world is my second.

[Chongo]

New twist on the Times Square SUV bomb
Times Square car bomb: police investigate South Park link - Telegraph

The device, which failed to detonate, was left near the offices of Viacom, which owns the irreverent cartoon series.

Last month postings on an Islamic website warned the creators of South Park - Matt Stone and Trey Parker - that they could face violent reprisals after an episode of the show featured Mohammed in a bear suit.