PDA

View Full Version : So Why Isn't the News Media.....


Snag
06-17-2007, 11:16 PM
calling the Hamas take over a civil war? They were quick to use that description in another war that we all know about.

hcap
06-18-2007, 06:36 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/15/AR2007061502027.html

What's Going On in Gaza?

By Warren Bass
Sunday, June 17, 2007; Page B05

Civil war: That's what both sides were calling last week's sharp Palestinian-vs.-Palestinian clashes in the Gaza Strip. So who was fighting whom, and how did this rivalry get so murderously bitter?

Snag
06-18-2007, 06:59 AM
Thanks. That is the first time I saw it printed that way.

boxcar
06-18-2007, 08:30 AM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/15/AR2007061502027.html

What's Going On in Gaza?

By Warren Bass
Sunday, June 17, 2007; Page B05

Civil war: That's what both sides were calling last week's sharp Palestinian-vs.-Palestinian clashes in the Gaza Strip. So who was fighting whom, and how did this rivalry get so murderously bitter?

Ahh...a civil war being fought by believers in that great and awesome "religion of peace". :rolleyes: I wonder when Muslims kill one another if they get visitation rights with any virgins on the other side?

Boxcar

Tom
06-18-2007, 09:09 AM
I'm wondering where are these virgins are coming from?
They can't be recycled, can they? :rolleyes:

boxcar
06-18-2007, 11:46 AM
I'm wondering where are these virgins are coming from?
They can't be recycled, can they? :rolleyes:

But if they're recycled, can they really be called "virgins"? :bang:

On second thought, though, if these virgins only submit themselves to cunnilingus and perform fellatio on men, then according to one notable and distinquished adulterer of our times, this doesn't count as sex. If he's right, then these could well be recycled virgins. :rolleyes:

Boxcar

toetoe
06-18-2007, 01:44 PM
Gents,

I have a call in to trainer Pete Vestal regarding this virgin thing. So far it's just a virginal monologue, as Pistol Pete has not responded. The more I ask ...

bigmack
06-18-2007, 02:21 PM
I'm wondering where are these virgins are coming from?
They can't be recycled, can they? :rolleyes:
When they run out, a little dab'll do 'em.

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/oliveoil.jpg

hcap
06-19-2007, 05:24 AM
Civil war with only one virgin involved and another "religion of peace"....


Between 1969 and 2001, 3,523 people were killed as a result of the Troubles.

Approximately 60% of the victims were killed by republicans, 30% by loyalists and 10% by the British, Irish and Northern Irish security forces.

Responsible party
Republican Paramilitary Groups 2055
Loyalist Paramilitary Groups 1020
Security Forces 368
Persons unknown 80


Additional estimated statistics on the conflict

Injury 47,000
Shooting 37,000
Armed robbery 22,500
Persons imprisoned for paramilitary offences 19,600
Bombing and attempted bombing 16,200
Arson 2,200

hcap
06-19-2007, 06:18 AM
Religious Wars? Civil wars? Gee seems that sort of stuff used to happen all da time. Let's stroll down memory lane.

Oh oh, not the "religion of peace", another runner up for that title

* 15th century: Crusades against Hussites, thousands slain.
* 1538 pope Paul III declared Crusade against apostate England and all English as slaves of Church (fortunately had not power to go into action).
* 1568 Spanish Inquisition Tribunal ordered extermination of 3 million rebels in (then Spanish) Netherlands. Thousands were actually slain.
* 1572 In France about 20,000 Huguenots were killed on command of pope Pius V. Until 17th century 200,000 flee.
* 17th century: Catholics slay Gaspard de Coligny, a Protestant leader. After murdering him, the Catholic mob mutilated his body, "cutting off his head, his hands, and his genitals... and then dumped him into the river [...but] then, deciding that it was not worthy of being food for the fish, they hauled it out again [... and] dragged what was left ... to the gallows of Montfaulcon, 'to be meat and carrion for maggots and crows'."
* 17th century: Catholics sack the city of Magdeburg/Germany: roughly 30,000 Protestants were slain. "In a single church fifty women were found beheaded," reported poet Friedrich Schiller, "and infants still sucking the breasts of their lifeless mothers."
* 17th century 30 years' war (Catholic vs. Protestant): at least 20% of population decimated, mostly in Germany.

.................................................. ............................................
Another source on the 30 years' war states

......The Thirty Year's War reduced the population of Germany by 30-40%. Somewhere between six million (6,000,000) and fourteen million (14,000,000) people died. Peace was finally negotiated in Westphalia in 1648.

hcap
06-19-2007, 06:45 AM
Now you would think this stuff has nothing to do with our history, wouldn't you. Sorry all you bunkies, but it is because of the extermination of large numbers of native North and South Americans that we now are here.

Some by disease, some by war, some exterminated outright by good, God-fearing, religious holier than thou Christians.

Democide is a term created by political scientist R. J. Rummel in order to create a broader concept than the legal definition of genocide. It has also been used by many other scholars.[5] Democide is defined as "The murder of any person or people by a government, including genocide, politicide, and mass murder."

Our Christian attitudes towards Native populations

American Holocaust
by David Stannard
Oxford University Press, 1992


p247
... one of the preconditions for the Spanish and Anglo-American genocides against the native peoples of the Americas was a public definition of the natives as inherently and permanently-that is, as racially-inferior beings. To the conquering Spanish, the Indians more specifically were defined as natural slaves, as subhuman beasts of burden, because that fit the use to which the Spanish wished to put them, and because such a definition was explicable by appeal to ancient Christian and European truths-through Aquinas and on back to Aristotle. Since the colonizing British, and subsequently the Americans, had little use for Indian servitude, but only wanted Indian land, they appealed to other Christian and European sources of wisdom to justify their genocide: the Indians were Satan's helpers, they were lascivious and murderous wild men of the forest, they were bears, they were wolves, they were vermin. Allegedly having shown themselves to be beyond conversion to Christian or to civil life-and with little British or American need for them as slaves-in this case, straightforward mass killing of the Indians was deemed the only thing to do.
***

....At the dawn of the fifteenth century, Spanish conquistadors and priests presented the Indians they encountered with a choice: either give up your religion and culture and land and independence, swearing allegiance "as vassals" to the Catholic Church and the Spanish Crown, or suffer "all the mischief and damage" that the European invaders choose to inflict upon you. It was called the requerimiento.
.................................................. .......................................
OOOPs, white mans' burden sure is a heavy, heavy burden.

ljb
06-19-2007, 06:47 AM
Surely this must be a mistake. Christians would never do harm to someone based on religious differences.

hcap
06-19-2007, 06:59 AM
Nah, God is on their side. Funny how God chooses who to back in say the 30 year war. Or in Ireland.

Give me that ole' time judgmental, holier than thou, in the process of removin' the timber from our eyes, religion. If the renaissance had not occurred and our founders did not steered us away from religious decrees and rationalizations, we would still be afightin' who's God is tougher. Islam needs some non religious expansion.

Christianity grew out of it's acceptance of savagery thru reason. Not because it is inherently better than Islam.

robert99
06-19-2007, 03:54 PM
Our Christian attitudes towards Native populations

American Holocaust
by David Stannard
Oxford University Press, 1992


p247
... one of the preconditions for the Spanish and Anglo-American genocides against the native peoples of the Americas was a public definition of the natives as inherently and permanently-that is, as racially-inferior beings. To the conquering Spanish, the Indians more specifically were defined as natural slaves, as subhuman beasts of burden, because that fit the use to which the Spanish wished to put them, and because such a definition was explicable by appeal to ancient Christian and European truths-through Aquinas and on back to Aristotle. Since the colonizing British, and subsequently the Americans, had little use for Indian servitude, but only wanted Indian land, they appealed to other Christian and European sources of wisdom to justify their genocide: the Indians were Satan's helpers, they were lascivious and murderous wild men of the forest, they were bears, they were wolves, they were vermin. Allegedly having shown themselves to be beyond conversion to Christian or to civil life-and with little British or American need for them as slaves-in this case, straightforward mass killing of the Indians was deemed the only thing to do.
***

.................................................. .......................................
OOOPs, white mans' burden sure is a heavy, heavy burden.

hcap,

Not disagreeing at all with your argument.
However, as far as the British Colonials were concerned they respected and at same time lived in fear of indian attack. British enslaved some of their own people from prisons and the slums of London to work the plantations etc before the times of the African slaves. They respected the indians, their knowledge of how to survive in this "wilderness" and their hunting skills for use in the fur trade as well as their warrior skills, Pochohuntas travelled to UK etc - certainly did not look down on them.

http://www.jamestown.abc-clio.com/ReferenceDisplay.aspx?entryid=1090098

They attempted to live in peace with the signing of the Iroquois Confedercy, which lasted into the French-Indian War. With Native Indians sought after and fighting on both sides. That war was also partly religious about protection of the British Protestants from allegiance to the Pope if the Catholic French won.
Not wishing to pay taxes for that war fought on their behalf and running the expanded area east of the Mississippi, protection from the Indians on the losing side and running Canada, lead to the War of Independence where decisively the French now sided with the patriots.
The British were long gone before the push West and the major decimation of Indian tribes and their prarie lands.

JPinMaryland
06-19-2007, 11:19 PM
THe democide concept is interesting but the def'n seems rather circular as he defines it as "murder" by a state, etc. Murder is usually defined as unlawful killing, per ancient Hebrew law or whatever other source you want to look at.

Which makes the whole thing circulas. Was the bombing of Hiroshima unlawful?" Sort of begs the question doesnt it?

perhaps a better notion would be to just say any taking of life caused by: governments, political parties, religious groups, corporations, ideologies, followers of a family, etc.

I would make it broader to include anything based on constructs, political parties, nations, companies, all these things are concepts that can only exist as long as people believe in them. The moment people stop believing in them they will disappear.

hcap
06-20-2007, 07:31 AM
Bottom line is that european Christians violated their own precepts and even justified wholesale extermination to suit the call of Manmmon.

Not only fighting among themselves-a long history of religious wars and civil wars-but an endorsement of imperialism, colonialism, and expansionist policies. Frequently destroying other countries and cultures.

The fact remains that the American Indian is no longer a viable culture.
The population has been both systematically and inadvertently decimated.

Other peoples were also considered sub-human in our expansion from border to border. The slave trade was endorsed by many a good Christian both here and abroad. And yes I do know many Arabs were involved as well.

Religion is only as good as it's practitioners.

betchatoo
06-20-2007, 09:38 AM
hcap:
As much as I believe that religion is responsible for more wars and destruction than any other reason, I have to say, with the exception of Ireland, the occasional abortion clinic or killing someone for daring to be homosexual, Christians have pretty much stopped waging religious wars in the 20th/21st century (although under the Patriot Act it seems some remnant of the Inquisition remains). I wish Muslims would follow suit.

lsbets
06-20-2007, 10:02 AM
Bingo bet. While I have not run across anyone who will try to deny the ugly moments involving Christianity throughout history, Christianity has evolved. To try and justify the actions of Islam by pointing to the actions of Christians no earlier than a century ago is insane. We are talking about what is happenning today. It is also important to remember, that while Christianity is a religion that preaches love and peace (and has not always lived up to the message), Islam is living up to the message of Mohammed - conquest and slaughter.

chickenhead
06-20-2007, 10:36 AM
I don't know where the idea comes from that amidst everything that is going on in the world, defending Islam as a useful and/or worthwhile religion is a top priority for non-muslim westerners. It seems to me that defending Western culture should hold that spot. If I have to choose between western culture and Islamic culture, I choose ours, it's better, in pretty much every way. Ever notice that all the multiculturalists live in the West? Isn't that odd?

ljb
06-20-2007, 11:43 AM
It is also important to remember, that while Christianity is a religion that preaches love and peace (and has not always lived up to the message), Islam is living up to the message of Mohammed - conquest and slaughter.
Parsed your note as this is the part I question. Have you been to any Fundamentalist services lately. Last one I was at the pastor sure was not preaching love and peace. He was the good old fire and brimstone type. Talking about gays he quoted from the bible "Trees that do not bear fruit should be cut off at the roots and dashed into the fire." He also said those that disagree with him would be grabbed by the throat and held against the wall and if they returned next week they would find their chair outside the church. And a regular member who I had attended with exclaimed to me after the services. "Well I am glad he was mellow today, I thought he might upset you if he got into one of his rages."
ps it was the Christians that got this war-mongering president elected.

ljb
06-20-2007, 11:49 AM
I don't know where the idea comes from that amidst everything that is going on in the world, defending Islam as a useful and/or worthwhile religion is a top priority for non-muslim westerners. It seems to me that defending Western culture should hold that spot. If I have to choose between western culture and Islamic culture, I choose ours, it's better, in pretty much every way. Ever notice that all the multiculturalists live in the West? Isn't that odd?
I can only speak for myself but, I am not defending any Religion. As for cultures I prefer western culture to mid-east culture but, I would not want them to force their culture on us and suppose they feel the same.

chickenhead
06-20-2007, 12:22 PM
I would not want them to force their culture on us and suppose they feel the same.

I would, if I thought it would be successful. I have a hard time opposing the imposing of womens rights on a woman, or imposing minority rights on a minority, or imposing the right to hold elections on the people, or imposing limitations on the rights of the state versus the people.

I say thank God Britain imposed its culture and form of government around the world when they had the chance. For all of the negatives the world is a much better place because of it.

I am not saying it is necessarily practicle or a good idea to try, but the idea that liberal secular democracy vis a vis Islamic populations is an impositiion is only a measure of their backwardness, nothing more.

lsbets
06-20-2007, 01:54 PM
Parsed your note as this is the part I question. Have you been to any Fundamentalist services lately. Last one I was at the pastor sure was not preaching love and peace. He was the good old fire and brimstone type. Talking about gays he quoted from the bible "Trees that do not bear fruit should be cut off at the roots and dashed into the fire." He also said those that disagree with him would be grabbed by the throat and held against the wall and if they returned next week they would find their chair outside the church. And a regular member who I had attended with exclaimed to me after the services. "Well I am glad he was mellow today, I thought he might upset you if he got into one of his rages."
ps it was the Christians that got this war-mongering president elected.

Did he kill anyone as a part of the service? He might be an idiot who doesn't understand the religion he is preaching for, but that doesn't change the religion he thinks he understands.

Greyfox
06-20-2007, 02:19 PM
Nah, Islam needs some non religious expansion.

.

hcap, You say "Islam needs some non religious expansion."

Islam is a religion. How can a religion expand non-religiously?
Any expansion of Islam will expand the religion by definition.

ljb
06-20-2007, 03:19 PM
Did he kill anyone as a part of the service? He might be an idiot who doesn't understand the religion he is preaching for, but that doesn't change the religion he thinks he understands.
Don't know if he killed anyone. Do know no one was killed during service I attended. Some there may have been involved in abortion clinic bombing but even that is conjecture. Point I am trying to make is there are Christians that do preach violence vs. love and kindness.

ljb
06-20-2007, 03:24 PM
I would, if I thought it would be successful. I have a hard time opposing the imposing of womens rights on a woman, or imposing minority rights on a minority, or imposing the right to hold elections on the people, or imposing limitations on the rights of the state versus the people.

I say thank God Britain imposed its culture and form of government around the world when they had the chance. For all of the negatives the world is a much better place because of it.

I am not saying it is necessarily practicle or a good idea to try, but the idea that liberal secular democracy vis a vis Islamic populations is an impositiion is only a measure of their backwardness, nothing more.
Womans rights, minority rights or elections are a product of our culture. (Abortion ?) Currently they are not part of the culture of Islam.
As for limiting the rights of state versus people. have you read the Patriot Act ?

delayjf
06-20-2007, 03:27 PM
Hcap,

To be fair, we should also examine the genocide committed by the Secular minded as well? And these happened this century.

Jewish Holocaust - Nazi Germany
Russian Purges - Communist
Chinese Purges - Communist
Killing Fields – Khmer Rough Communist Party.

Tom
06-20-2007, 04:04 PM
Did he kill anyone as a part of the service? He might be an idiot who doesn't understand the religion he is preaching for, but that doesn't change the religion he thinks he understands.

And unlike the islamics, when they do get out of line and try to act out thier hatred, WE as a nation swat them back down right away. WE even passed hate crimes laws to specifically deal with this kind of stuff. He prays to the same God many of us do, but we do not support his interpretations and do not allow him to intimidate us when he preaches them.

That, Ljb, is the bottom line. We can allow free speech and not worry about it.

GaryG
06-20-2007, 04:09 PM
I say thank God Britain imposed its culture and form of government around the world when they had the chance. For all of the negatives the world is a much better place because of it.This is quite true. For example, South Africa used to be a safe place to visit. Granted it was run by an apartheid govt but it was still safe. The country is virtually lawless at this point, thanks Mr Mandella, and I could not imagine ever going there again.

46zilzal
06-20-2007, 04:15 PM
This is quite true. For example, South Africa used to be a safe place to visit. Granted it was run by an apartheid govt but it was still safe. The country is virtually lawless at this point, thanks Mr Mandella, and I could not imagine ever going there again.
Fascist countries are usually safe if you are the right color or ethnic group.

chickenhead
06-20-2007, 04:23 PM
we can thank Britain for Canada, the US, Australia, India, New Zealand, Hong Kong as well as various other well functioning governments. Some former colonies, like Pakistan, chose to go a different route. Bad choice.

GaryG
06-20-2007, 04:34 PM
Fascist countries are usually safe if you are the right color or ethnic group.Safer than those run by savages.....Hey Trevor, got an opinion on this?

PaceAdvantage
06-21-2007, 02:02 AM
ps it was the Christians that got this war-mongering president elected.

What percentage of the US population is Christian? See how silly your statement is?


ps. this president isn't war-mongering ENOUGH...which is why Iraq is still a burden.

hcap
06-21-2007, 05:42 AM
As USUAL you denigrate an entire religion by some practitioners. The whole religion. Youse guys were going on and on about the religion of peace in QUOTATION marks. Chuckling about virgins, and as usual missing the point. That's what I responded to.

I simply pointed out that Christianity has a history of atrocities equal and probably much worse than Islam.

Previously in other posts I have stated that yes, right now extremist Muslims are a greater threat than extremist of other religions. Let me stipulate to that once again.

Yes right now EXTREME FUNDAMENTALIST of the Islamic nomenclature are much worse than those of the CHRISTIAN kind.

Christianity has moved on due to non religious influences. The re-birth of reason , the Age of Enlightenment shook up buying into religious dogma and with it the growth of technology. True a double edged sword, but nevertheless counting how many angels fitting the pinhead, gave way to actual counting.

There was a "Golden Age of Islam"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_Golden_Age

"During the Islamic Golden Age (fl. 622 AD - 1258 AD in Gregorian calendar; or 1 AH - 656 AH in Islamic calendar), scholars and engineers of the Islamic world contributed enormously to philosophy, science, and technology, both by preserving and building upon earlier traditions and by adding their own inventions and innovations. Scientific and intellectual achievements blossomed in the Golden Age, and passed on to Europe to be expanded upon in the European Renaissance."

Other influences and historical events reversed most of the achievements during this period. Islam, much more advanced than the Europeans eventually took the back seat. Cultures rise and fall due to many factors. The inherent good or evil of a religion is unknowable-particularly to the proponents of another religion. Boxcar, Tom, Toetoe and Bigmack cackling about rewards of heavenly virgins is utter stupidity.

Just imagine the "Rapture" competing with heavenly virgins as a world view to live your live by. Both have affected feeble minds.

ljb
06-21-2007, 08:33 AM
What percentage of the US population is Christian? See how silly your statement is?


ps. this president isn't war-mongering ENOUGH...which is why Iraq is still a burden.
pa,
If you don't believe the fundamentalist Christians were the block that put Bush in the Whitehouse, you are kidding yourself.
As for not being war-mongering enough. Tell that to the troops. Now if you were to say he is not a good commander in chief we would be in agreement.
Getting back to the topic of this thread here is a link showing how our government is supporting Iran and other countries in the area. Check out this link. This news story was on both CNN and Fox but never got legs.
http://www.current.tv/watch/22026443?s1=topVids

robert99
06-21-2007, 11:15 AM
hcap,

Your views are exactly the way I see it.
I have lived in Muslim countries and they have been the most warm and hospital people I have ever met. Their culture is far different, but so is their history.
I also understand how some of the Muslim youth are being mislead by the evil of others who absolutely distort the Koran and world politics for their own miserable ends. There are a minority of so called Christians just as evil who also distort the Bible with their hatred so it comes out the opposite to its true meaning. One is the "Reverend" Ian Paisley in Northern Ireland.

Suff
06-21-2007, 12:23 PM
Any God that can be killed, should be.

delayjf
06-21-2007, 01:29 PM
Any God that can be killed, should be.

Well, that would not apply to mine. However, I... am in danger. :cool:

Tom
06-21-2007, 02:17 PM
What about us demigods? Or is that druids? I never can remember!:lol:

PaceAdvantage
06-22-2007, 02:41 AM
pa,
If you don't believe the fundamentalist Christians were the block that put Bush in the Whitehouse, you are kidding yourself.

You didn't say FUNDAMENTALIST in your prior reply. You simply said CHRISTIANS.

As you know, Hcap wouldn't want you to "denigrate an entire religion by some practitioners." You can thank me later.

JPinMaryland
06-22-2007, 01:04 PM
well tell me what percentage of Bush's vote was from Christians? You seem to make a big deal that America may not be totally Christian but Gawd (Christ?) only knows people who believe in stuff like religion are also the same folks who are willing to believe they all belong to a geographic entity with imaginary boundries.

PaceAdvantage
06-23-2007, 03:26 AM
well tell me what percentage of Bush's vote was from Christians?

Not sure who this is addressed to, but I'll add that the percentage of Bush's votes from Christians was likely quite similar to the percentage of Kerry votes from Christians, considering Christians make up approx 80% of the population in the United States.

ljb
06-23-2007, 07:52 AM
You didn't say FUNDAMENTALIST in your prior reply. You simply said CHRISTIANS.

As you know, Hcap wouldn't want you to "denigrate an entire religion by some practitioners." You can thank me later.
Splitting hairs now hey.

PaceAdvantage
06-24-2007, 05:14 PM
Splitting hairs now hey.

Just following the protocol established by Hcap.