"I have been a Muslim all my life and I've never heard about Shariah law"

[Heracles 417]

Find me 1 example from this year where you have 1 person or 1 group of a religion (non-Muslim) carrying out an act of terror that kills 40 or more people of another religious group (non-Muslim). Better yet see if you can find 1 example. I'll make it easier, an act of terror that killed 2 or more people...

Wednesday, October 13, 2010

Explosion at Shiite Protest Kills at Least 40 in Pakistan

ISLAMABAD, Pakistan — A blast ripped through a Shiite protest, the second such attack in three days, in the southwestern Pakistani city of Quetta on Friday, killing at least 40 people and wounding 80, police and rescue officials said.

It was not immediately clear whether the bomb was detonated by a suicide bomber or a remote-controlled device, and there were no claims of responsibility.

Militants are intensifying their violent attacks to pressure a government that has been struggling to cope with devastating monsoon-driven floods, described as the worst in the country’s history.

The attack was aimed at a procession of Shiite Muslims who were part of nationwide marches to mark “Al Quds Day,” an annual protest to express solidarity with Palestinians and to condemn Israel.

It came just two days after three suicide bombers struck a Shiite procession in the eastern city of Lahore, killing 31 people and setting off violent demonstrations by infuriated survivors.

Something that can seen every week. But hey, it's all just a "fringe group".

It's pathetic that anyone would ignore this and be more concerned about rights in western countries for Muslims. Because God Forbid you cannot wear a Hijab at Disneyland. The above example is irrelevant since in the year 1105, the Christians....

Or my favorite there was a Christian guy at a trailer park that stabbed someone. Apparently, that is the same as someone blowing themselves up, with the intention to kill as many as possible, in the name of their beliefs.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Heracles

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Find me 1 example from this year where you have 1 person or 1 group of a religion (non-Muslim) carrying out an act of terror that kills 40 or more people of another religious group (non-Muslim). Better yet see if you can find 1 example. I'll make it easier, an act of terror that killed 2 or more people...

Terrorist Attacks on U.S. Soil by Group, From 1980 to 2005, According to FBI Database

From Loonwatch.com

CNN recently published an article entitled Study: Threat of Muslim-American terrorism in U.S. exaggerated; according to a study released by Duke University and the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, “the terrorist threat posed by radicalized Muslim-Americans has been exaggerated.”

Yet, Americans continue to live in mortal fear of radical Islam, a fear propagated and inflamed by right wing Islamophobes. If one follows the cable news networks, it seems as if all terrorists are Muslims. It has even become axiomatic in some circles to chant: “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but nearly all terrorists are Muslims.” Muslims and their “leftist dhimmi allies” respond feebly, mentioning Waco as the one counter example, unwittingly affirming the belief that “nearly all terrorists are Muslims.”

But perception is not reality. The data simply does not support such a hasty conclusion. On the FBI’s official website, there exists a chronological list of all terrorist attacks committed on U.S. soil from the year 1980 all the way to 2005.

According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%). These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion. These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.

Yet notice the disparity in media coverage between the two. It would indeed be very interesting to construct a corresponding pie chart that depicted the level of media coverage of each group. The reason that Muslim apologists and their “leftist dhimmi allies” cannot recall another non-Islamic act of terrorism other than Waco is due to the fact that the media gives menial (if any) coverage to such events. If a terrorist attack does not fit the “Islam is the perennial and existential threat of our times” narrative, it is simply not paid much attention to, which in a circuitous manner reinforces and “proves” the preconceived narrative. It is to such an extent that the average American cannot remember any Jewish or Latino terrorist; why should he when he has never even heard of the Jewish Defense League or the Ejercito Popular Boricua Macheteros? Surely what he does not know does not exist!

The Islamophobes claim that Islam is intrinsically a terrorist religion. The proof? Well, just about every terrorist attack is Islamic, they retort. Unfortunately for them, that’s not quite true. More like six percent. Using their defunct logic, these right wingers ought now to conclude that nearly all acts of terrorism are committed by Latinos (or Jews). Let them dare say it…they couldn’t; it would be political and social suicide to say such a thing. Most Americans would shut down such talk as bigoted; yet, similar statements continue to be said of Islam, without any repercussions.

The Islamophobes live in a fantasy world where everyone is supposedly too “politically correct” to criticize Islam and Muslims. Yet, the reality is the exact opposite: you can get away with saying anything against the crescent. Can you imagine the reaction if I said that Latinos should be profiled because after all they are the ones who commit the most terrorism in the country? (For the record: I don’t believe in such profiling, because I am–unlike the right wing nutters–a believer in American ideals.)

The moral of the story is that Americans ought to calm down when it comes to Islamic terrorism. Right wingers always live in mortal fear–or rather, they try to make you feel that way. In fact, Pamela Geller (the queen of internet Islamophobia) literally said her mission was to “scare the bejeezus outta ya.” Don’t be fooled, and don’t be a wuss. You don’t live in constant fear of radicalized Latinos (unless you’re Lou Dobbs), even though they commit seven times more acts of terrorism than Muslims in America. Why then are you wetting yourself over Islamic radicals? In the words of Cenk Uygur: you’re at a ten when you need to be at a four. Nobody is saying that Islamic terrorism is not a matter of concern, but it’s grossly exaggerated.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Sofiyya

[Sofiyya 1,687]

The Faith-Based Militia: When is Terrorism ‘Christian’?

Frederick Clarkson

April 8, 2010

The arrest of the Michigan-based Hutaree Militia has drawn worldwide attention, and in so doing surfaced one of the knottiest issues we face as a culture to which religious freedom and free speech are so central: How do we think about and describe religiously-motivated violence?

The Hutaree’s plans to murder a police officer and use IEDs to attack the funeral procession in order to catalyze an uprising against the federal government was shocking and made headlines around the world. Their action plan, while preposterous on its face, is not terribly surprising, and is in many respects a logical outgrowth of the eschatology of a wide swath of the Christian Right. But what has been most striking to me is the media’s high-profile use of the term “Christian militia.” This suggests to me that a tectonic shift may be underway in our underlying culture and politics as we continue to struggle with how to acknowledge the realities of actual and threatened religiously-motivated violence in the United States.

Until now, of course, the elephant in the room has been our double standard, at least since 9/11. We’ve had little difficulty acknowledging religious motivations when Muslims are involved, but it’s been rare to find the word “Christian” modifying terms like “militia” and “terrorism” in mainstream discourse.

Faith-Based Terrorism?

In 2003, I reported on the trial of convicted serial anti-abortion terrorist Clayton Waagner for Salon.com. Even the fiercely pro-life Attorney General John Ashcroft described him as a terrorist. Waagner had FedExed envelopes of white powder purporting to be anthrax to some 550 reproductive rights groups and clinics. In a manifesto published on the Web site of the anti-abortion Army of God, he declared himself to be “God’s warrior” and a “terrorist,” and threatened to kill as many abortion providers as he could.

Waagner’s threats arrived during the same period when real, post-9/11 anthrax attacks on media outlets and Congress killed five people. In some cases, whole city blocks were evacuated when Waagner’s pacakges were opened. People were stripped and hosed down with Clorox by hazmat teams in protective gear.

I quoted several people who agreed that the term “Christian terrorist” is practically taboo; even as the term “Islamic terrorist” was ubiquitous. The same double standard would have applied to militias. I don’t recall the term “Christian militia” ever being used, even if a group’s motives could be fairly described as religious.

Chip Berlet, senior analyst at Political Research Associates (a progressive think tank in Somerville, Massachusetts) agreed that the press stayed away from reporting the Waagner trial in droves. “Once somebody claims a religious motivation for an act of terrorism,” he said, “most people, including reporters and editors, become unglued.” If Waagner had been a self-identified Muslim terrorist instead of a Christian terrorist, Berlet observed, “he’d have been lynched by now.”

Ann Glazier, then the director of clinic security at Planned Parenthood Federation of America told me, “The notion of Christian terrorists is a place people don’t want to go. And the notion of there being more than one Christian terrorist is a place where people also don’t want to go.”

Reporters and editors often “fear to offend,” added Berlet. “But if it’s fair to say if we can see the religious motivations in the Taliban, we ought to be able to see them in Waagner or [Olympic Park and abortion clinic bomber] Eric Rudolph.” He notes that although Waagner and his associates in the Army of God “represent a tiny fraction of the wider Christian right, people don’t know how to make sense of it.” And reporters, he says, “walk away from it.”

Interestingly, an Army of God supporter named Chuck Spignola wrote a letter to the editor of Salon, agreeing with me. “In ‘The Quiet Fall of an American Terrorist,’ Frederick Clarkson rightly identified Clay Waagner, Eric Rudolph, and James Kopp as Christian terrorists.” Spignola went on to praise Christian terrorists as the cream rising to the top of churchgoing Christians.

A longer version of the letter was published on the Army of God Web site.

As recently as this past week, we saw the double standard in action. Scott Roeder (the man convicted of the murder of Dr. George Tiller, an abortion provider in Wichita, Kansas) was mostly described in the media as an anti-abortion extremist or anti-abortion militant, terms that fail to convey the depth and breadth of his views and the reasons for his crime.

At his sentencing Roeder said that in murdering Dr. Tiller, he believed he was acting to enforce “God’s Law.” Roeder, as part of his statement to the court, read from the posthumously published book by Rev. Paul Hill, a Christian Reconstructionist who viewed himself as a “Phineas Priest”—a kind of biblical vigilante assassin—who was executed for the murder of a Florida abortion provider and his security escort. Hill also believed in the need for militias and for a theocratic Christian revolution. But one would not know all that to read mainstream press accounts.

And while the sentencing was massively covered by national and international media, it would have been fair to describe Roeder as a “Christian terrorist,” though the media didn’t go there; he was described neither as a Christian nor as a terrorist in any of the news or broadcast accounts I could find.

In the ’90s, other terms were used to describe what we might now call Christian militias. The most famous militia group at the time, The Michigan Militia, had views similar to those of the Hutaree. It was founded and led by a Baptist minister named Norm Olsen and a deacon of his church, and they’d made an indoctrination video of its chaplain addressing new recruits explaining that abortion necessitated the founding of the militia. Nevertheless, it was typically described as “anti-government.” And while that was certainly fair, (as it would be to describe the Hutaree militia as anti-government), it also tended to obscure the indisputable religious motivations of this and many other militia groups large and small. Reporting on these groups at the time also tended to downplay their religious eschatology.

The shorthand descriptions of such groups and individuals sometimes depends on the context. Some fall under the category of “hate groups,” and their acts as “hate crimes.” While these terms can be useful, they too can obscure religious motivations. For example, the once-infamous Aryan Nations group referred to itself as the Church of Jesus Christ, Christian, and its leader was Rev. Richard Butler, a minister in one of the sects generally referred to as Christian Identity.

The uneven evolution of our thinking about these things, and the language we use to describe them, casts fresh light on how we use other shorthand terms in this complex and fraught dimension of public life. The term “faith-based,” for example, we use more or less synonymously with “religious” and as substitutes for such terms as “ecumenical” and “interfaith.” It has become a warm and fuzzy term used for glossing over religious differences, both for reasons of inclusiveness and to conceal exclusion. But we would never describe the Aryan Nations as a “faith-based” hate group or the Hutaree as a faith-based militia, or Clayton Waagner as a “faith-based terrorist.”

The rise of the term “faith-based” is probably closely related to our difficulty in ascribing religious motivations to hate and violence, unless of course it is the religion of foreigners with whom we are at odds or at war. Such characterizations can be taken as highly inflammatory. Terms like “Christian militia” or “Islamic terrorism” can suggest that terrorism and militias are more characteristic of these enormous and highly-varied religious traditions than is the case. And there are certainly those who do not hesitate to exploit such opportunities. At the same time, the current use of the term “Christian militia” suggests to me at once a certain inevitability (since the Hutaree feature their religious identity on their Web site) and a certain maturity in our collective ability to acknowledge the reality of the situation without hyperbole or inappropriate defensiveness with regard to the use of the term—Christianity—that fairly describes the majority of religious believers in the United States, for all of their extraordinary diversity.

That said, regarding diversity among Christians in the U.S., we have no central ecclesiastical authority to define who and what is and is not Christian. Lacking common definitions can affect our responses to the likes of Clayton Waagner, Scott Roeder, and the Hutaree. For example, liberal Washington Post columnist Eugene Robinson wrote regarding the Hutaree: “I put the word Christian in quotes because anyone who plots to assassinate law enforcement officers, as a federal indictment alleges members of the Hutaree militia did, is no follower of Christ.” Of course the Hutaree might say the same thing about Robinson. Scott Roeder certainly did not view Dr. Tiller as a Christian, even though he was serving as an usher at Sunday service at the Lutheran Church when he shot him in the face. [For further discussion see Gary Laderman’s What Do ‘The Christians’ Believe? Easter Reflections from a Non-Christian, and then Biblical Inerrancy: Responses to “What Do ‘The Christians’ Believe?”—ed.]

RD contributor Chip Berlet, correctly I believe, wrote that the ideas of the Hutaree are analogous to those of such Christian Right leaders as Tim LaHaye and Pat Robertson. But if we follow Robinson, shall we say that LaHaye and Robertson are not followers of Christ? Or do people stop being Christians only when they commit or are alleged to have planned to commit violent crimes? If so, having appointed ourselves as the arbiters of apostasy, we then cannot describe such people as Christian terrorists or Christian militias because by definition they have auto-excommunicated themselves.

Finally, what terms we use depends on the occasion. While the media term of choice for the Hutaree was “Christian militia,” federal prosecutors have carefully avoided religious references. Assistant US Attorney Ronald Waterstreet, who summarized the case in court, insisted that the charges “aren’t about a religion or the militia. It’s a group of like-minded people who decided to oppose the authority of the United States by using weapons and force.” Similarly in the indictment he described the Hutaree as “an anti-government extremist organization” whose members wear a patch on their uniform that includes a cross and the initials CCR. The indictment did not explain that the name Hutaree meant “Christian warrior” and that CCR stands for “Colonial Christian Republic.”

“The Hutaree’s enemies,” the indictment continues, “include state and local law enforcement authorities deemed to be ‘foot soldiers’ of… the new World Order.” Of course, ‘foot soldiers for the New world Order’ does not help anyone understand that the Christian warriors of the Hutaree saw themselves as fighting an end-times battle with the agents of the Antichrist. For their purposes, they may not need to. But even as the feds sought to elide references to religion, they certainly opened the door to draw on the full palette of possibilities in their vision of end times religious war, since the indictment also said that the Hutaree’s enemies list includes “anyone who does not share their beliefs.”

Frederick Clarkson’s writing about about politics and religion has appeared in magazines and newspapers from Mother Jones, Conscience and Church & State, to The Village Voice and The Christian Science Monitor for 25 years. He is the editor of Dispatches from the Religious Left: The Future of Faith and Politics in America (Ig Publishing 2008), and co-founder of the group blog, Talk to Action.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Elias Abuelazam serial stabber case befuddles experts

Criminologists say the serial stabber may be a hybrid criminal: someone who is motivated by the grievances of a mass killer but uses the tactics of a serial killer. Police arrested Elias Abuelazam in Atlanta Wednesday.

Elias Abuelazam attends an extradition hearing in Fulton County Superior Court in Atlanta Friday. Abuelazam, an Israeli citizen, is a suspect in several stabbing attacks in Michigan, Ohio and Virginia. He was arrested at Atlanta Hartsfield-Jackson International Airport before boarding a flight to Israel.

Erik S. Lesser/AP/pool

By Patrik Jonsson, Staff writer / August 13, 2010

The arrest of Elias Abuelazam in connection with a series of 18 stabbings across Michigan, Ohio, and Virginia – five of them fatal – has so far offered no further clues into the potential motivation behind the 11-week spree of senseless violence.

Mr. Abuelazam, a bulky Arab Christian from Israel living in the US on a green card, told an Atlanta judge Friday that he would not fight extradition to Michigan, where the majority of the attacks happened and where he has already been charged in one of the cases.

The facts of the cases are spare but perplexing to criminologists. Nearly all of the victims were black, but it is unclear whether race was a factor. Piecing together the shreds of information that exist, a criminologist suggests that the attacker may have been something of a hybrid – employing the tactics of a serial killer but harboring motives, such as hate, that more typically drive mass murderers.

"Whether it was directed at Americans in general or black Americans, I do think [the spree] was motivated by hate," says Jack Levin, a criminologist at Northeastern University in Boston and author of "Serial Killers and Sadistic Murderers: Up Close and Personal."

"The complicating factor here is that the defendant is not an American citizen," he says. "There is little doubt that he would have fit the category of a hate-motivated killer – someone who targeted black Americans out of racial animosity – but the fact that he was from Middle East also raises the possibility that he hated Americans."

Unusual profile

Police in Leesburg, Va., where three of the stabbings took place last week, have said that they believe Abuelazam was motivated by the dark color of the victims' skin. If true, that would be somewhat unusual.

Serial killers, who stalk multiple victims in multiple attacks, are rarely motivated by hate, but usually by sex, power, or profit. By contrast, mass murderers, who kill many people at once, are often driven by hate.

For instance, investigators say the primary suspect in the mass shootings at Fort Hood last year, Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan, was motivated by hate. Also, in the Hartford Distributors rampage earlier this month, accused gunman Omar Thornton killed eight people and then himself after complaining that his co-workers were racists.

"If this had been a mass killing, if the killer had shot to death a number of people in the same category all at once, it would have made more sense," says Mr. Levin.

An early report suggests that anti-Americanism may not have been a factor.

The Israeli Internet newspaper Ynet reported Friday that federal counterterrorism investigators are part of the investigation because of Abuelazam's Arab name. "Initial indications, however, are that US officials cannot find the slightest trace of evidence or intelligence linking the man – a 33-year-old Christian who grew up in [the Israeli town of] Ramla – to terrorism," Ynet writes.

Abuelazam's timeline

Abuelazam agreed to be extradited to Michigan so that he could fight the current charge – and the others expected to be filed.

Though Abuelazam reportedly has a Florida driver's license, he spent time in Flint, Mich., and worked at a party store where his manager has told the Associated Press that he didn't seem to harbor any racial resentments. Authorities have said Abuelazam has an uncle in the Flint area and a sister in Leesburg.

All but four of the stabbings happened in in the Flint area. They began May 24 and crescendoed at the end of July, when attacks occurred daily.

Three of the stabbings occurred in northern Virginia at a time when Abuelazam was known to be there. In fact, police in Virginia stopped Abuelazam last week for failing to obey a stop sign. They briefly impounded Abuelazam's car because of an outstanding assault warrant against him.

Abuelazam was released, and the three Virginia knife attacks happened shortly afterward. The Virginia police said they had no knowledge of the Flint stabbings and so had no reason to hold him.

The final stabbing that police connect to Abuelazam was of a church custodian in Toledo, Ohio, Aug. 7.

Police allege that Abuelazam would approach lone victims at night, asking them for help with his car or for directions. Once they were off their guard, he would stab them, police say.

After police received numerous tips, Abuelazam was apprehended by four police officers at Hartsfield-Jackson international airport in Atlanta on Wednesday night after being paged over the airport intercom and told to report to a ticket counter. He was set to board a plane to Israel.

Passengers on the Tel Aviv-bound Delta plane said he appeared tense, according to the Associated Press. He was talking to someone on his cell phone "about not being violent and different things like that," passenger Eugene Williams said after the plane landed in Tel Aviv, the AP writes.

[Heracles 417]

So what's the ratio between Muslims versus the rest? Furthermore, find me a mainstream Christian, Buddhist or Hindu places of worship which promote violence and death towards others of differing beliefs. Whereas, ever month there is some Imam or place shut down, in western countries that do not have anything goes amendments, for being responsible for some act or preaching hatred.

Someone is really grasping for straws when they used single isolated incidents to try to disclaim essentially a movement. But hey, who cares what the actual terrorist say out of their own mouths when caught, it's Sofiya and co in the know.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Heracles

[Nina~ 431]

So what's the ratio between Muslims versus the rest? Furthermore, find me a mainstream Christian, Buddhist or Hindu places of worship which promote violence and death towards others of differing beliefs. Whereas, ever month there is some Imam or place shut down, in western countries that do not have anything goes amendments, for being responsible for some act or preaching hatred.

Someone is really grasping for straws when they used single isolated incidents to try to disclaim essentially a movement. But hey, who cares what the actual terrorist say out of their own mouths when caught, it's Sofiya and co in the know.

Christian - Ireland, enough said.

Buddhism - Khmer Rouge. Granted, they were a communist political party but they did target thousands of non-Buddhist (Hindu & Muslim) people and massacred them.

Hindu - Shiv Sena, an extreme right wing Hindu-Nationalist political party in India that is known to incite violence against Muslims & Christians.

Just because the media doesn't talk about them doesn't mean that they don't exist. You have to understand that there will always be violence when there are a handful of extremists in any religion/organization. Regular folks all over the world spend most of their time worrying about feeding their family & putting a roof over their heads instead of running around and killing people. It is the nutjobs that don't value human life and cause all the violence & mayhem.

[Heracles 417]

Christian - Ireland, enough said.

Buddhism - Khmer Rouge. Granted, they were a communist political party but they did target thousands of non-Buddhist (Hindu & Muslim) people and massacred them.

Hindu - Shiv Sena, an extreme right wing Hindu-Nationalist political party in India that is known to incite violence against Muslims & Christians.

Just because the media doesn't talk about them doesn't mean that they don't exist. You have to understand that there will always be violence when there are a handful of extremists in any religion/organization. Regular folks all over the world spend most of their time worrying about feeding their family & putting a roof over their heads instead of running around and killing people. It is the nutjobs that don't value human life and cause all the violence & mayhem.

What's happening in Ireland? Is there mass bombings or a Jihad equivalent movement occurring? I must have missed it over the past month. Same goes with any other place you mentioned.

This is the same old argument used by others to disclaim the Unites State's homicide rate. Surely because homicides occur in other OECD countries, then the US rate per capita is null and void right? No, it's not the same at all actually.

A handful of extremists do no create the weekly news stories, now do they. If it was a handful of extremists, then we would not still be fighting in Afghanistan for 10 plus years now would we. What you fail to grasp is that the nutjobs or not some rogue isolated Timothy McVeigh, they are a movement, hence the frequency of these separate incidents; something clearly stated by their own mouths.

One has to watch world news to grasp this. Being that you are in Texas, it's safe to assume that what goes on in America, let alone the world, is not broadcast on your local news. I am sure Dallas or Houston whatever does not spend 15% of their local broadcast focusing on world news, as one would find in the UK, Aus, Canada etc etc etc.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Heracles

[Nina~ 431]

What's happening in Ireland? Is there mass bombings or a Jihad equivalent movement occurring? I must have missed it over the past month. Same goes with any other place you mentioned.

Did you not hear about the recent bombing in Londonderry? How is Jihad worse than other voilent movements? Is it just because the media covers it more than the atrocities done by others? Or are you saying that the people killed by other religious extremist don't count? Maybe you just like to block out things that don't fit in your narrow view?

This is the same old argument used by others to disclaim the Unites State's homicide rate. Surely because homicides occur in other OECD countries, then the US rate per capita is null and void right? No, it's not the same at all actually.

What does US homocide rate have to do with Jihad?

A handful of extremists do no create the weekly news stories, now do they. If it was a handful of extremists, then we would not still be fighting in Afghanistan for 10 plus years now would we. What you fail to grasp is that the nutjobs or not some rogue isolated Timothy McVeigh, they are a movement, hence the frequency of these separate incidents; something clearly stated by their own mouths.

And how do you equate these handful of extremists to regular Muslim folks? There are nutjobs in America too, but does that mean all Americans are nutjobs?

One has to watch world news to grasp this. Being that you are in Texas, it's safe to assume that what goes on in America, let alone the world, is not broadcast on your local news. I am sure Dallas or Houston whatever does not spend 15% of their local broadcast focusing on world news, as one would find in the UK, Aus, Canada etc etc etc.

There you go again with your simplistic thinking and generalizations.. Just because I live in Texas means that I don't read international news online or listen to the radio? You claim to be an engineer, but you sure as hell don't think like one.

[Heracles 417]

Did you not hear about the recent bombing in Londonderry? How is Jihad worse than other voilent movements? Is it just because the media covers it more than the atrocities done by others? Or are you saying that the people killed by other religious extremist don't count? Maybe you just like to block out things that don't fit in your narrow view?

So in your opinion, this is the same as a worldwide movement is it? When was the last time the IRA affected France, Germany, the US, Australia etc etc?

Just in case you have not noticed, the Jihad movement is worldwide.

What does US homocide rate have to do with Jihad?

Nothing, it's simply establishing an example of your mentality. I am sure you will ignore Mexico's violence because you will find an article of an incident in Aus.

And how do you equate these handful of extremists to regular Muslim folks? There are nutjobs in America too, but does that mean all Americans are nutjobs?

You missed the point, it's not a handful of extremists, it's actually tens of thousand of them. Hence the frequency of these incidents, as in weekly, on top of the war we are fighting.

There you go again with your simplistic thinking and generalizations.. Just because I live in Texas means that I don't read international news online or listen to the radio? You claim to be an engineer, but you sure as hell don't think like one.

Nice dodge. What percentage of the daily local news in Houston is dedicated to world affairs? Is it anywhere near the 15 to 20 percent of the news abroad? Excluding Mexicans, what percentage of foreigners live in Texas? So yes, your exposure to others is slim.

You read international news? Strange, as your posts over the years seem to illustrate otherwise. They actually show a close minded liberal, who bases her opinions on Kumbayaesque views of reality.

Actually, my education is exactly why I think that way I do, where I analyze the situation and then form a pragmatic and rational opinion on it. I have argued with everyone on here at one time or another, because I base my opinion on the issue at hand, rather than stick to some lock-step partisan line of thinking.

A typical sign of a liberal on the other hand, is the homogeneous mentality and the assumption of everyone being the same. Another telltale sign is jumping on bandwagon rights oriented issues, which in this case is now defending Islam. A religion [ironically] with polar opposite views to those of Liberal yanks, but hey, don't let reality step in the way of liberal thought patterns.

Why is this important to the discussion? Because it illustrates that pattern or thought or lack of in such discussions. So it's very important to point out someone who is attempting to argue based on their ideology, rather than facts and reality.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Heracles

[Nina~ 431]

So in your opinion, this is the same as a worldwide movement is it? When was the last time the IRA affected France, Germany, the US, Australia etc etc?

Just in case you have not noticed, the Jihad movement is worldwide.

Nothing, it's simply establishing an example of your mentality. I am sure you will ignore Mexico's violence because you will find an article of an incident in Aus.

You missed the point, it's not a handful of extremists, it's actually tens of thousand of them. Hence the frequency of these incidents, as in weekly, on top of the war we are fighting.

Nice dodge. What percentage of the daily local news in Houston is dedicated to world affairs? Is it anywhere near the 15 to 20 percent of the news abroad? Excluding Mexicans, what percentage of foreigners live in Texas? So yes, your exposure to others is slim.

You read international news? Strange, as your posts over the years seem to illustrate otherwise. They actually show a close minded liberal, who bases her opinions on Kumbayaesque views of reality. Actually, my education is exactly why I think that way I do, where I analyze the situation and then form a pragmatic and rational opinion on it.

A typical sign of a liberal on the other hand, is the homogeneous mentality and the assumption of everyone being the same. Another telltale sign is jumping on bandwagon rights oriented issues, which in this case is now defending Islam. A religion [ironically] with polar opposite views to those of Liberal yanks, but hey, don't let reality step in the way of liberal thought patterns.

Why is this important to the discussion? Because it illustrates that pattern or thought or lack of in such discussions. So it's very important to point out someone who is attempting to argue based on their ideology, rather than facts and reality.

Right, since I live in Houston I must be listening to the local news. And of course not, I never grew up in Europe or Asia because I live in Texas now. Oh right and I never travel regularly to foreign countries because I couldn't possibly work for a multinational company since I am based in Texas now. Nice Try!

You really need to stop trying to generalize people just because they live in a particular place, worship a particular god or look a certain shade of brown. People and communities are way more complex than that. I have lived in (not just visited) several countries to know that there are good & bad people everywhere. Judging a book by its cover will never earn you a Phd.

[^_^ 5,021]

That's good, because higher education is for libruls anyway. Conservatives don't waste time getting their PhDs, they work at Wally World and put food (in their world, SPAM counts as food) on the table.

[Heracles 417]

Right, since I live in Houston I must be listening to the local news. And of course not, I never grew up in Europe or Asia because I live in Texas now. Oh right and I never travel regularly to foreign countries because I couldn't possibly work for a multinational company since I am based in Texas now. Nice Try!

You really need to stop trying to generalize people just because they live in a particular place, worship a particular god or look a certain shade of brown. People and communities are way more complex than that. I have lived in (not just visited) several countries to know that there are good & bad people everywhere. Judging a book by its cover will never earn you a Phd.

You are the one here that is generalizing and essentially claiming we are all equal and all think the same. Anyone who has traveled within the US let alone abroad knows this is simply not true. Ever heard of crime stats, bribery index, or the corruption index? Surely these would all be the same if we were all equal and all thought the same. Surely we would all eat, drink, listen to the same music, live in the same manner or same types of homes as everyone else if we were all the same. Once again, someone with your international exposure would know this first hand.

Houston is little to nothing like DC, yet claiming so in your opinion is generalizing. Wrong. You also make the critical liberal mistake of assuming because you are different, then you somehow represent the norm. Norm is the median. Surely someone with your extensive business acumen and world wide travel would know this.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Heracles

[Heracles 417]

What I enjoy about you Nina is that you have a big mouth but seldom provide specifics. Like what do you do? What field you are educated in and so forth.

I am keen to be enlightened.

Edited October 14, 2010 by Heracles

[Ban Hammer 13,470]

Right, since I live in Houston I must be listening to the local news. And of course not, I never grew up in Europe or Asia because I live in Texas now. Oh right and I never travel regularly to foreign countries because I couldn't possibly work for a multinational company since I am based in Texas now. Nice Try!

You really need to stop trying to generalize people just because they live in a particular place, worship a particular god or look a certain shade of brown. People and communities are way more complex than that. I have lived in (not just visited) several countries to know that there are good & bad people everywhere. Judging a book by its cover will never earn you a Phd.

yeah nina, you live in houston. shouldn't you be out 4 wheeling in the mud and chewing tobacco?

[Sofiyya 1,687]

No matter how much evidence is shown to BY, FBI stats, articles and discussions re media bias, the fact that his "jihad movement" is not worldwide, but consists of various groups with varying political, nationalist, anti-nationalist, etc. agendas, he is unchanging. Facts do not sway him. Muslims are his boogeyman under the bed. He needs them to stroke his narcissism as the superior White Christian man. Nothing short of another lobotomy will make a difference in his thinking.