[Corsair]

Originally posted by jdjtcagle
I sense something bad

...

And Rictor, I'm going to disagree. Fundamentalism is a major problem and it's only getting bigger, especially these days where the fundamentalists are in charge.

[Rictor]

nah, don't mitake a temporary relapse for a full blown comeback.

If you look, you'll notice than even though Dubya is a religious fundamentalist, he has to keep it in check becuase if he really gave it his all, he would lose many, many voters.

he can't outright ban gay marriage (I'm talking about the Constitutional ammendment), he has to play all nice nice to Muslims. He has to publicly recognize feminism and all that as valid. He can't implement a truly fundamentalist agenda becuase if he did, he'd lose all his voters except for a small minority of zealots.

Just look at the incident with General Boykin. The guys spits on Islam, and Bush has to distance himself from the man, because he can't be seen to be religiously intolerant. Or how Dubya is always repeating "Islam is our friend, this is not a war on Islam, we looove Islam, these terrorists are perverting the good religioun of Islam". I mean, the guy prayed to Japanese idols, and he had to do it for the PR.



Click the "whats wrong with Dubya" link, cause if I put the URL in here, the filter will mess it up, it contains the word B-U-S-H.

http://www.formoore.com/

George W. Bush betrayed Roy Moore. When Justice Roy Moore and his supporters declared that the Ten Commandments have a place in the America's courts of law, George W. Bush cut and run. Bush pretended that he didn't even know us, like Peter denying Jesus.


George W. Bush betrayed Lieutenant General William Boykin. When Boykin told the truth about America's war against terror, saying that it is really a war against Satan, Bush denied knowing anything about it. We know very well that Bush and Boykin have talked about this very thing in the White House together, but again Bush pretended that he didn't even know about it.


After September 11, 2001, George W. Bush has engaged in a silly ecumenical project to try to pretend that all religions are really the same and equally valid. General Boykin is courageous enough to say that "America is a Christian nation". Bush tries to pretend that he does not think so. We need a President who will be honest about these things, and not try to cover up the real differences between Christianity and Islam.


George W. Bush campaigned as a responsible fiscal conservative, but he has created the largest budget deficits in history. As Pastor William Baldwin points out, under Bush's leadership, the Republican Congress has outspent their Democratic predecessors. Bush's policies raise our local taxes, and George W. Bush has yet to veto a single spending bill.


Under George W. Bush, the Republican Party has become the party of big government. The government has grown bigger and bigger, with more agencies and bureaucracies and enforcement programs.


George W. Bush seems to have a problem being honest. Bush has been caught in many lies. He's lied about September 11. He's lied about Iraq. He's lied about his budget. The sad fact is that George W. Bush has lost all the moral authority that a President of the United States must have. Bush is a poor example for our children, who we try to teach to be honest.


America is supposed to be the land of freedom, not the land of spies. Yet, George W. Bush has created new programs for the government to spy on ordinary, law-abiding Americans. Through the Patriot Act and Total Information Awareness, Bush has made America the land of Big Brother.


We criticized Bill Clinton for having his donors sleep in the Lincoln Bedroom of the White House. Now George W. Bush is doing the same, arranging for his big fundraisers to sleep overnight in the White House. That's a shame.


Just like Bill Clinton, the Bush Administration uses focus groups to set its policy and its speeches. Judge Roy Moore has more integrity than that.


George W. Bush promised that he would promote a pro-life agenda, but now both George W. Bush and his wife say that they oppose overturning Roe v. Wade, because George W. Bush is really pro-Choice!


Bush is two-faced and insincere about homosexuality. He says he opposes gay marriage, but then refuses to oppose civil unions for homosexuals. He also refuses to be consistent on hiring gays in the government, allowing for other offices to fire gays because of their sexual orientation, but he hires several homosexuals himself! Either Bush should be pro-gay or anti-gay. Make a decision, Bush!


Bush has taken part in Shinto ceremonies, bowing down to idols at a Shinto temple in Japan. Blasphemy and idolatry is not Christian behavior. Judge Roy Moore would never do such a thing.


George W. Bush has actually increased the funding for the National Endowment for the Arts, which funds blasphemy!


Bush has allowed for experimentation on human embryos.


Bush has sent American soldiers to serve under United Nations authority.

[Liberator]

When are you morons going to get over yourselves and realize that there are mountains of difference between Fundamentalist Christians and Fundamentalist Muslims.

The reason that everybody assumes a terrorist is  from the Arabic regions is most International Terror comes from there.  Sure you can show example of other hotbeds, but 90% of International Terror come from the Arab Bloc.

BTW Kazan, TOO MUCH INFORMATION!

Talking about relationships is one thing, but keep the intimate details of your sex life to yourself, THIS GOES FOR EVERYONE.

[Rictor]

that depends as what you define international terrorism to be.

ok, I would honestly like to hear your definition Lib. I'm genuinly interested to know how you are able to define it in such as a way as to exclude the actions of your own government. Every once in a while, I like to see how the other side think, so I'de be greatful if you could oblige me.

[Liberator]

Okay, since you asked in the spirit of gaining knowledge.

I define International Terrorism as violent actions of a small(compared to the populations they target), nationally-unaffiliated group against generallized, civilian targets designed to affect social or political change in a nation they dislike for whatever reason.  This includes such groups as Al Queda and Hamas.  There are also Western groups, but the only one that springs to mind is the IRA.

I should add, now that I think of National powers, such as the United States of America or Great Britain cannot engage in Terrorism.  Nations can engage in Guerilla Warfare(spec ops, black ops, ect), which can be misconstrued as Terrorism by the uninformed or anti-* outside observer.

[Kazan]

liberator:saying that i've had intercourse with girls that are both white and are not white qualifies under the category of TMI _HOW_

it's not like I gave yuo a play-by-play of the intercourse

you=prude

[Liberator]

Originally posted by Kazan
you=prude

Perhaps, while I don't mind the topic of sex in general, the specifics are not considered part of polite conversation.  I put it in the same category as talking about the diarrhea I had last week.

The topic itself is fine, whys and whos should, if nothing else, should be left for more intimate personal conversations, not the general public.

[Flipside]

Quote from Rictor's post :-

'George W. Bush cut and run. Bush pretended that he didn't even know us, like Peter denying Jesus.'

Mr Roy Moore obviously has a massively inflated image of himself then

Well, it appears that Abu Hamza may well be looking at either 100 years or Death, though Britain are trying to get a promise of no Death Penalty, though no promises he won't mysteriously fall down a flight of stairs repeatedly or anything

One thing actually confused me about Abu anyway, he started shouting about Muslim law when the Mosque in Finsbury Park was raided with sniffer dogs. I can understand this to a certain degree, but dogs aren't allowed in Christian churches either, but if the Police were looking for explosives in one, they would have acted in exactly the same manner. However, when Abu's sons were arrested for attempting to break into Finsbury Park Mosque, which is also a defilement of the Mosque, not one word.... It must be wonderful to be a selective fanatic

[aldo_14]

All fanatics are selective...............

[Kazan]

Originally posted by Liberator
the specifics are not considered part of polite conversation.

A) I didn't go into specifics
B) "polite conversation" among prudes

[Rictor]

Originally posted by Liberator
Okay, since you asked in the spirit of gaining knowledge.

I define International Terrorism as violent actions of a small(compared to the populations they target), nationally-unaffiliated group against generallized, civilian targets designed to affect social or political change in a nation they dislike for whatever reason.  This includes such groups as Al Queda and Hamas.  There are also Western groups, but the only one that springs to mind is the IRA.

I should add, now that I think of National powers, such as the United States of America or Great Britain cannot engage in Terrorism.  Nations can engage in Guerilla Warfare(spec ops, black ops, ect), which can be misconstrued as Terrorism by the uninformed or anti-* outside observer.

OK, thanks for answering. alright, so first things first.

Private military mercs, from the likes of Titan, CACI and Blackwater, currently operating in Iraq, make up the third largest force, beside the US and the UK. They are nationally unaffiliated, small (compared to 25 millions Iraqis), and entered Iraq with the intention of affecting political change, namely the ousting of Saddam and the Baath Party. They have killed civilians, that much is documented, whether or not this was their intention is impossible to prove. They contiue to operate in the interest of political change, to prevent a theocracy from being established in Iraq (think al-Sadr).

_______________________

Now, second, and more importantly, do you acknowledge the existence of a phenomenon known as State Sponsored Terrorism? If you agree with Dubya, then such a thing certainly exists, and is being perpetrated by the likes of Syria, Iran, and formerly Afghanistan and Iraq (though Iraq was not in fact, but it was Dubya's assertion).

Now, if such a phenomenon exists, how would you define it?

_____________________________

Third, do you believe that "Spec Ops warfare" is morally superior to traditional terrorism, even if the exact same acts are commited by both groups. Whether or not both groups have in the past commited identical acts is another question. Assuming that they have, would one group be "better" morally than the other, and if so, why?

______

Kaz: drop it. it pertains in no way whatsoever to the current discussion. If you want, please go ahead and make a seperate thread about it. Thanks.

[aldo_14]

I was under the impression most mercenaries (aka 'security contractors') were in Iraq hired as protection for the various firms hired to rebuilt the infrastructure.

[Rictor]

not necessarily. though it is true that many private corporations have their own security detail, the US government is employing a large number of mercs to fill in the gaps, due to the shortage of troops. Take Abu Ghraib for example. Lots of "private contractors" there.

[Liberator]

Their is no "shortage of troops", we have over 130,000 people on the ground in Iraq.  The Private Security firms that have people in country are being used to guard key locations and personel to allow the real soldiers to go out and do what they were trained for.

The key difference between "spec ops" and terrorism is this:

Terrorism, by it's definition, targets random, typically civilian groups are a rule.  Spec Ops units are utilized on specific, usually military targets.

The so-called "State Sponsored Terrorism" refers to terrorist acts that can be shown to have ties to an organized government.  It's still terrorism because of the target.

"Is Spec Ops warfare morally superior to Terrorism, assuming that the same acts are carried out?"

Well, this assumes that a Spec Ops unit are going to go around randomly killing people and destroying things in a way similar to Terroists.  Spec Ops isn't about that, it's about gaining intel, destroying specific targets to reduce enemy capability, and sometime SAR.  

Terrorism is specifically about making as large a number of people as possible scared of you so you have power over them.

@Kazan

"polite conversation" among prudes

No, polite conversation among civilized people.

[Rictor]

just thought I'de post this up, quite amusing



YARRR! I am Hamza the Fearsome, greatest pirate on the Seven Seas. Beware, ye scurvy dogs, I don't take kindly to having my stump insulted!

[Eishtmo]

Originally posted by Anaz


Eish rules.

The sad part is that it would have been better if that thunderstorm hadn't come through and threatened to kill the power.  I had to hurry because of that.

Originally posted by Kazan

WTF Eishtmo

are you tryting to trivialize the threat of fundamentalists?

Go read "The Fundamentals of Extremism" please

No, I'm trying to be funny and possibly interesting, neither of which is your strong suit.  Just making up for your slack.

[Kazan]

eishtmo: some things i find it inappropriate to be funny about until the threat of them is eliminated - this is one of them

Liberator: then your definition of "civilized" is prude and I want nothing to do with it.

Why don't I drag you into the current millenia - it's the 21st century not the 17th.

  Welcome to the 21st cenury where you can say "I've slept with someone before" without having people gasp and be all agast that you acknolwedge reality.  Welcome to the century where some of the population has grown up enough to realize that rationalism is the only way to know what's indeed true.   Welcome to the 21st century, where people who act like sex is never to be talked about are now backwards prudes who are living in the dark ages.


[thunder: sorry, but symptoms of fundamentalism rub me the wrong way - especially when they're dosed with arrogance]

[Grey Wolf]

Ah. It's about this guy. I had thought it was going to be a post on the School of the Americas, where the US trains Latin American guerillas and strongmen.

[Rictor]

oh no, haven't you heard, they've totally mended their ways. its no longer the School of Asassins anymore, they're called the Western Hemisphere International Security Cooperative now. they have a petting zoo, and a library to teach the young'ins to read, and they hand out free hot chocolate on thursdays and help little old ladies cross the street.

[Ace]

Kazan, he acts like he's Victorian.

He probably puts table cloths on his tables because table legs remind him of legs, which in turn remind him of sex.