What is it that terrorists have in common?

Posted by AmericanGreatness 10 years, 1 month ago to Ask the Gulch
201 comments | Share | Flag

Hint: it's not that they're all named Bob.

All Comments

Previous comments...   You are currently on page 6.
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Christians killed more Christians during the Crusades than Muslims. Christians ran the inquisition. ?The War Between the States was Christians killing; Christians. World War I was a war primarily betwen Christians. World War II was primarily a war between Christians and Christians ran the death camps, the gas chambers and the ovens. Christianity as a whole has failed to honor the Prince of Peace. Nothing pointing fingers elsewhere will change facts. Play pretend is not the same as atonement. if you are relying on manufactured history to support your point you are sadly mistaken, certainly no objectivist and have failed. Not that non-Christians were pikers. Stalin killed 20 million of his own citizens. The followers of gentle Bhudda did the same,

    The only real difference is the Islamic fanatics are willingly violating their prohibition of committing suicide just as Christians have violated thou shalt not commit murder

    As for your last statement it may preach it but that's only on Sunday. What it teaches tells me they are not followers of Jesus Christ but play pretends secure in a belief of last second redemption as an excuse for the other six days Just another version of Mohammeds Paradise for those who commit suicide and call it martyrdom.. The two have a lot in common. Now follow your own request and procide examples to the contrary.

    Where were your jumps?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Comment hidden due to member score or comment score too low. View Comment
  • Posted by $ MichaelAarethun 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    History Books are a wonderful thing if you read them. Maybe not your kind of Christian but Christian none the less. I don't hold much with what Esceptico writes but ....in this case he's 100 % accurate.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    because the US says so, uncommon. db just got his new license. I am looking at the gold star right now
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by conscious1978 10 years ago
    Belief...extreme, reason suspending beliefs.

    They believe this is the best action for them to take.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by UncommonSense 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    The German Army, Navy & Air Force were not Christians ~ they were tools of Nazi regime and of the Bankster's dictator - A. Hitler. (Pop Quiz question: how many lawyers and bankers who financed the war and passed the laws to kill off the invalids, the elderly and the non-politically connected Jews in the camps were prosecuted during the Nuremburg trials? If you can name ONE, please tell me)

    Hitler effectively muzzled the Church and killed those who opposed him. Furthermore, Hitler was a fan of H. P Blavatsky (occultist) and of jackarse Darwin. (evolutionist). (Got Aryan Race?)

    If you can point to me a speech in which Hitler gives New Testament chapters & verses that provide validation on why he motivates the country's industry for war, I would greatly appreciate it, so I can do further research.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jlc 10 years ago
    In the book, Confederates in the Attic (about Civil War reinactors), the author comments on Confederate creep: the counties at the margins of the Confederate area, which were once strongly Union, now have a 'we were/are Confederate' culture. Why is this happening? Because it is 'neat' to be the Rebel and because various media portrayals romanticized the modern Southern Rebel.

    So some counter-propaganda is not unwelcome. Perhaps we will get Confederate-ebb as the marginal counties now recall that they were once proudly Union.

    Jan
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Esceptico 10 years ago
    What about the modern Christian army of Germany murdering millions of innocents---often with the help the Catholic church in Germany?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by UncommonSense 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Whenever I've heard "radical" islam over the years, it always implied that there are types, kinds or various levels of islam that a muslim can follow.

    That said, can you provide me some clear differences between "radical" islam versus, say islam-lite? Or, beginners islam and "mainstream" islam? "Regular" islam and "islamic conservative"? Do you have any verses in either the koran, sura or the hadiths that can clearly point the differences?

    Finally, do you think mohommad would give his coerced followers options of which one to accept outside of what he said and did?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Flootus5 10 years ago
    It seems to me that one thing in common is that after the fact we find that the "authorities" should have had the perp on the radar screen. With all the spying and monitoring that is conducted, they always seem to miss that oh, they recently traveled to a mid-east or muslim country or oh, they were posting bizarre ideologue positions on facebook.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by Mamaemma 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    Gotcha. I like law and order, but I am hyper aware that the more power they have the more than can use it against me. And don't tell me as long as I do nothing wrong I have nothing to fear. Long, long ago I might have believed that. Now I know I am a target and my only defense is to lie low, which sadly means they have won.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by LarryHeart 10 years ago
    "What's not clear — to counterterrorism investigators and to neighbors and former classmates — is what set him on the path to violence that ended with him being gunned down by police."

    It is ISLAM. Everything he did is outlined in the Koran. It is indeed an act of war by Islam. Muhammad required Muslims to war with non-Muslims.

    Not all Muslims are terrorists/warriors/Jihadi but Islam REQUIRES it of all Muslims. There are no Radical Muslims only religious Muslims carrying out what is required of them to achieve eternal reward.

    The US (and literally Obama) is bowing to the Saudis, who fund terrorists at war with us, to minimize mention to Islam in exchange for Saudi allegiance and oil.

    ISLAM IS THE ENEMY. There is no placating it. It has been at war with the world since the 7th century and always will be unless it is completely reformed or defeated utterly.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by wiggys 10 years ago
    the answer to the question appears on the news on a daily basis.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    We should define the elements of that definition:
    1. Act of War - What is the difference between an act of war and an ordinary crime. Clearly a kook who "declares war" obstructing traffic in front a gov't building would not count. Clear, IMHO, a military action in a foreign country without a declaration of war by Congress would be an act of war (not terrorism unless civilians are deliberately targeted). So my question is what makes it war.
    2. Deliberate non-combatant targets - What if the intended target is civilian infrastructure, like roads, power, and phones, with no intentional civilian deaths? What if the attackers target infrastructure that they know will lead to shortages of food or medical supplies, which may lead to deaths, hoping to draw the gov't to the bargaining table? What if the attackers impose a curfew with the policy that even non-combatants who violate it will be shot on sight?

    I ask these questions b/c it's easy for any use of force to become "terrorism" by some definitions. My thought is it's just a epithet of condemnation with no meaning. I appreciate hearing other thoughts.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by $ jdg 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    A better definition of terrorism is anything that would be an act of war, except that it's deliberately conducted against non-combatant targets.
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by jabuttrick 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    The "no true scotsman" fallacy emerges again! By the way, muslims use the same false argument. Haven't you heard, "Islam is a religion of peace"?
    Reply | Permalink  
  • Posted by khalling 10 years ago in reply to this comment.
    lived in St. Louis, Chicago, Kansas City, Colorado Springs. I have an idea of how police work. Also, several friends on the Force. Two beta test readers for Trails of Injustice were lifeers on Seattle's force. I have a clue
    Reply | Permalink  

  • Comment hidden. Undo