dogger807 said:You know I've see this guy labeled as the christian terrorist and I've seen people label him an atheist. Let's face it, no one wants to claim him.
does anyone know of a non biased source that may show his religious preference if any?
I'm not saying he wasn't an atheist , I simple don't know.
GySgt said:You replied to the question of the existence of an athiest serial killer with Timmy.
He wasn't a serial killer. He was a Practical terrorist. Now, if he had murdered (whether destroying himself in the process or not) in the name of "God," then he would fit into the definition of an "Apocalyptic" terrorist.
he was part of what is know as the "Christian identity" movement.dogger807 said:You know I've see this guy labeled as the christian terrorist and I've seen people label him an atheist. Let's face it, no one wants to claim him.
does anyone know of a non biased source that may show his religious preference if any?
I'm not saying he wasn't an atheist , I simple don't know.
steen said:he was part of what is know as the "Christian identity" movement.
http://eyeonhate.com/mcveigh/mcveigh3.html
vergiss said:Ooh, I've heard about them. Apparently, they enourage the killing of interracial couples, gay, prostitutes and abortion providers and consider the Jews to be the children of Eve and the snake in the Garden of Eden. :doh
steen said:We see it as a clasdh with radivcals, not just those of the Islamic faith. Witness the tissy and spewed nonsense by creationists in the US when they are presented with scientific information. Same deal, except that they havent resorted to violence yet. But certainly, the pro-life movement's fringe has done so:
http://www.armyofgod.com/heroes.html
vergiss said:don't you think the best way to stop radicals recruiting and corrupting Muslim youth would be to show that the West aren't monsters, that we aren't evil? That's going to be somewhat difficult when we're dropping bombs on their heads.
More lame and cowardly evasions. :roll:aquapub said:More angry, shallow smears against the evil right....Garrrr....boooo....hisss.
Yawn.
vergiss said:What about those Christian fundamentalist psychopaths who blow up abortion clinics and gay bars, or murder abortion doctors and their families?
vergiss said:The Army of God definitely evokes the name of God whilst encouraging that sort of evil... their website is plain scary.
steen said:We see it as a clasdh with radivcals, not just those of the Islamic faith. Witness the tissy and spewed nonsense by creationists in the US when they are presented with scientific information. Same deal, except that they havent resorted to violence yet. But certainly, the pro-life movement's fringe has done so:
http://www.armyofgod.com/heroes.html
mnpollock said:Wow, if that isn't spreading the scriptures I don't know what is. Lol, how could they possibly get so far away from the original intent of the message of christ? Not that I'm christian, or athiest for that matter, but really, they don't even know what their own religeon was trying to get at. How pathetic.
GySgt said:What ever might offer them a chance to get out from under their oppressive Mullahs and dogmatic control of relgion. Since we are the target for every Radical in the region who needs a scapegoat to explain away what his own governments and religion has done to his society, we have an obligation to face it and not cower behind closed doors waiting for the next 9/11.
Just think....the weapon of choice would be a nuclear bomb were it readily available.
vergiss said:The rest of you - don't you think the best way to stop radicals recruiting and corrupting Muslim youth would be to show that the West aren't monsters, that we aren't evil? That's going to be somewhat difficult when we're dropping bombs on their heads.
aquapub said:Um, we tried things that way under Clinton for eight years. The patriotic Left retreated from Bin Laden in Somalia, did nothing about numerous Al Queda attacks, did nothing about Saddam, appeased N. Korea...
All it got us was more attacks, not less, 9/11, a nuclear N. Korea, a discredited international body (U.N.) who's threats are now known by radical Islam to be idle.
We've tried the retreat, cower, and surrender policy of Democrats. They don't work. Liberals are utterly clueless about human nature and the nature of our enemies, and if the world has any sense, it will thank us for however long we can keep them out of office.
I think I'll continue rooting for a policy that involves us having a spine, thank you.
Iriemon said:That seems to contradict what you had just posted:
Exactly. History has shown us that when people feel that their religious and philosophical integrity is being threatened, that they will withdraw into Radicalism and demand the punishment of non-believers.
Iriemon said:You don't think that invading on of their countries on false pretext doesn't make some people over there feel that their religious and philosphical integrity is being threatened, such that it will encourage them to withdraw into a Radicalism?
Iriemon said:Exactly. Our response went way overboard as a response to 9-11 and is perceived as a threat to Islam, which, as GySgt points out encourages the radical element in Islam -- we are seeing the results in Iran and Palestine and the resistance to our occupation in Iraq. Our mistaken invasion of Iraq is making matters much worse.
There are ultimately two responses. Either we go for the "final solution" (or "ultimate fix, as GySgt calls it) as folks like GySgt propose and slaughter all groups who resist us. Which would require the genocidal slaughter of millions.
Or we find ways to stop threatening their religion and philosophy to discourage the radical element, and find ways to encourage the moderate element.
GySgt said:Iriemon said:That seems to contradict what you had just posted:
Exactly. History has shown us that when people feel that their religious and philosophical integrity is being threatened, that they will withdraw into Radicalism and demand the punishment of non-believers.
I don't see the contradiction.
...
It is surely a fact that individuals have entered the extremists camps over Iraq. But we must be able to identify what is happeneing. These sorts of peopple hate us anyway.
First you say that when people feel threatened they turned to Radicalism. Then you say that the Iraq war had no affect because they hated us anyway.
What you are maintaining is that the Iraq invasion had no effect on the perception of Arabs in the Middle East that their religion is threatened by what America is doing.
Listen to what they are saying on Arab media. Of course this invasion is being used by those who oppose us to argue that the the US is trying to attack the Islamic religion. And reading posts around here, with good reason. To say that this does not cause a perceived threat (and therefore by your theory drive more to Radicalism) to some in the Islamic world is to ignore evidence and reason. You can see it just in the opposition to the occupation in Iraq.
Iriemon said:What is the "final solution" in your view. Just stay in Iraq indefinitely, creating a motivating force for radical Islam? Or do you support GySgt's final solution of slaughtering the groups that oppose us, starting with the Sunni Iraqis? Or are you too "politically correct" to stomach that solution?
GySgt said:The Middle East defies solution. Again, you are attempting to be rational to an irrational problem. To the Radical element there is absolutely nothing we can do that would find favor with them. Our way of life threatens their religion. To these people who are born, raised, and controlled through a single dogmatic religion our freedoms of speach ois a threat to their religion.
It is not up to us to change. Progress cannot be reversed. Islam must do what every religion throughout history has done - change their religion to suit the needs of the society to grow. Stagnation kills.
When you hear the mention of our bombs creating Radicalism, one should ask what bombs they are referring to. How many bombs have we dropped in Saudi Arabia? How many bombs have dropped in Iran? Before having to deal with Saddam, how many bombs did we drop in Iraq? How about Afghnaistan before 9/11? How many bombs have been dropped in Syria? Using our bombs to explain what is happening is ignorant. It is also lazy. Radical Islam gets it's roots from The Muslim Brotherhood which was created bu Qutb in 1929 in Egypt. It carried over to Saudi Arabia after it's creater was executed for attemtping to use Radical Islam to overthrow the Egyptian government. One of Muhammad Qutb's students and an ardent follower was Ayman Zawahiri, who later became the mentor of Osama bin Laden.
Radical Islam is indeed learned from this culture. It is not learned from our bombs. However, our retaliations and our support of the freest nation in the region is used by these zealots to recruit from the jobless and angry masses who need somehting to fix blame upon.
GySgt said:Solid military tactics are just that crude and blunt. The tacticians do not sit around and search for the moral solution. This is for the politician who has to answer to his voters.
People can whine all day about the A-bomb in Japan, but it was a solid tactical solution and it brought an end to the violence.
Iriemon said:First you say that when people feel threatened they turned to Radicalism. Then you say that the Iraq war had no affect because they hated us anyway.
Iriemon said:What you are maintaining is that the Iraq invasion had no effect on the perception of Arabs in the Middle East that their religion is threatened by what America is doing.
Iriemon said:Listen to what they are saying on Arab media. Of course this invasion is being used by those who oppose us to argue that the the US is trying to attack the Islamic religion. And reading posts around here, with good reason. To say that this does not cause a perceived threat (and therefore by your theory drive more to Radicalism) to some in the Islamic world is to ignore evidence and reason. You can see it just in the opposition to the occupation in Iraq.
Very good point per the US drifting strongly towards the theocracy of fundie extremists.GySgt said:It's the difference between a robust mutli-cultural free society versus a society ruled by a single dogmatic religion. One has the greater potential to unleash widespread radicalism.
Iriemon said:Well isn't that what you are proposing? Slaughter groups that oppose us? The ultimate fix? Maybe nuke them?
Or are you too politically correct to stomach the final solution?
Good post.Iriemon said:I agree with GySgt on one point. Half assed *****-footing around isn't the answer, and only makes things worse. Killing a hand full of Arabs in Iraq isn't improving the situation, and is making it worse.
If you are sitting under a tree, and get stung by a bee, and look up and see a nest, you either a) move to another tree and leave them alone, or b) Kill the entire nest.
Either way there is a risk you might get stung again, probably more of a risk with plan b). But the worst thing you can do is just take a stick and wack the nest a couple times to let 'em know you are pissed. Which is what our action in Iraq amounts to.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?