babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Using barbarism to justify barbarism

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Using barbarism to justify barbarism
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 11 May 2004 06:39 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Al Qaeda's leader in Iraq beheaded an American civilian and vowed more killings in revenge for the abuse of Iraqi prisoners, an Islamist Web site said Tuesday.

A poor quality videotape on the site showed a man dressed in orange overalls sitting bound on a white plastic chair in a bare room, then on the floor with five masked men behind him.


Very disturbing images


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Section 49
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3186

posted 11 May 2004 07:10 PM      Profile for Section 49     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I read this story earlier this afternoon, and have spent the time since trying to think of other things. I don't understand how people do this. I don't understand how people can stand smirking behind a pile of battered, bruised men and pose for the camera. I don't understand how people can anally rape one another with fluorescent light fixtures. I don't understand how people can film themselves beheading a stranger. All in cold blood. All in technicolour.
From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Gir Draxon
leftist-rightie and rightist-leftie
Babbler # 3804

posted 11 May 2004 07:42 PM      Profile for Gir Draxon     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
At least they didn't take pictures of him in humiliating naked poses.

Reading that link to the information clearing house article, I am struck by how many times Al-Qaeda is mentioned. Is this the same Al-Qaeda that executed the 9/11 attacks, which would make it the same people Saddam had nothing to do with? If that is the case, then why would senior Al-Qaeda leaders have any kind of presence in Iraq?


From: Arkham Asylum | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 11 May 2004 07:45 PM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
If that is the case, then why would senior Al-Qaeda leaders have any kind of presence in Iraq?

When the Americans invaded without sufficient troops to properly secure the entire country, including the borders, they created a power vacuum and Al-Qaeda is only too happy to take advantage. Not to the mention the fact that Bush invited them in when he said: bring it on. They did.


From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 11 May 2004 07:50 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
God those images are disgusting. Those people are disgusting. They're on a race to the bottom of the cesspit of human degradation.

And Gir, of course Al-Quaeda is there now! Iraq is in the middle of their home territory, for chrissakes! It's like being surprised to find American radical militia members in Nebraska.


From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Section 49
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3186

posted 11 May 2004 07:58 PM      Profile for Section 49     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
At least they didn't take pictures of him in humiliating naked poses.


Not sure if this was directed at me, but if you're tinking that I consider humiliation to be on par with outright murder you're wrong. Doesn't mean it isn't all unbelievably disgusting.


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 11 May 2004 08:03 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Gir Draxon:
[QB]At least they didn't take pictures of him in humiliating naked poses.

Or rape him, or beat him, or electrocute him, or bomb he and thousands of his countrymen into smithereens...

And surely, no Iraqi has been summarily executed by an American soldier...

Surely...

In unrelated news, I have a bridge for sale in Brooklyn, if anyone is interested....


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Anchoress
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4650

posted 11 May 2004 08:05 PM      Profile for Anchoress     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And meanwhile there are Americans emailing CNN telling Iraqis to 'quit whining and suck it up, because our troops are dying in your country to make it a better place'...

What a mess.


From: Vancouver babblers' meetup July 9 @ Cafe Deux Soleil! | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
Fidel
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5594

posted 11 May 2004 08:06 PM      Profile for Fidel     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As to the "why" of it all, perhaps this presentation by former American presidential candidate ,Dennis Kucinich can help to clear up a few things about the illegal war on innocent Iraqi's. Since 1991, more than 700 000 Iraqi children have perished and more than 1.5 million Iraqi's in total. Iraq has been described as the most toxic battle field in history. Even moreso than Vietnam with the millions of gallons of agent orange that were dropped on that nation in the 1960's and '70's.

Warning: Pressing play at the end of Kucinich's rant leads to some absolutely horrifying images

Flash presentation ~ 1.3 Mb ..

Depleted Uranium Weapons

[ 11 May 2004: Message edited by: Fidel ]


From: Viva La Revolución | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Shane
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4328

posted 11 May 2004 08:20 PM      Profile for Shane     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The video is sick and deeply disturbing.

However, these bastards will spend an eternity in hell.

[ 11 May 2004: Message edited by: Shane ]


From: Ontario | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mandos
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 888

posted 11 May 2004 08:27 PM      Profile for Mandos   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I believe that some of this is highly calculated, in order to ensure that the American public remains naively hostile to Muslims. Remember that these groups, like Christian apocalyptics, want to induce confrontations.
From: There, there. | Registered: Jun 2001  |  IP: Logged
Sine Ziegler
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 225

posted 11 May 2004 10:16 PM      Profile for Sine Ziegler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I wen tto the link from the top here "Very disturbing images" and the account has been suspended. Now I am actually glad. What was I thinking wanting to see the images. Sick.
From: Calgary | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 11 May 2004 10:26 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Looks like information clearinghouse needs to be more careful in choosing their web hosts...

It's a pointed question for me, as a supporter of free speech. Should these images be broadcast at all? Isn't doing so achieving the exact results the murderers desire?


From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 11 May 2004 11:33 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Reaction from murdered man's family
From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 May 2004 12:15 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Looks like information clearinghouse needs to be more careful in choosing their web hosts...



Information Clearing House is run entirely on donations. It should be supported in that it provides a source for news not always available from the main stream.

quote:
It's a pointed question for me, as a supporter of free speech. Should these images be broadcast at all? Isn't doing so achieving the exact results the murderers desire?

And who should decide what you see and don't see? Can I do it? I will send you a list with links of appropriate stories for your digestion daily.

Sorry for the sarcasm but I hope you see my point.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 01:10 AM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by WingNut:
Information Clearing House is run entirely on donations. It should be supported in that it provides a source for news not always available from the main stream.

I didn't mean to suggest they shouldn't be supported, but rather that their webhost appears to have pulled the site -- probably under pressure. If you're going to be hosting stuff that will offend, you probably want to make sure your host is 100% behind you.

And my point about freedom of speech was really me "thinking out loud." I'm not suggesting the apparent pulling of the site is something that should have been done. The question is really a circular one, becasue I don't believe in censorship. However, I also don't believe in making it easy for murderers to advertise themselves, either. I suppose they will reap the whirlwind, one way or another.


From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Big Willy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5451

posted 12 May 2004 01:28 AM      Profile for Big Willy        Edit/Delete Post
This decapitation is an act of complete and utter animalism. These terrorist are not people. They have no emotion. No empathy. They are sick and demented. This is what we are dealing with folks. An enemy that cannot rationalize. We live in very dangerous times!
From: The West | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 May 2004 01:36 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Enemy? I thought they were people. Demented? Sure. But how much more demented than their "enemy"?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 May 2004 01:41 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
their webhost appears to have pulled the site -- probably under pressure.

Yes, financial pressure. I have seen this before. He has run out of money.

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 12 May 2004 01:44 AM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Anyone who actually wants to look at this disgusting and inhumane execution can find it at Ogrish.com along with any number of other rather disgusting things, such as the Perl killing.

I just don't get why people can't just execute people with a bullet anymore.


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 01:50 AM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Big Willy:
This decapitation is an act of complete and utter animalism...

Actually, animals don't even do this to each other. However, I disagree that this makes the perpetrators inhuman. They are all too human -- one of the things that seperates humanity from the rest of the animal kingdom is our propensity to sheer barbarity. This ritual murder is heinous, but Nick Berg is no more dead than the people deliberately killed by the Coalition forces that we never hear about.

From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Anchoress
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4650

posted 12 May 2004 01:56 AM      Profile for Anchoress     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry to drift, but I'm not sure what people mean about the webhost; I'm still able to open the link at the top of the thread. Is this some mirror thing or something? It isn't cached on my computer, because I didn't even try to open the link until I read the post saying it was gone.
From: Vancouver babblers' meetup July 9 @ Cafe Deux Soleil! | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 02:07 AM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
By webhost I mean the company that's renting space on an internet-connected computer to Info Clearinghouse. I don't think IC is hosting on their own computers because if they were I suspect there would be a different error, or perhaps even no response from the server at all.
From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Anchoress
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4650

posted 12 May 2004 02:17 AM      Profile for Anchoress     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
verbatim, was that in response to my question? Because when I click the link I don't get an error message; I get a page with a bunch of pictures and text. I am just wondering if I am seeing what other people are saying is gone, or if there is something more that should be there but is not.
From: Vancouver babblers' meetup July 9 @ Cafe Deux Soleil! | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 02:32 AM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Oh! Well, I'm getting this page when I click on the link at the top. Unless you're referring to the depleted uranium page, or the link to the family's response?
From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Doug
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 44

posted 12 May 2004 02:40 AM      Profile for Doug   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If you have to watch it, the video is available at the Memory Hole (not a direct link, so don't worry):
http://www.thememoryhole.org/

I haven't yet summoned up the courage to go have a look at it.


From: Toronto, Canada | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
Anchoress
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4650

posted 12 May 2004 02:41 AM      Profile for Anchoress     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Nope. I'm getting this:

NEWS YOU WON'T FIND ON CNN

WARNING

Images contained at the base of this report are taken from a video which depicts the murder and beheading of Nick Berg, A U.S. CITIZEN

WARNING


And there's a couple of screens of text from an article, then a bunch of lurid photos showing a guy being decapitated.

There's also a link to a video, which I didn't click.

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Anchoress ]


From: Vancouver babblers' meetup July 9 @ Cafe Deux Soleil! | Registered: Nov 2003  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 12 May 2004 02:50 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
After much hesitation, I tried the link at TheMemoryHole, and was greatly relieved when it produced nothing but gibberish on my screen.

Get used to more of this shit.

In my worst nightmares, I never believed things could get this bad.


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 02:55 AM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Anchoress: Well, that's the site I originally saw, alright. Who knows why you're still able to view it?

As for the video, well, I saw the pictures once, and that was enough. I don't need to see any of that again, let alone with full motion and sound.

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: verbatim ]


From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 12 May 2004 03:05 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree that this is a horrible way to die. That poor man did not deserve this. At least he didn't know it was coming and it was over with quickly.

I don't know about how "barbaric" this murder was, though. I think it was very calculated, even sophisticated in a macabre way. I read earlier today how the prisoners in Abu Ghraib were subjected to abuses that were calculated to cause the most humiliation to people from their culture.

To have women force them, naked, to become pornography, was considered an efficient way to enable their captors to extract information from them.

The people who killed Nick Berg did it in a way that Americans would find most disturbing - by hand, and up close and dirty. Americans like clean warfare, with surgical strikes and smart bombs guided by satellites. A little rubblizing or collateral damage doesn't bother them. They can keep shopping without any anxiety at all.

Seeing someone being killed the pre-industrial way, however, is guaranteed to horrify Westerners, and sends a message far stronger than sterile death-ratio statistics.

I think perhaps the same psychology might be behind suicide bombing. It appears to be senseless and wanton destruction, but it sends some messages as well; that the people who commit these acts have a long-range vision of their struggle, they aren't afraid of death and they will do anything to achieve their objectives.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 03:32 AM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:
...I don't know about how "barbaric" this murder was, though. I think it was very calculated, even sophisticated in a macabre way...

I think something can be barbaric and also calculated and even sophisticated. I find the Nazi Death Camps to be barbaric, for example. The barbarity for me in this case is due to the fact that it's a revenge killing, done solely for the purpose of furthering hatred and spreading more pain and misery.

I agree that this sort of murder does feel quite alien to my own "western" sensibilities. I just can't fathom dragging some computer techie off the street and sawing off his head with a hunting knife. What purpose does it serve? How does it restore the "honour" of the Iraqi people? These actions reflect a vastly different view of the world than mine: one where there is some sort of quintessential difference between an "Iraqi" and an "American" such that there is some sort of divine scoreboard and someone keeping track. I suppose that's the view of a lot of Americans as well.


From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 12 May 2004 03:45 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What sort of murder isn't alien to your western sensibilities?

Is decapitation any more barbaric than, say, packing a person in ice for 24 hours during interrogation and then letting him die, as has happened at Abu Ghraib?

What purpose did that serve?

The best commentary I've seen on this latest horror was made by As'ad Abukhalil:

quote:
Of this I am certain: “Bush” wanted a war between “us and them” , and “Bin Laden” wanted a war between “us and them” and they both got what they wanted, and for that we all suffer, and will suffer.

Of this I am certain: we have entered a perpetual path of revenge, counter-revenge, wars, and counter-wars, and more revenge and counter-revenge, and on and on and on.


I hope he's wrong.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 12 May 2004 03:46 AM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mr. Berg seems to have been a nice guy who was trying to help. It's a great pity he was killed.

Um, tinfoil hat time, feel free to ignore the following raving . . .
I find myself wondering if it was, in fact, Al Quaeda. First, it's the first time I've seen any direct evidence of Al Quaeda acting in Iraq; lots of American claims that the rebels are Al Quaeda, very little evidence presented. There was one letter, apparently from an Al Quaeda member, advanced as evidence a few months ago, when they were trying to push the Al-Zarqawi bogeyman; it seemed to be an amazingly precise encapsulation of all the occupation's pet party lines about what the resistance was, even where they clashed with all other available evidence. I found myself figuring it had to be a plant. Meanwhile, my understanding is that the groups that the US refers to as "Al Quaeda" rarely in fact refer to themselves as "Al Quaeda", which these people apparently did. The timing is amazingly good for deflecting criticism of American torture. As well, the guy was apparently detained for a while by American forces before being let go; clearly they knew exactly where he was. Finally, up until now prisoners who were not associated with the occupation have been let go every time.

What if it was CIA or similar? They needed a distraction. If they were going to nail an American, they would favour a do-gooder who wasn't "inside the tent", both because he wasn't one of theirs and because it would create more outrage. And they would surely call themselves Al-Quaeda rather than nationalist resistance. And does anyone think, at this point, that they would find such an action morally unacceptable?

I don't suppose we'll ever know. But that in itself is a problem with normalizing the unacceptable--once people realize that you've done despicable evil in one situation, it becomes easier to believe any report or speculation that you might have done despicable evil in another situation. If the American forces had conducted themselves with justice and restraint throughout, I wouldn't even be considering such a hypothesis.


From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 04:09 AM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by al-Qa'bong:
...Is decapitation any more barbaric than, say, packing a person in ice for 24 hours during interrogation and then letting him die, as has happened at Abu Ghraib?...

No.

From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
DownTheRoad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4523

posted 12 May 2004 07:54 AM      Profile for DownTheRoad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Um, tinfoil hat time, feel free to ignore the following raving . . .
I find myself wondering if it was, in fact, Al Quaeda.

Many news outlets are reporting that Berg was picked up by Iraqi police and held for several weeks at the behest of US authorities. Then released just in time to be picked up by the guys in the video.

From: land of cotton | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 May 2004 09:22 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
How does it restore the "honour" of the Iraqi people? These actions reflect a vastly different view of the world than mine

What about strapping someone to a table and injecting poisons into them? Or putting a rope around their neck and springing a trap door? Are these less barbaric? How about spreading tons of poison guaranteeing some of the most horrendous punishments imaginable for generations to come?

It is all barbaric.

Equally barbaric is the game now in play. On CNN, last night, they wondered if this story would now "balance out" the abuse scandal and warned that "these people" will kill Americans anytime for no reason. They are now demonizing the entire Iraqi, and by extension, Arab people. I can only imagine what the committed barbarians on the right, Rush Limbaugh, for example, are saying.

The nightmare is only beginning.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
BleedingHeart
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3292

posted 12 May 2004 10:44 AM      Profile for BleedingHeart   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
For those conspiracy minded among us, how likely do you think it is that the Americans sacrificed someone to draw the heat away from their own mess with the prison pictures?
From: Kickin' and a gougin' in the mud and the blood and the beer | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 12 May 2004 11:00 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think that it's unlikely, although I have been proven naive time and time again when it comes to estimating the utter lack of humanity within the current USian regime.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 12 May 2004 11:27 AM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
For those conspiracy minded among us, how likely do you think it is that the Americans sacrificed someone to draw the heat away from their own mess with the prison pictures?

... and then the thread jumped the shark.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 12 May 2004 11:54 AM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I am very interested in the outcome of the investigations regarding the deaths of Iraqi inmates. 25 dead and only 3 under serious investigation. This murder of a mercenary will bury the outcome I think. Perhaps American soldiers didn't behead them but likely beat them to death over a period of time, we just haven't seen the video yet.
From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
DownTheRoad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4523

posted 12 May 2004 11:58 AM      Profile for DownTheRoad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
This murder of a mercenary will bury the outcome I think.

You mean the cell phone tower repair guy? The term carpet bagger might fit, but not mercenary.

From: land of cotton | Registered: Oct 2003  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 12 May 2004 12:04 PM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
u mean the cell phone tower repair guy? The term carpet bagger might fit, but not mercenary.

Maybe he's not a mercenary. But he was sure eager to make money off the war, a war he supported.


From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 May 2004 12:51 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
“We actually shot two prisoners today. One got shot in the chest for swinging a pole against our people on the feed team.

“One got shot in the arm. We don’t know if the one we shot in the chest is dead yet.”

Her video also documented the time she spent guarding prisoners at Camp Bucca, in southern Iraq.

Showing a snake, she says: “This is a sand viper. One bite will kill you in six hours. We’ve already had two prisoners die of it, but who cares? That’s two less for me to worry about.”

She said about three prisoners managed to break out each week.

She said she was a fearsome guard: “They are scared of me. I actually got in trouble the other day because I was throwing rocks at them.”



http://news.scotsman.com/latest.cfm?id=2915028

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Bacchus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4722

posted 12 May 2004 12:57 PM      Profile for Bacchus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hmm from the reports it isnt clear he even supported the war but was a young (26) guy thinking he could help rebuild things.

And besides does that make it ok to kill him if he was a supporter? When you start sayings things like it was ok he was killed because..... then you join the right in their demonizing or dehumanizing of the opposisition

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Bacchus ]


From: n/a | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 12 May 2004 01:12 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
... and then the thread jumped the shark.

I know what you're saying here, but entertaining conspiracy theories is a direct consequence of people losing faith with the governments and the media we expect to explain this to us with at least some degree trustworthiness.

This is what I've always hated about war...that truth becomes the first casualty. We look at the actions of the US administration since 2001, the obscurantism (..'axis of evil', 'hating our freedoms'), the perceptions of conflicts of interest that go unexamined (Perle, Cheney, etc.) the questionnable premises for waging this war, the cover-ups of atrocities that come to light months after they've occurred, the punditry that spins each and every issue into something that's a perversion of truth and common sense, and what is the average, criticallly-thinking citizen left with? That you either give up and go along with this mess (or tune it out altogether), or you start entertaining conspiracy theories to keep yourself alert and protected from being made a total fool of. Or you go to Iraq yourself and see what's going on...like that's an option we all have.

This is where the government and the media are going to have a lot to answer for in the next few years, if the bulk of the citizenry can muster the strength to take them on: in the interpretation of reality we expect from you, just who the fuck do you think you are?

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Hinterland ]


From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
mighty brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3148

posted 12 May 2004 02:18 PM      Profile for mighty brutus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Scout:

Maybe he's not a mercenary. But he was sure eager to make money off the war, a war he supported.



BBRRR! Pretty cold there, scout. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY deserves to have their head sawed off with a knife.


From: Beautiful Burnaby, British Columbia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
MT VIEW
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5402

posted 12 May 2004 02:19 PM      Profile for MT VIEW     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mandos:
I believe that some of this is highly calculated, in order to ensure that the American public remains naively hostile to Muslims. Remember that these groups, like Christian apocalyptics, want to induce confrontations.


You're getting warm. In their statements on the tape of Berg's beheading, they use the word "crusaders".

President Bush used that word once, in a speech a few days after Sept 11, and was immediately corrected. Several months ago some American general was taped claiming that he wasn't afraid in Iraq because his Christian God was larger than the Muslim God. This kind of thinking needs its polar opposite for survival, kind of like Bloc and Reform feeding each other.


From: Maple Ridge, BC | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
MT VIEW
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5402

posted 12 May 2004 02:22 PM      Profile for MT VIEW     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Scout:

Maybe he's not a mercenary. But he was sure eager to make money off the war, a war he supported.



The real reason Berg was selected by the Al Qaeda operatives for assassination could not possibly be more clear. He was Jewish.


From: Maple Ridge, BC | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 12 May 2004 02:26 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hinterland:

This is what I've always hated about war...that truth becomes the first casualty.

Well, not this time--it was toast long before.


From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 12 May 2004 02:28 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by MT VIEW:

The real reason Berg was selected by the Al Qaeda operatives for assassination could not possibly be more clear. He was Jewish.

Was he Jewish? My wife thinks his background was Mennonite.


From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 02:40 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by WingNut:
...It is all barbaric.

Equally barbaric is the game now in play...



Yes. It is all barbaric. There is no excuse for any of the murders, abuse of prisoners, and the invasion is a farce generally. However, as you have pointed out, there no are "scales" to "balance", by either side. It is simply murder and barbarism. The claims by CNN that revenge is a legitimate tactic are no more execrable than those of the murderers of Nick Berg taking revenge for Abu Ghraib.

From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
josh
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2938

posted 12 May 2004 02:49 PM      Profile for josh     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, Berg was Jewish. Whether that was part of the reason for the murder is unclear. Reference was made to an unsuccessful trade for prisoners held by the Americans. But the modus operandi was very similar to the murder of Danny Pearl in Pakistan.
From: the twilight zone between the U.S. and Canada | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
pogge
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2440

posted 12 May 2004 02:51 PM      Profile for pogge   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by MT VIEW:


The real reason Berg was selected by the Al Qaeda operatives for assassination could not possibly be more clear. He was Jewish.


Yes, he was Jewish. But you must have better sources of information than any of the half-dozen media outlets whose reports I've looked at because none of them seem as sure of this as you are.


From: Why is this a required field? | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 12 May 2004 02:58 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What I'd be curious to know is why, with Iraq crawling with U.S. forces, they chose a civilian who was there to help set up telephone service. If the killers wanted to send a message to Americans that absolutely nobody is safe, then I'd expect the average U.S. citizen to respond by happily endorsing any action, no matter how hamfisted, that claims to keep them safe. I don't see that improving anyone's lot in life in Iraq.
From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Scout
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1595

posted 12 May 2004 03:19 PM      Profile for Scout     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Scout:

Maybe he's not a mercenary. But he was sure eager to make money off the war, a war he supported.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


BBRRR! Pretty cold there, scout. Nobody, and I mean NOBODY deserves to have their head sawed off with a knife.


And I never said he did. Nor would I but thanks for smearing me. Maybe a closer reading of what I posted previously might clue you in.

He has been called a civilian contractor, which has meant mercenary, turns out he wasn't a mercenary which is what I repsonded too, to corrected my error regarding why he was there. Not that he did he have any contracts anyway but that's not important. But feel free to extrapolate a conversation I was having with another postr however you see fit. I expected a bit better from you MB.

quote:
The real reason Berg was selected by the Al Qaeda operatives for assassination could not possibly be more clear. He was Jewish.

So do you think they went up to the thousand of white Americans wandering the streets of Iraq and asking who was Jewish before they abducted him? I don't think so, nor doI think he was handed over by the US to steer attention away for dead Iraqi prisoners or the ones being abused. Come on, it's too much. They just grabbed the first American looking & sounding person they could.

This was a case of wrong place, wrong skin colour, wrong accent/passport and wrong reasons to be in a war zone at the wrong time.


From: Toronto, ON Canada | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jack01
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5211

posted 12 May 2004 03:23 PM      Profile for Jack01        Edit/Delete Post
The Islamists had to save face in their minds for what happened at Abu-G prison.

The Israel/Palestine debate can also be looked at in this context.

Peace cannot occour between Israel and Palestine because if it did it would confirm the defeats the Israelies put on the Muslims.

The decapatating of Nick Berg a "Jew" is abhorent in the West but for a Muslim it equates to saving face.

quote:
The Face Of The Cowardice

By: Tashbih Sayyed
Saddam Hussein's capture was important. It was needed to deprive the radical Islamists of a rallying symbol. The failure of coalition forces to capture the fugitive despot was being used by the insurgents to bolster his image as a holy warrior, who could make the U.S. sweat. Many believed that it was contributing to the ongoing attacks on coalition forces. Commander of U.S. Forces in Iraq Lt. Gen. Ricardo Sanchez told a recent press conference that one reason more Iraqis had not come forward to offer information on guerrilla leaders was the fear they would be punished by Saddam and his followers.
Saddam Hussein's removal from power was not enough for the Iraqis to feel totally free. They were unable to make a fresh start. As long as Saddam has not been killed or arrested, there will remain a shadow for many Iraqis as to whether they can move on with their lives, whether they can start rebuilding their country and re-map their own lives, Intifahd Qanbar, spokesman for the Iraqi National Congress told Inter Press Service in Baghdad in October.

But the meekness with which he emerged from his hole and the disheveled, haggard and impotent face that he wore, deprived the Islamists of their hero. It robbed them of something without which no Arab can face their world - it blackened the face of resistance. Arab life revolves around a sociology of honor. And Saddam's contemptible and pitiful demeanor took away any illusion of bravery, chivalry and dignity that was hitherto associated with him. Islamists had always presented him as the present day "Salahuddin Ayyubi." Years of careful planning and imaginative marketing to cultivate this image was demolished in an instant by the television. They could not prevent the world from seeing the what their "Amir-ul-Momeneen (commander of the faithful) looked like when faced with reality - it was the ultimate face of cowardice.

Only a Muslim living in an Islamist controlled society can understand the impact and meaning of such a humiliation. A culture that thrives on fairy tales, myths and legends of bravery and honor, where it is a holy and noble profession to twist history to transform a coward into a larger than life hero, the disheveled face of their leader was beyond any explanation. Ghassan Tweini, founder and editor-in-chief of Lebanon's most prestigious daily an-Nahar, wrote that the shameful capture of the "despotic tyrant," Saddam Hussein, will leave the Arab world, its leaders, regimes and thinkers, confused regarding what lesson to learn from the event. Saddam looked like a "wild monster" in the pictures of his capture, he said.

Saddam Hussein was supposed to be their "dragon slayer," the one who was supposed to destroy the Jewish state of Israel, liberate Palestine and humiliate the U.S. But what the world saw was meeker than a worm. Their Salahuddin was begging for a deal to save his own life. Television images did not leave any room for any face saving. It was a total debacle.

The shamefulness in Saddam's capture was also reflected in the Shiite-owned Lebanese daily al-Safir. The capture of Saddam Hussein must be a lesson for the Iraqis and the Arabs, who should do their best to prevent the appearance of a "new Saddam," wrote al-Safir. The moment of his capture marked the vanishing of a heavy moral burden that long tarnished the Arab conscience, for they are all responsible, to a certain extent, for allowing the emergence of a tyrant like Saddam, published al-Safir.

How will the Islamist insurgents react to this ultimate bust is a million dollar question? Since Islamism is a product of Wahhabi ideology, it is only logical to conclude that the Islamists will follow the Arab code of honor - continuing with their terrorism. "The Arab either "whitens" the face (saves face), or "blackens" the face (loses face). "Face is the outward appearance of honor, the 'front' of honor which a man will strive to preserve even if, in actuality, he has committed a dishonorable act" (ibid., p. 101). In the Arab world "honor" and "face" are so closely related that the words are almost interchangeable. This "face," or "honor," is such an integral part of the Arab mind that a person is considered perfectly justified in resorting to deceit and falseness in order to "whiten," or save, their own, someone else's or the entire Arab world's face.

The Arab mind is in perpetual motion—working against "blackening" the face (losing face), and thus sculptures its words accordingly. When it comes to "whitening" or saving somebody else's face or the face of the Arab world, lying is even considered to be "a duty" (ibid., p. 105)." History tells us that the Arabs have never been able to reconcile with the idea of losing honor. They live to win honor by dishonoring others. That's why, some fear that the anti-U.S. elements will exploit Arab street's sense of honor to recruit more terrorists. They foresee an upsurge in anti-coalition violence. If my understanding of the Arab mind is correct then anything is possible. In order to dishonor their enemy, radical Islamists can go to any length. They can lie, resort to deceit and falsehood and indulge in a very focused and motivated campaign of terror. We should be prepared for all eventualities.



From: Windsor, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 12 May 2004 03:45 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:
The Islamists

Please define.

quote:
The decapatating of Nick Berg a "Jew" is abhorent in the West but for a Muslim it equates to saving face.

And how is it that Muslims 'save face' in a different way from we in 'the West', Jack?


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jack01
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5211

posted 12 May 2004 04:22 PM      Profile for Jack01        Edit/Delete Post
Courage,

I am not sure. Is there a difference between Islamic and American payback?

In the West we seem to self evaluate and self police even it means loosing face.

We feel compeled to analize and criticize ourselves. Loosing face and then trying to regain it seems to be a passtime in the west.

Because of the prison scandel any moral authority was lost by the American military.

The Islamists could have beaten the troops back and out of Iraq with public opinion alone.

For some reason Nick Berg had to have his head cut off?

Why, would you throw away all the political mommentem from the prison scandel?

Imagine Nick Berg going on CNN and telling his story of being captured, treated well and then being released to freedom. "American Jew released by Iraqi militia".

The USA wanted Iraq to be an answer for 9/11. If Iraq could be free and democratic the USA could save face for 9/11 and free a country from the likes of Saddam.

My pop psychology answer would be its almost like gang violence. Tit for Tat because you need to protect your turf. No one in a Gang ever asks why they need to protect it they just feel justified for killing.

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Jack01 ]


From: Windsor, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
mighty brutus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3148

posted 12 May 2004 04:24 PM      Profile for mighty brutus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Scout:

So do you think they went up to the thousand of white Americans wandering the streets of Iraq and asking who was Jewish before they abducted him? I don't think so, nor doI think he was handed over by the US to steer attention away for dead Iraqi prisoners or the ones being abused. Come on, it's too much. They just grabbed the first American looking & sounding person they could.

This was a case of wrong place, wrong skin colour, wrong accent/passport and wrong reasons to be in a war zone at the wrong time.


Scout, relax! If I wanted to smear you, I would have done a lot more than merely saying you had a cold attitude. In your post you seemed to imply that he 'had it coming'---this is what I was commenting on. I didn't think you would take it so personally! If I have hurt your feelings I apologize.


From: Beautiful Burnaby, British Columbia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 04:26 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The quote about "Islamic honor" seems like an attempt to claim that Muslims have a special relationship with "saving face". This looks like rhetoric to me. The combination of cowardice and machismo the author describes is no different than the "face" phenomenon in Eastern, Western, African, and any other culture I'm even passingly familiar with. The killers of Nick Berg are no more diabolical than revenge-killers of any other culture, and I think it's racist to suggest that Muslims are more prone to barbarism.
From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 12 May 2004 04:27 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
We feel compeled to analize

To be fair, it was the prison guards who felt compelled to analize.*

Jack your post leads me to ask a very relevent question: Who's the bigger tit? Bush or Osama?

*yes, yes, spelling flames are lame. It's just a joke, get over it.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 12 May 2004 04:32 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The quote about "Islamic honor" seems like an attempt to claim that Muslims have a special relationship with "saving face".

To be fair, many accounts of the prison scandal note the fact that being forced to disrobe in front of other men (as an example) is a special kind of loss of face in the Muslim world. If Muslim society has its own ways of losing face, it's not unreasonable to suppose that they might have their own ways of regaining it too.
Hopefully fact will trump speculation with regard to what those ways might be, but simply suggesting that Muslims may save face differently than we do isn't out of line.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 12 May 2004 04:37 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:
[QB]Courage,

In the West we seem to self evaluate and self police even it means loosing face.


You mean like unleashing bombers and Marines onto countless Afghani civilians in order not to 'lose face' to The Terrorists?

quote:
We feel compeled to analize and criticize ourselves.

You mean like when the WTC bombings took place and few wanted to look at past foreign policy decisions as a possible motivation for the attackers? Or how about when the US was about to launch an illegal and ill-advised war against a state that had committed no act of aggression against it.

Hmmmm....

quote:
My pop psychology answer would be its almost like gang violence. Tit for Tat because you need to protect your turf. No one in a Gang ever asks why they need to protect it they just feel justified for killing.

And of course, this 'gang psychology' is more prevalent among Dark folks than among us Hhhhhwhites.....

Even though we have the biggest, most powerful, most dangerous gang on the planet who bully or terrorise all the smaller gangs into seeing things their way.

White Supremecism by any other name still stinks like shit.

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Rufus Polson
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3308

posted 12 May 2004 04:37 PM      Profile for Rufus Polson     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Courage:

And how is it that Muslims 'save face' in a different way from we in 'the West', Jack?

Doesn't seem so different. As I recall, when the Americans had four guys killed a little while ago they saved face by massacring 600+ Moslems. They said they were going after the killers, but they clearly weren't as other kinds of measures would have been much more likely to catch the killers. And they said they were taking back the city, but they ended up apparently satisfied with not taking it back, as long as the media don't talk about it. So it seems clear the attacks on Fallujah were about massacring people to save face.

The only difference is, the Iraqi case involves six vile people killing one civilian to save face. The American case involves a whole major institution killing hundreds of civilians to save face.


From: Caithnard College | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 12 May 2004 04:40 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
[QB]

To be fair, many accounts of the prison scandal note the fact that being forced to disrobe in front of other men (as an example) is a special kind of loss of face in the Muslim world.


This sounds like a special kind of racism on behalf of the reporters. Literally denuding someone is considered an insult EVERYWHERE. We in 'the West' are no more comfortable with this act than anyone else. It is a common practice in prisons and in torture (yes, we torture people) in the West. I suspect, too, that being forced to (nakedly) pile on top of one another like some kind of human Jenga contraption might make a few 'Westerners' 'lose face'. Or that perhaps, just perhaps, having an electrical device strapped to one's testicles to deliver random shocks whilst standing behooded on a box for a couple of days might be a little humilitating to the average 'Westerner'. Just a possibility...

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 12 May 2004 04:42 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mr. Magoo:
... If Muslim society has its own ways of losing face, it's not unreasonable to suppose that they might have their own ways of regaining it too.
Hopefully fact will trump speculation with regard to what those ways might be, but simply suggesting that Muslims may save face differently than we do isn't out of line.


Well, I don't see much nuance among these different honour codes, then. Revenge is a common aspect of human behaviour throughout the world and through history. I also think the question as to whether the murder saves Iraqi face is entirely academic, because there is no such thing as an objective measure of honour.

From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 12 May 2004 04:47 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Rufus Polson:

Doesn't seem so different. As I recall, when the Americans had four guys killed a little while ago they saved face by massacring 600+ Moslems. They said they were going after the killers, but they clearly weren't as other kinds of measures would have been much more likely to catch the killers. And they said they were taking back the city, but they ended up apparently satisfied with not taking it back, as long as the media don't talk about it. So it seems clear the attacks on Fallujah were about massacring people to save face.

The only difference is, the Iraqi case involves six vile people killing one civilian to save face. The American case involves a whole major institution killing hundreds of civilians to save face.


Over here: http://www.rabble.ca/babble/ultimatebb.php?ubb=get_topic&f=2&t=006057

I said this: While this torture business should get as much attention as possible, I think we shouldn't let it cloud over the results of the battle at Fallujah. Hundreds upon hundreds of people were killed. Many were civilians. The 'official' estimates being reported in the news media are of 'confirmed dead'. This number doesn't include those who died out of hospital (and didn't make it to a morgue) or who were treated and released and subsequently died from their injuries.

People have been digging up soccer pitches to make gravesites for all the bodies.

When Saddam or Slobodan or Satan Himself kill dark folks and dig up fields to bury them, it's big news. MASS GRAVES FOUND! When Marines kill 'em and they have to dig their own mass graves, it's no big thing. Just business as usual

This can lead us to only one conclusion: the difference between 'War' and 'War Crimes' is all in who cleans up the mess afterward....


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jack01
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5211

posted 12 May 2004 05:00 PM      Profile for Jack01        Edit/Delete Post
Courage,

quote:
You mean like when the WTC bombings took place and few wanted to look at past foreign policy decisions as a possible motivation for the attackers?

You got me on this one.

By the west allowing Muslims to come to college and learn engineering they were engaged in "foreign policy" decisions that caused well to do Saudies to fly planes into tall buildings?

By letting them travel back and forth between Europe and the USA they had committed a "foreign policy" decision so horrible as to justify 9/11?

I guess Mr Berg must of had senior level status at the State Department and as such he held dirrectly responsible for "foreign policy" decisions.

I'm getting Alice in Wonderland flashbacks.


From: Windsor, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 May 2004 05:15 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Pigs are pigs are pigs.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 12 May 2004 05:20 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:
Courage,

You got me on this one.


Jack, your point was about self-reflection and self-criticism.

The grievances against the United States held by many Muslims generally, and explicitly stated by Al-Qaida specifically, are well-known. The series of policy decisions that are in question would be things like:

1) Military, political, diplomatic and finiancial support for Israel in their occupation and denigration of the Palestinians.

2) Unabashed support of monarchies, dictatorships and various despots in oil-rich countries in the Middle East in spite of popular opposition to these governments and resentment of U.S. involvement.

3) The Persian Gulf war. From it's outset, a war about oil, profits and ensuring that 'the West' remains economically dominant over the region.

4) The presence of American troops in Saudi Arabia, which is considered holy ground.

5) Overthrowing a democratically elected government in Iran only to replace it with a dictatorship because there was rumblings that the new government would nationalise the natural gas resource that Iran possesses.

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 12 May 2004 05:25 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:
... justify 9/11?

"Justify" is your word, Jack-ass, not mine. There is a whole heap of difference between understanding causality and assigning moral/ethical blame.

Interestingly enough, you are demonstrating the lack of critical thinking about foreign policy that I was speaking of.

How nice of you.

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 12 May 2004 05:27 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I guess Mr Berg must of had senior level status at the State Department and as such he held dirrectly responsible for "foreign policy" decisions.

Yup. Just like thousands of Afghanis and thousands more Iraqis made responsible (in the American public's minds', according to polls) for the attacks on the WTC.

Fascinating that. But then again, us Hhhhhwhites would never stoop to blind vengence to save face...


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 12 May 2004 06:29 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
May 11, 2004 " Los Angeles Times" -- BAGHDAD — One woman told her attorney she was forced to disrobe in front of male prison guards. After much coaxing, another woman described how she was raped by U.S. soldiers. Then she fainted.

A U.S. Army report on abuses at Abu Ghraib prison documented one case of an American guard sexually abusing a female detainee, and a Pentagon spokesman said Monday that 1,200 unreleased images of abuse at Abu Ghraib included "inappropriate behavior of a sexual nature."

Whether it was one or numerous cases of rape, many Iraqis believe that sexual abuse of women in U.S.-run jails was rampant. As a result, female prisoners face grave prospects after they are released: denial, ostracism or even death.

A woman who is raped brings shame on her family in the Islamic world. In many cases, rape victims have been killed by their relatives to salvage family honor, although there is no evidence this has happened to women who have been prisoners in Iraq.



Barbarism in white hats

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 12 May 2004 06:59 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And of course, this 'gang psychology' is more prevalent among Dark folks than among us Hhhhhwhites.....

There's a real racist miasma bubbling up here. Mix the Dark folks' gang violence with the Oriental's need to save face and honour (shades of "The Jap"), toss in the "barbarian" slur and you have a "Super-Other" that must be exterminated.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 12 May 2004 07:15 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
By the west allowing Muslims to come to college and learn engineering they were engaged in "foreign policy" decisions that caused well to do Saudies to fly planes into tall buildings?

I don't suppose it matters to you, Jack01, but Osama bin Laden earned his civil-engineering degree from the University of Jeddah.

That's in the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, by the way.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 May 2004 07:32 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:
By the west allowing Muslims to come to college and learn engineering they were engaged in "foreign policy" decisions that caused well to do Saudies to fly planes into tall buildings?

By letting them travel back and forth between Europe and the USA they had committed a "foreign policy" decision so horrible as to justify 9/11?


Jack, I'm getting really tired of your racist generalizations about Muslims. This is a progressive board, and you agreed to abide by our posting policy when you signed up. Suggesting that 9-11 happened because we let "Muslims" cross our borders and study at our schools is racist.

Go spew that racist crap on Free Dominion where it's welcomed. You can consider this a warning from the moderator.

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 12 May 2004 08:33 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by MT VIEW:

Several months ago some American general was taped claiming that he wasn't afraid in Iraq because his Christian God was larger than the Muslim God.

Lieutenant General "Jerry" Boykin was referring to his fight with Somali warlord Osman Atto.

quote:
"When Boykin's Delta Force commandos went after Atto, they missed him by seconds, he said. "He went on CNN and he laughed at us, and he said, 'They'll never get me because Allah will protect me. Allah will protect me.'

"Well, you know what?" Boykin continued. "I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol." Atto later was captured.


"Our "spiritual enemy," Boykin continued, "will only be defeated if we come against them in the name of Jesus."

I guess this means the Yanks will be turning the other cheek, huh?


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
BleedingHeart
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3292

posted 12 May 2004 08:43 PM      Profile for BleedingHeart   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
To be fair, many accounts of the prison scandal note the fact that being forced to disrobe in front of other men (as an example) is a special kind of loss of face in the Muslim world.

Actually that is a special loss of face in Christian atheist or just about any culture.


From: Kickin' and a gougin' in the mud and the blood and the beer | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 12 May 2004 10:04 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Another wrinkle in the Nick Berg story: his parents filed suit in early April, saying he was being held illegally by the US military.

quote:
Michael Berg said on Tuesday his son would still be alive had he been set free [by the military] earlier. Berg had told his parents he intended to leave Iraq at the end of March.

From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jack01
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5211

posted 12 May 2004 10:58 PM      Profile for Jack01        Edit/Delete Post
Courage,

1. Yes the USA gives a great deal of money to Israel they also give a great amount to countries such as Egypt.

2. What popular opposition? Right know the only country with popular opposition is Iran.

3. Yes, the West needs oil.

4. The Saudies asked the Americans to leave and they did.

5. Iran has been self ruled since 1979.

Have the Afghans returned home from Pakistan since the USA has been there. Yes.

al-Qa'bong,

I tried to present an explanation for why Mr Berg had his head cut off. Does everything meet the definition of racism for you?

My example then presented "Saving Face" as one of the reasons the USA invaded Iraq.

'lance,

I was referring to Mohammed Atta. He had a degree from in architecture from Cairo University but he was also a student of urban planning in Hamburg Germany. Marwan ALshehhi also attended school in Germany. Jarrah, engineering Germany. Hanjour, flight school USA.

Michelle, for giggles what do you feel were the motivating factors for the 9/11 attacks?

No, I didn't suggest that by allowing Muslims to cross our borders and study at our schools to be a cause for 9/11.

My sarcasm was pointing out that the USA is open and anyone who might want to come and visit can and if they like get an education.

I feel that Courage's suggestion that the woes of the middle east are all about the "policy decissions of the USA" doesn't hold up. I also think its a weak excuse for what happened on 9/11.

Michelle, I double dog dare you to ban to me.

Your little comment about "spewing racist crap" is classic labeling used to avoid debate.

Wait, I tripple dog dare you to ban me.

[ 12 May 2004: Message edited by: Jack01 ]


From: Windsor, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 12 May 2004 11:00 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, al-Qa'bong's link this morning about the reaction of the man's family, was talking about their anger at the US government for detaining him in Iraq for so long when he wanted to leave.

I haven't read your article yet, 'lance, but apparently the parents were firmly anti-war all the way along, while the son supported it from a humanitarian viewpoint and thought he could make a difference in Iraq by helping rebuild the infrastructure.


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 12 May 2004 11:04 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ah. I'd missed al-Qa'bong's link before.
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 12 May 2004 11:21 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
From that link:

quote:
Berg's mother, Suzanne Berg, said her son was in Iraq to help rebuild communication antennas.

"He had this idea that he could help rebuild the infrastructure," she said.

Michael Berg described himself as fervently anti-war, but said his son disagreed with him.

"He was a Bush supporter," Berg said. "He looked at it as bringing democracy to a country that didn't have it."



From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 12 May 2004 11:35 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Wait, I tripple dog dare you to ban me.

For the last time, Jack01, we're not getting you a Genuine Red Ryder 200 Shot Carbine Action Air Rifle. You'll put an eye out.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 13 May 2004 02:50 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
1. Yes the USA gives a great deal of money to Israel they also give a great amount to countries such as Egypt.

Yes, Egypt, a brutal dictatorship with a paper-thin veneer of democracy (what did Mubarak get last election, 98%?), in which citizens who dare dissent are subjected to routine torture similar to what we've seen recently in Iraq.

You expect those citizens to be grateful that the US supplies money to their tormentors? Please explain.

quote:
2. What popular opposition? Right know the only country with popular opposition is Iran.

Huh?? Are you saying governments like Saudi Arabia's are supported by their populations? How do you figure this? Are you denying that they're oppressive dictatorships? Have you never heard of the "Arab street"? Wha?

In a sense, though, you're right. Under most of these US-backed regimes, there is little visible "popular opposition" because most of the people who might comprise it are rotting and suffering the torments of hell in prison.

quote:
3. Yes, the West needs oil.

And therefore we are justified in propping up and supporting vile regimes in order to obtain that oil? Explain again how we're the "civilized" ones, please.

quote:
4. The Saudies asked the Americans to leave and they did.

Which may well have had some impact in lessening anti-US resentment in the region, if said withdrawal had not occurred contemporaneously with the illegal US invasion and occupation of a neighbouring Arab country. The US merely traded one provocation for another -- now vastly worse -- one.

quote:
5. Iran has been self ruled since 1979.

I don't quite know what this means. The Iranians overthrow one of the US's favourite pet dictators (the Shah) after 25 years of brutal rule, and they're just supposed to forget about it?

And, needless to say, the type of "self-rule" Iran has enjoyed since '79 has not exactly been fun and giggles for the Iranian people, to put it mildly. Islamic theocracy is no joke -- and that theocracy would never have triumphed after the fall of the Shah had all the other, secular/democratic strands of Iranian political life not been crushed and extinguished during the Shah's US-backed rule.

quote:
I feel that Courage's suggestion that the woes of the middle east are all about the "policy decissions of the USA" doesn't hold up.

First of all, neither Courage, nor anyone else that I'm aware of, has suggested that "all" the "woes of the middle east" are the result of American foreign policy. You seem to recognize only two possibilities: either the US is responsible for 100% of the nasty things going on there, or 0%. Typical either/or Manichean thinking, George Dubya Bush-style.

Of course the US isn't responsible for everything bad in the Middle East, but they sure as heck are responsible for a significant chunk of it, given the overwhelming influence of US power in the region. To suggest otherwise is to suggest that the problems of Eastern Europe under Communist rule had no relation whatsoever to the "policy decisions" of the USSR. Frickin' absurd.

quote:
I also think its a weak excuse for what happened on 9/11.

Noooo... really? No shit!

Of course the litany of horrors that make up the last 50 years of US policy in the MidEast cannot justify 9/11. Nothing could. But it does explain where the attack came from, and where the support and sympathy for scum like bin Laden comes from. If you don't know why something happened, you don't have a chance in hell of preventing it from happening again.

As has been suggested before, you might be advised to enlighten yourself on the difference between explaining a phenomenon -- in this case, 9/11 -- and excusing it. I know that's not a Patriotically Correct distinction to make amongst Bush supporters, but I'm sure you can do it if you really try.

Or you could just fall back to your "duhh... Muslims BAD" explanations for this appalling mess we all find ourselves in. It's your choice, dude.

[ 13 May 2004: Message edited by: beluga2 ]


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 13 May 2004 03:06 AM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why were the FBI talking to Berg while in custody as a suspected terrorist?

And how about that timing?

And how about that "al queda" claim?

quote:
why was Mr. Berg in an American issued orange jump suit

Kurt Nimmo's take.

[ 13 May 2004: Message edited by: Jingles ]


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 13 May 2004 04:50 AM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:
[QB]Courage,

1. Yes the USA gives a great deal of money to Israel they also give a great amount to countries such as Egypt.


Does Egypt sit in illegal occupation of Palestinian territory?


quote:
4. The Saudies asked the Americans to leave and they did.

Before or after Sept. 11, 2001?

quote:
I feel that Courage's suggestion that the woes of the middle east are all about the "policy decissions of the USA" doesn't hold up.

Would that I made such a suggestion. In fact, I prepped for this idiomatic response with the caveat that there is a distinction between understanding causality chains and assigning moral values.

quote:
Your little comment about "spewing racist crap" is classic labeling used to avoid debate.

Actually, it really isn't when your comments are essentially a kind of White/Western Supremacism.

Imagine that I suggested that, say, black people were not prone to the same kind of critical thinking as white people....

That's precisely what you did.

Debate that, Jack-off.

[ 13 May 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Secret Agent Style
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2077

posted 13 May 2004 09:32 AM      Profile for Secret Agent Style        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:
No, I didn't suggest that by allowing Muslims to cross our borders and study at our schools to be a cause for 9/11.

Just in case you've forgotten, in response to "You mean like when the WTC bombings took place and few wanted to look at past foreign policy decisions as a possible motivation for the attackers?"

You wrote:

quote:
By the west allowing Muslims to come to college and learn engineering they were engaged in "foreign policy" decisions that caused well to do Saudies to fly planes into tall buildings?

By letting them travel back and forth between Europe and the USA they had committed a "foreign policy" decision so horrible as to justify 9/11?



Busted.

[ 13 May 2004: Message edited by: Andy Social ]


From: classified | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Jack01
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5211

posted 13 May 2004 11:33 AM      Profile for Jack01        Edit/Delete Post
Beluga2,

The point and context with regards to aid is that the USA gives aid to both Israel and Muslim countries. Some would like to give the impression that only Israel recieves aid. 2nd I never suggested that Egypt is a free country.

With regards to the "Arab Street" I can turn on CBC/CNN/BBC and see a protest of hundreds of arm pumping men react to the latest issues with Israel or the USA yet I can't remember CNN or the BBC showing a demonstration where the "Arab Street" is protesting their own governments with regards to freedom and democracy? It just strikes me as odd that almost on cue you can have a protest of thousands of men for anti-western stuff yet never ever see anyone questioning their own rulers?

The USA is happy to pay for oil from #1 supplier Mexico and #3 supplier Canada. Both are free countries. I don't think it would bother the USA to buy oil from any free country in the Middle East. The whole proping up despots for oil thing doesn't ring true.

The USA has been out of Iran for 25 years anything going on there is the fault of the Mullahs.

Courage, I dropped the white mans guilt thing a long time ago. You guys seem to have a thing for racism. You swing it around like a dead cat. "Islam" is a religon that a person of any race may practice. My criticism is with Islam a religon. It has knothing to do with any race of people.


From: Windsor, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 13 May 2004 12:26 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Just Islam, eh?

Which one of these bozos made negative comments about the "Arabs" in Indonesia? Was it Jacko or someone else?

By the way, Egypt may be a "Muslim" country, but its government is not "Muslim." The Muslim Brotherhood, (which itself doesn't speak for all Muslims) for example, is violently opposed to Mubarak's dictatorship.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 13 May 2004 02:16 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:

Courage, I dropped the white mans guilt thing a long time ago. You guys seem to have a thing for racism. You swing it around like a dead cat. "Islam" is a religon that a person of any race may practice. My criticism is with Islam a religon. It has knothing to do with any race of people.


This is a dinner-theatre's worth of semantic tap-dancing. Characterising a large group of people as inherently and generally (the distinction between genetics or social ideology as the main causal factor being really moot) unable to think critically, or to employ restraint, or to engage in self-reflection is a very strong assertion. I'm only asking you for evidence.

The word "racism" is often used to characterise this sort of broad-brush and wholly unsubstantiated smearing of groups of people. Whether the invidious comparison be on the grounds of 'race' as a specifically genetic concept, or as a signifier designating a clearly definable social/cultural group, really doesn't matter. If we consider how the word is commonly (and even academically) used it is evident that its stretches to cover both.

As such, your protest that my charge is mislaid because your definition does not fall into the specifically 'genetic' type of racism doesn't hold water. You know what was meant, and more poignantly, you haven't done a thing to counter my assertion. Instead you've headed for the sandbags and are trying to tie the argument up in ad hominem rhetoric about how all of 'us' have some kind of fetish for shouting 'racism' without evidence along with some semantic games about the precise meaning of 'racism'. So fine, I'll concede. If you'd rather, I could say 'discrimination on the grounds of religion', but that's too long. How about, instead of calling it 'racism' we call it a "really dumb statement".

So, you want evidence that you made a "really dumb statement"? Just so we don't forget, you said:

quote:
n the West we seem to self evaluate and self police even it means loosing face.

We feel compeled to analize and criticize ourselves. Loosing face and then trying to regain it seems to be a passtime in the west.


Your misuse (and mispelling) of the word pastime here is where the trouble starts. It would seem that you are suggesting that we in the West no longer participate in such activities as trying to 'regain face'. I draw this conclusion on the sympathetic assumption (I know, it's a big stretch) that you are being logically cogent with your first statement that people in 'the West' would rather self-evaluate and self-police and lose face than the opposite; a behaviour which 'Islamists' do participate in.

The implicit message is that 'we' are "compelled" to do one thing, but that 'Islamists' (which you still haven't defined, mind you - would that I said 'Christianists', it would bring up similar questions as to meaning) do not. This is a pretty broad characterisation of two groups of people. One (The West) is forced - by some factor - into self-critique, while the Other (Islamists) is forced - by some other factor - into some kind of irrational gang psychology which eschews self-reflection and criticism for "tit for tat" revenge; a behaviour what we Western sophisticates find oh-so-uncivilised....

Now, to make this fair, and so that no one can accuse anyone of unfairly shouting "really dumb statement", it's my turn to ask for evidence. Would you care to back this statement up with anything more substantial than the article you posted? It's nice that you found yourself a Muslim author in an attempt to couch the argument and make it seem alright (though below I'll tackle your (mis)use of the article) Do you have any arguments/evidence of your own (or attributed/accredited) that might elucidate and/or proove your contention that nearly a billion people (Islamists) are incapable of self-critical thought and are prone to irrational displays of revenge? Furthermore, could you butress this with some connective argument demonstrating that 'Islamists' are relatively less self-critical (as a social group, mind you) than we 'Westerners'.

Hell man, I'll even accept a certain amount of rhetoric, though I really would rather see some testable qualitative and quantitative evidence.

Furthermore, I take issue with your use of that article. The author of the article goes to some (albeit unsatisfactory to me) effort to define 'Islamists' as the adherents of a particular political/social/religious ideology which is NOT coextensive or symmetrical with Islam as a whole. Granted, he falls into a few old "really dumb" canards like 'The Arab Mind', etc...

You, on the other hand, have taken this word to mean an entire religious group. Such is the conclusion to be drawn from your statement, ""Islam" is a religon that a person of any race may practice. My criticism is with Islam a religon. It has knothing to do with any race of people.""

It seems that you like to confuse the terms 'Islam' and 'Islamist' and have falsely used the posted article to support your position.
Care to clarify/justify your use of the article in this fashion?

Moreover, if your criticism is of 'Islam (as) a religion', we can discuss theology, if you'd like. I have a feeling you aren't very familiar with the source material, however.

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 13 May 2004 03:26 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Mandos:
I believe that some of this is highly calculated, in order to ensure that the American public remains naively hostile to Muslims. Remember that these groups, like Christian apocalyptics, want to induce confrontations.

Perhaps. Or it is calculated to scare the bejeezus out of the American public and create a popular backlash stateside that will help topple Bush and/or force a withdrawl of U.S. troops. Remember Somalia?

It also might be that there is something deeper going on. I mean, this guy was detained for awhile on suspicion of being on the 'wrong side'. Perhaps he did have some contacts with 'them' and this is a message to the U.S. about what will be done to informants who talk.

A communications technology guy (cell phone systems, etc.) is a very valuable dude. Perhaps he was selling his services to both sides...

We'll never really know. Much like Daniel Pearl, the book is out.


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jack01
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5211

posted 14 May 2004 02:41 AM      Profile for Jack01        Edit/Delete Post
Courage,

My thoughts on Islam pre 9/11 was that is was a Monothesic God without having to believe in the virgin birth of Jesus. Like Christianity but different.

The five pillars seem straight forward. Innocent enough I thought.

Post 9/11 I started to read up on it.

In Christianity you have the family. God/Father Jesus/Son and Mother/Mary. Again, believe it if you like.

I couldn't find a Mother figure in Islam. Its not there. What is there?

Islam for me boiled down to the angry male ego of a 19 year old male. Anal Retentive. Narcissitic.

The Quran is the word of God via the angel Gabriel to Mohammed. If you believe in Islam you submit to the will of God. Believers will experience both spiritual and physical pleasure for all eternity.

Lets play Freud. On earth you must submit and if you do on your death you will receive spiritual and physical pleasure for all eternity?

What does submit mean? If your a woman in Afghanistan it means wearing a blue tent. Why the big need to submit? Kind of sounds Orwelian to me. And why is the deal back loaded. Why can't things be fun on earth and in heaven?

So by submitting you can obtain Real Happiness and Inner Peace according to Islam.

Why is Mohammed the last prophet? Seems convienent doesn't it. This is the "no changes rule" It doesn't matter that its been over 1400 years since Mohammed was alive. 2400 years from now Mohammed will still be the final prophet.

Back to the male ego thing. Islam has the one and only God and the final prophet. The Muslim God is more like a "Super" God. All knowing. The Muslim God actually covers the entire universe. Not just Earth the whole Universe.

Now this is where the Freud stuff comes in.

Your a Muslim. Your a belivier living the good life. How in your mind do you reconcile the sucess and power of the USA/Europe/Israel.

As a Muslim according to the Quran your the stuff. Untill you step out of your world and see how the other 4/5ths live.

What crack or mental gynastics does your brain have to go through to balance the fact that the Middle East compared to any other part of the world is far behind?

How does your belief of Predestination explain your circumstance.

So, the Quran is the word of God and it basically the borrowed Jewish/Chrisitian/Zorastian stuff. But there are the Sunnah which are comprised of "Hadiths" this is where Mohammed got to add his two cents to Islam. This is where the angry male ego kicks in.

This is the stuff that gets "non-belivievers" sent to hellfire. This is an important point. In Islam you have those who believe in Islam and those who don't. Bad things happen to those who don't believe.

This is where you also get the great rewards stuff for fighting "religous wars".

This is also where you get the kill the unbelievers wherever you find them.

According to the rules as long as Israel is there this constitutes an oppression of Muslims.

Not just Palestinians but all Muslims.

So today you have Iraq with pictures of men on dog leashes. For this Nick Berg gets his head cut off.

But to sit here and think its just Israel is naive. Its Chechnya, East Timor, Sudan, Nigeria, Kashmir, Kosovo, Armenia, Cyprus, etc, etc.

Back to Freud and humiliation. How does the Muslim reslove itself to the fact that Israel "just a bunch of Jews" has kicked their ass 2 or 3 times. It can't. So the suicide bombings go on and a false negotiation for peace goes on.

The funny part is that the Islamists consider other Muslims "moderates" as apostates. The penality for being an apostate in Islam is death.

This is one of the best tricks of Islam. Quran 2, 194. "And one who attacks you, attack him in like manner as he attacked you." Islam has the ability at any time to justify any action.

Mr Berg a Jew was and could be killed because of Israel and its fight with Palestine.

The Quran is Rationalization and Justification raised to a high art.

Al-Qaeda and the Islamist and the Jihadis can and will take the Quran in any context they see fit.

If your a moderate Muslim in Algeria watch out.
The Jihadis, Islamista and Al-Qaeda consider you an apostate and as such can justify cutting your head off.

If your an actual non-believer anywhere in the world recognize what the Islamist Al-Qaeda and Jihadis are willing to do to their own people and wise up.

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Jack01 ]

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Jack01 ]

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Jack01 ]


From: Windsor, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 14 May 2004 04:07 AM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
You DARE bring up East Timor?

quote:
Why is Mohammed the last prophet? Seems convienent doesn't it.
Like Jesus Christ (who was, incidentally, sired by someone other than his mother's husband - since Freud and motherhood are issues with you I thought I'd mention it) is the Messiah? Jewish believers might tell you they find that concept too convenient.

One last point; if you'd rather not come across as an illiterate buffoon, please learn the difference between "your" and "you're."


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 14 May 2004 04:50 AM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry, Jack, but your 'theology' is anything but, and your 'Freud' is even worse.

One interesting point - which also attests to the speciousness of your arguments - was your assertion about the 'Mother' figure in Islamic theology. Do you find it equally 'anal retentive' and 'narcissistic' that a 'Mother' cannot be found in the essential Judaic teachings? What of Buddhism? I mean, afterall, how can you base your life on the ravings of some upper-class n'er-do-well who did little more than plant himself comfortably in the shade of a tree for a little while....

Anyway, your post is essentially a heap of half-baked and unsubstantiated assertions tacked together in such a way as to be essentially inarguable. The effort necessary for the deconstruction and contextualising needed to get through your serpentine logic is beyond me. So, I guess you win by default. I'm just not going to bother.

I note well that you still have not adequately evinced and defended your earlier assertions about 'Islamists' and the 'West' and the relative capacity for self-reflection, etc. Still less has your recent foray into 'theology' shown any even theoretical ideological connection between the 'Islamists' supposed lack of self-critique and Islamic theology.

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Courage ]


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 14 May 2004 05:05 AM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
You DARE bring up East Timor?

Yeah, he does. Amazing. I guess his notion is that Indonesia killed vast numbers of people not because it was a brutal military dictatorship, but because it's a Muslim country. Well yabba-dabba-doo.

Maybe Jack-o can suggest that as a defense strategy for Suharto if he's ever charged with crimes against humanity: "Islam made me do it!"

Oh, and presumably all the leaders of those "Christian" countries that backed Indonesia's slaughter (US, UK, Canada, Australia, etc.) are actually Muslims in disguise, huh?

Why are we bothering with this guy again? I think I've had enough; I don't want to use up my entire year's quota of these all at once.


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 May 2004 08:03 AM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
eah, he does. Amazing. I guess his notion is that Indonesia killed vast numbers of people not because it was a brutal military dictatorship, but because it's a Muslim country. Well yabba-dabba-doo.


So when the US slaughetred 100's of thousands of Filipinos, was that because of their Judeao/Christian background or because they were secretly Islamic?

Stalin? Hitler? Mao? Pol Pot? Papa Doc? Somoza? All Islamic?

I don't know why you bother with him either? I am sure he has a white power meeting to attend somewhere.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 14 May 2004 01:56 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
As a by-the-way, the Prime Minister of East Timor (Mari Alkatiri) is a Muslim. The Indonesian general who presided over the invasion and genocide in East Timor was a Catholic (Benny Murdani). Only an idiot would call what happened in East Timor a religious conflict.
From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Courage
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3980

posted 14 May 2004 01:58 PM      Profile for Courage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
One last barb, for laughs...

Jack, you aver that, "The Muslim God actually covers the entire universe. Not just Earth the whole Universe."

And the Christian God, and the Judaic God are different how? Last I checked the God of Catholics and Lutherans alike has pretty much full purview over everything and anything....

Like I said, your theology is a little weak.


From: Earth | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Jack01
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5211

posted 14 May 2004 03:36 PM      Profile for Jack01        Edit/Delete Post
Courage,

To have a monotheisic God. All powerful and all knowing should be enough.

The Islamic monotheisic God is God but he is more powerful than the monthesic God that came before.

What?

Its the equivalent to my Dad is stronger than your Dad.

The psychology of Mohammed being the final prophet is also the same as the Islamic God being more powerful then God was pre-Islam.

Islam has both the final prophet. -Mohammed- But they also have a stronger monothesic God than Jews or Christians.

** For: Wingnut. Not different just new and improved.**

This is the equivalent of calling infinitti and your buddy gets you with infinitti + 1.

The funny thing is even with a SuperDuper God Muslims have to get on hand and knee bend over and prostrate themselves towards Mecca 5 times a
day.

Islam is about submission and as a reminded you need to pray 5 times a day to get into heaven.

Islam presents to me as being anal retentive with neurotic tendicies capeable of violent psychotic episodes.

Again, its like a nasty male ego. Watch out or else.

Now if you want to play the "fair" game is the Catholic church run by men? Yes. Does the Catholic church have a checkered past full of violence. Yes. Can anyone explain any of the recent scandals? No.

However, if your living in a Western Christian nation your free. If your living in a Muslim nation the chance is higher that your not free.

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Jack01 ]

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Jack01 ]


From: Windsor, ON | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 May 2004 03:37 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, and the God of Jesus and Mohammed and the Jews is the God of Abraham. Or in words that might cause Jack convulsions, the very same God.

Yep, they all worship the same deity. I hope He has a sense of humor.


From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Jingles
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3322

posted 14 May 2004 03:43 PM      Profile for Jingles     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I get it now.

Jack01= Jack Chick


From: At the Delta of the Alpha and the Omega | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hinterland
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4014

posted 14 May 2004 03:47 PM      Profile for Hinterland        Edit/Delete Post
Yay...Chick's got two new ones. Check them out here and here.

The first one is a scream!

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Hinterland ]


From: Québec/Ontario | Registered: Apr 2003  |  IP: Logged
Mr. Magoo
guilty-pleasure
Babbler # 3469

posted 14 May 2004 03:52 PM      Profile for Mr. Magoo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hehe. Yes, I think I can hear Newbie screaming from here.

I guess what's sometimes known as "gaydar" is nothing more than checking to see if a person has a little demon living on their head.


From: ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°`°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø,¸_¸,ø¤°°¤ø, | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 14 May 2004 04:01 PM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"This better be good, or I'm going to jump!"

I'm confused. Why didn't Jimmy jump? It certainly wasn't good.


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
liminal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5617

posted 14 May 2004 04:17 PM      Profile for liminal        Edit/Delete Post
Well, if the Western nations were still Christian, you'd be still going out Saturday night for a bonfire show where non-believers are burnt for dissent, ie, you want elections, you are commiting blasphemy, how do you like your heretic? Well done obviously.Same applies to any country based on religion. So Christian countries are by no means more democratic than Muslim or Jewish countries.
This all brings us to a fallacious argument: It is often said in association Christian, Jewish, and moderate Muslim abhor violence for example, which implies that a Christian is defacto moderate, and so is a Jew, but a Muslim has to be moderate to indulge in common sense. this is really sinister, because the correct usage would be moderate Christian, moderate Jew, Moderate Muslim, and moderate Atheist or what have you, or extremist Christian, extremist Jew, and extremist Muslim, even extremist Atheist or whatever.

From: the hole I just crawled out of | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
Cueball
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4790

posted 14 May 2004 04:53 PM      Profile for Cueball   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Anyone catch this:

Bizarre New Link In Berg Murder

quote:
But in the wake of Berg's gruesome murder, it becomes a stranger-than-fiction coincidence — an American who inadvertently gave away his computer password to one suspected al Qaeda operative, Moussaoui, is later murdered by another notorious al Qaeda operative, Zarqawi.

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Cueball ]


From: Out from under the bridge and out for a stroll | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
mjollnir
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5618

posted 14 May 2004 08:26 PM      Profile for mjollnir        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Jack01:
Courage,

...However, if your living in a Western Christian nation your free. If your living in a Muslim nation the chance is higher that your not free.

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Jack01 ]

[ 14 May 2004: Message edited by: Jack01 ]


No! If you're living in a Western SECULAR nation you're free. I doubt very much the level of freedom you'll enjoy in a Christian Western Nation, least of all the freedom of religious belief (1492 comes to mind as a date).

--
"Islam is about submission and as a reminded you need to pray 5 times a day to get into heaven. "
--
Yes Humility is terribly overrated in these days, only arrogance pays. And besides, so long as you've mentioned this pillar, how about charity being another pillar of islam? Or is that so wrong too?

--
"slam presents to me as being anal retentive with neurotic tendicies capeable of violent psychotic episodes. "
--

Goodness! The Catholic Encyclopedia's last edition was in 1907, I thought people had stopped using it as a theological source!


From: NY | Registered: May 2004  |  IP: Logged
drgoodword
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3214

posted 16 May 2004 02:12 PM      Profile for drgoodword   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The staff at The Onion is writing mainstream news again:

Powell criticizes Arab governments: Secretary of state says response to Berg killing insufficient

quote:
WASHINGTON - AP - 16 May 2004 - Secretary of State Colin Powell scolded Arab governments Sunday for not expressing more outrage over the videotaped beheading of an American civilian in Iraq.

(snip)

Powell, interviewed from Jordan, said he has told Arab leaders, “When you are outraged at what happened at the prison, you should be equally, doubly outraged at what happened to Mr. Berg.”


Goebbels was an amateur.


From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
al-Qa'bong
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3807

posted 16 May 2004 03:32 PM      Profile for al-Qa'bong   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm outraged at those dopes who killed Mr. Berg because they went out of their way to undermine the Iraqi - and by extension, Arab - national resistance.

Iraqis and Arabs lost a lot of support when those images were shown - just as the USA lost a lot of credibility when the Abu Ghraib torture photos were revealed. How stupid was that? The timing couldn't have been worse.

Those religious freaks are doing nothing but damage.


From: Saskatchistan | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 16 May 2004 03:34 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Apparently Powell is carrying one of those new high-tech "Outrage-o-meters" with him. I heard that so far, none of the arab leaders has registered more than 1.13 on the Abu Ghraib standard outrage scale.
From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
beluga2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3838

posted 16 May 2004 03:38 PM      Profile for beluga2     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I thought of a few stirring patriotic slogans for 'Mericans:

"America -- at least we don't behead people on camera."

"America -- we use 30% less brutality than al-Qaeda."

"America -- we PROSECUTE our torturers."


From: vancouvergrad, BCSSR | Registered: Mar 2003  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 May 2004 10:56 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
BABBLE - we close our long threads!
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca