The Latest Islamic Suicide Attack

[rn79870]

i definately agree. The turks slaugthered armenians by the millions. its yet another in a long line of US meddling. Bush attacked congress for passing a bill declaring the masscres of armenians in the 1910s in turkey, genocide. he didnt want to ruffle the feathers of the turks and thereby lose their support in iraq.

The christian community isnt as vocal as it should be in the US. im sorry, but where are the crys against the Westboro Baptist Church? People are mad at them for protesting funerals, not the perversion of the christian faith. Personally, i find their perversion much more scary than their funeral protests. You think Islam is the only militant religion, you are sadly mistaken.

Orthodox Jews in israel have been known to throw bleach on improperly dressed women.

Westboro Baptist Church/ Pat Robertson/ Jerry Fallwell/ Etc

Alqaeda.

n'f said.

One needs look no further than the 1st. Amendment to answer your question. Freedom of the press and freedom of religion. Fred Phelps isn't a threat, at least not a physical threat. His form of protest, although distasteful, is legal (assuming he follows the rules proscribed for his activity). Americans see him as a offbeat loon. Neither Fred, or the other Christians mentioned, sanction death or destruction.

Religious tolerance is the simplest thing to promote, yet, in the middle east, the capital of religious intolerance, belonging to the wrong religion can equate to a death sentence. How is America to understand and work within that framework.

BTW, I checked with the library, and they have 2 copies of that book. I may stop by later today if I get downtown.

[audtatious]

also, again, im not making light of 9/11, but how does the 9/11 attacks compare to say, other acts of terrorism in the world. how many acts of terrorism or genocide have elicited such a response? We sat ildly by as millions of Hutus were slaughtered in Africa in the 1990s. We also sat as Bosnia was ethnically cleansed. We continue to sit as Darfur goes from bad to worse. Areas like darfur are PRIME recruiting grounds for militant extremeists. Dont believe me? Guess where osama spent most of the 1980s? Somalia..

If we were not fully entrenched in Iraq I would believe we would have a greater hand in Darfur and other areas. This brings to light the constant and continual failure of the UN. The cold war caused alliances that are causing issues that we face today. We know this but we can't change the past, just go forward. We are accused of being war mongers for Iraq then beaten up for not doing the same thing in other regions. The UN is supposed to be a counsil that addresses these issues but they are so full of FAIL it is rediculous and I wish we would simply pull out until they decide to make decisions based on what is best for everyone instead of the pocketbooks of those with pull on their counsils. From an Israel perspective I still feel they would be more open to negotiations with others should the others not constantly threaten their existence and bomb the piss out of them. I'm not saying they are angles and innocent in any of this at all either.

[heliochrome85]

is it ok to be jewish in all of america? how bout catholic? religious intolerance is alive and well in the US. The middle east has a much bloodier history in terms of religion, BUT it is something that can be overcome by secular countries. it takes time. In Syria, we have large jewish and christian populations. There is a town near damascus that still exclusively speaks Aramaic. Relgious freedom varies depending on your country. Its not hopeless there. It just takes patience and an even hand. So far, that hasnt happened.

[heliochrome85]

i agree, but there are measures we can do. We havent done anything. This coming from Bush, who historically, has devoted the most presidental time of any president to Africa. Israel may be more open to negotiations, but that ship has sailed. you cant take back those threats because its the only thing these people have left, the power of speech. Again, kill them with kindness and they will sit and reevaluate their position on Israel. personally, i have no dog in that fight other than i care for the suffering of both israelis and palestinians. Both sides are full of fail. There is no reason, the most powerful country in the world cant do anything about it.

[rn79870]

I don't know that religious persecution exists in America. I'm sure there are a few examples, but all in all, I think America is very tolerant of religion. I would say that the religious alignment of 90% of the people I know is unknown to me. It simply isn't important, and I'm really not interested. However, in the middle east, that doesn't appear to be the case. This is ironic because all three major religions preach tolerance and peaceful living principles, yet none of them practice it.

[audtatious]

Both sides are full of fail. There is no reason, the most powerful country in the world cant do anything about it.

We have requested it and have worked with both sides time and again to try and get their differences resolved. The most powerful country in the world is quickly hand-tied about all issues at this point. If we do anything it is considered "war mongering" or "nation building". This leads to a lot of frustration to the point where I've said "screw them all, pull out of everywhere and close off all our borders to everyone and let them sort it out themselves". Of course, that's not a viable solution either as pulling out and letting people fend for themselves will make even more US haters and cause global economic issues. We can't do for ourselves and we can't do for others because we are damned by one person or another regardless of which side we are on.

From a day to day perspective I don't see the "average Joe" being descriminatory to people or other religions. Sure, there are bound to be some but that's human. I don't care what religion anyone is as long as they don't try to force their views on me as I don't try and do that to them. I am tired of the current movements to make other religions more comfortable over here at the expense of Christian viewpoints (which you seem to understand based on your comments). They should all be equal in the eyes of the Gov't and should deal with the same limitations across the board. Today, that does not seem to be the case but may be my viewpoint only.

[heliochrome85]

tell me then why romney wasnt our repblican candidate. from all indications, he is a generally nice guy and is more than competent to do the job. why also hasnt lieberman run for president. in any case, again, the middle east lived for centries without problems with christians jews and muslims itner mixed. the reality is that christians in the middle east dress just the same way as muslims do. most christian women cover their hair, although not as much as muslims do (half covered hair, vs, fully covered hair) just as you cant tell what peoples religion is here, you cant really there. you mix in politics with the religion, you get a bad mix.

[rn79870]

Romney withdrew from the race. He wasn't forced out for his religious beliefs. They said the same thing about Kennedy when he was running (so I hear) because he was Catholic. America may comment on the religion of the candidate, but it really isn't something that dwell on when it comes time to choose between 2 candidates.

But tell me whether, in the middle east a persons nationality, even religion, is seen as sufficient grounds to hate/attack/terrorize?

[AZhitman]

tell me then why romney wasnt our repblican candidate. from all indications, he is a generally nice guy and is more than competent to do the job. why also hasnt lieberman run for president. in any case, again, the middle east lived for centries without problems with christians jews and muslims itner mixed. the reality is that christians in the middle east dress just the same way as muslims do. most christian women cover their hair, although not as much as muslims do (half covered hair, vs, fully covered hair) just as you cant tell what peoples religion is here, you cant really there. you mix in politics with the religion, you get a bad mix.

But if that's the case, and I'm ignorant here, how do the Shia know they're fighting the Sunni? (I'm sure there are thousands of examples of different factions that I'm unfamiliar with, but my point is, they're not seperated by skin color or obvious differences, so how does such fighting continue?

I don't think Romney's failure to secure the nomination was due to his Mormonism (solely). However, there are those who will perceive it as such, and that's a hard opinion to counter.

Historically, US Presidents have been of the Christian faith... or some permutation or derivation thereof.

[heliochrome85]

it normally isnt. the people there arent any more hateful than those here or in europe. you have to understand that in the middle east, politics is as popular as baseball or football here in the US. in every coffee shop, in every city, politics are being discussed. we dont have the music, hollywood, or sports topics to discuss. so the people there are much more poltiically aware of what is going on than here.

[heliochrome85]

its largely based on name. honestly and style of dress in some cases. shii'tes are commonly known to wear turbans and have red marks on their forehead due to the amounts of prayers they perform. plus, they tend to live in certain sections/neighborhoods of cities. in damascus, there is definately a shiite area. its where the iranian consulate is. you might want to remember that the shiite.sunni violence only is in iraq, where lo and behold they are fighting for power, not for religious reasons. it just so happens that shiite sunni are the iraqi versions of republican and democrat (respectively).

[AZhitman]

Interesting.

It's hard to know what to think when you don't know who the "good guys" are (by that I mean, who thinks like you do).

Are they that different ideologically? They're both followers of Muhammed, with a shared heritage... what's the key difference?

I'm not asking this confrontationally, just to understand.

[rn79870]

In those discussions, do the people sanction terrorism? I believe that middle eastern philosophy (religious) is one of peace and harmony, yet they, in their discussions don't seem to denounce that behavior. Is it a popular belief that America is the great Satan and needs to be destroyed?

[AZhitman]

Bob, we've already established that terrorism is the work of a fringe minority who misinterprets religious law.

[heliochrome85]

my understanding is limited but ehre goesshiites believe that in the succession following the death of the prophet muhammad, his cousin Ali should have been first. He was passed over and the job to lead the muslims was given to the prophets uncle. A few years later Ali did in fact become the Caliph. During his time as Caliph, he was killed in southern Iraq in battle. The shiites believe that Ali was murderd by those who followed the Uncle. Thats why in arabic their name is actually "Shiite Ali" which is arabic for the party of ali.

During the end of Januray, they have a holy time called Ashura. thats when you see pics of them flogging themselves and holding up pics of Ali. Both those practiices are strictly against the rules of Islam. If you couldnt tell before, Im sunni. In Islam, depictions of people, prophets or otherwise, is strictly forbidden. It can be a slippery slope from picture to idolitry. Many sunnis believe there is a bit of idolotry in the case of Shiites and Ali. Thats why you never see a pic of the prophet. Thats why all islamic art is geometric or tiles. Thats also why the region reacted as it did, whether accepted or not, when the pics came out. Its fundamental to Islam that there is no God but God. Any pictures of the prophet can lead to his elevation to demigod. Thats the fundamental difference between the two factions and Christianity.

[heliochrome85]

i have never heard, honestly, anyone advocate terrorism. they all denounce it. you have to remember that for someone to come out publically and say, yes they are doing the right thing, is against Islam and the government. To a certain degree there does exist a certain fear of unrest from the people. Support for suicide bombers would mean that the people are open to attacks against the state. so whether they believe it truely or not, there is no one who speaks in favor of the action. at most, they can sympathize or rationlize, but never support.

[rn79870]

Bob, we've already established that terrorism is the work of a fringe minority who misinterprets religious law.

But certainly they have an opinion on it. That's what I'm wondering about. Do they accept it as inevitable, or do they condone it as necessary, or do they condemn it as violent? I'm interested in what the average middle eastern person hears in a coffee shop with respect to suicide bombings, missile strikes and the like.

My perception is that there is dancing in the street whenever there is a successful terrorlst attack, and Helio is presenting the other side, and I'd like to hear it.

[rn79870]

I see that Helio answered my question. Thanks Helio, I'm ignorant as to the middle eastern mindset and I believe the first step in working through a problem is to understand the other's side. Thanks for all the sharing you are doing.

Do the people lack the resources or the ability to vent their disapproval of terrorism? Is protest unhealthy? How is it that there appears to be so much public support for it? Is it merely the news capitalizing on specific events and representing them as the entirety?

[heliochrome85]

i can say for certain there is NO dancing in the streets. we arent barbarians. our religion forbids us from killing anyone since its considered God's will to take a life. If you kill someone, then you have commited sin since only God has the power to give and take life. hence the religious basis for their arguement falls through. If you look at suicide bombers from a strategic and emotional point of view, i can see why they do it. take away a persons dignity and there are no limits to what they are capable of rationalizing. give them jobs and a future and watch how the suicide attacks will cease. their desparation ceases to be enough to blow themselves up.

[heliochrome85]

the news is 100% capitolizing on one instance and painting the region as such. In my 23 years on this earth and of all the palces ive been, ive never witnessed or heard of situations where people were HAPPY that innocent lives were lost. It is morally indefensable even if you remove the religion aspect.

[AZhitman]

my understanding is limited but ehre goes.....

Interesting, thanks for that! It's disheartening to see that other faiths have their inter-faith squabbles as well... simple human reality.

Thats the fundamental difference between the two factions and Christianity.

Actually, the differences are minimal if at all... You'd be surprised.

Probably a topic for a different time and thread, as we'd be delving into religion then...

[rn79870]

That's reassuring, and refreshing. If you're correct, and merely giving those who suffer the means to support themselves and live a meaningful life, then I'm all for pursuing that avenue.

My only question is why the middle east governments seem to support, in the sense that they allow to exist, the extremist factions of Islam, those that go against the core tenants of the faith and preach death and destruction. Is there any way to reach the bin Laden's who promote terrorism?

[AZhitman]

My guess is, they're insulated by followers, much like our own retarded zealots are.

[heliochrome85]

my guess is that they are the lesser of two evils. in some cases, like Hezbollah in lebanon, they actually serve a positive social function. hezbollah, has massive cash reserves and has the man power to mobilize reconstruction efforts in disaster zones. they also provide for the poor, housing, food, and income. They represent the only reason why Israel has not taken the Shebaa farms of southern lebanon, with their verdant green fields and numerous natural resources. Hezbollah has been largely painted as extrememists and terrorists, but the reality is that they serve much the same function as the red cross here in the US. they have political and social legitmacy, and in hezbollah's case, they are a force to be recoked with. Many syrians support him and his organization because they actually do good work in the community while actively resisting the agressive Israeli military/government. Their use of rockets is a deterrant, and is unfortunate in that it is a risk to civilians. If you want to see more about whats going on in the region, from a very very unbiased view point, check out aljazeera english. I honestly can say its the best news source for the region and has some of the most well respected journalists in the world working for it.

http://english.aljazeera.net/N...5.htm

[AZhitman]

Sounds a lot like the Masons and the Shriners in our culture...

On the surface, respected businessmen who build hospitals and drive around in funny cars.

Underneath, a history of anti-Christian atrocities, bizarre rituals, and long traditions rooted in eastern religion.

[AZhitman]

Tariq - Thanks for that link, I'm adding it to bookmarks.

Might even start a new thread on this article... Interesting that there's little in the Western news about it!

http://english.aljazeera.net/N...E.htm

[HashiriyaS14]

Wow, so much to reply to here....

A.) There IS religious persecution in America, or at least a major movement in favor of it by a huge segment of the population.

Any attempt to overturn Roe v Wade on religious grounds is religious persecution upon those who do not share the belief that it is wrong. The same could be said for gay marriage or whatever else. You're limiting what someone else can do with their life because of a religion that YOU subscribe to and THEY don't.

Granted, no one's killing anyone else, and it's not as bad as if they were, but it's still a form of persecution on religious grounds.

B.) Helio is advocating "kill them with kindness", to which many will reply "But kindness won't sway extremists". This is absolutely true, no ovetures from the US will stop Al Qaeda from wanting us all dead. The trick is that these ovetures WILL sway the rest of the population to want to stop tolerating Al Qaeda's existence. We must drive a wedge between the two politically, as if the two are allied together firmly they are unassailable simply because we lack the political will (and rightly so) to exterminate entire nations.

This is why we must throw wholehearted support behind GOOD Islamist groups, like Fatah in Palestine. Abu Mazen is a reasonable man who wants to bring about positive change for his people, and both he and us have the mutual goal of eliminating Hamas from the table. This situation could be replicated everywhere this problem exists. All parties (except the terrorists) would win when this happens. In order for this to happen though, we can no longer unconditionally back Israel! We have to approach the situation with a truly even hand. We can't punish Fatah because Hamas launches rockets. We need to force Israel to negotiate with Fatah and then we can all stop the rockets together.

And then lather, rinse, repeat in other locales.

Oh, and I totally think that Jerry Falwell was every bit as bad as WBC. Falwell might actually have been worse, because while Phelps is just a lunatic, Falwell dressed his message better and it was genuinely accepted by millions of American households. WBC is just a blip and a nuisance.

EDIT: I've always really wanted to go to the Middle East, but now is likely not a good time (other than Dubai). My Grandmother went in the 1960's and was amazed how gracious and friendly everyone was (Egypt, Jordan, Jerusalem). It was her favorite place she ever went, and she'd been just about everywhere. Hopefully the current conflicts don't keep me from ever getting over there and enjoying it.

[AZhitman]

Wow, so much to reply to here....

A.) Any attempt to overturn Roe v Wade on religious grounds is religious persecution upon those who do not share the belief that it is wrong. You're limiting what someone else can do with their life because of a religion that YOU subscribe to and THEY don't.

As with any argument, it's a lot more complicated if you carry it out to its extreme.

OK, so Brian and his NAMBLA buddies are being "persecuted"? Because, I mean, they can't molest little boys anymore, because of a religious ideal that someone else ascribes to.

Here's the catch:

There's religion, and then there's a universal RIGHT AND WRONG.

This isn't "persecution on religious grounds".

Those who critique people of faith can only go so far before they have to admit that there DOES exist a universal right and wrong, which makes it damn tough to deny the existence of a force or a being greater than us.

[heliochrome85]

i have to say, i just looked at your post count. 11111. i freaking love palindromes. so **** yeah.

2nd, if we marginalize those factions, they will just become passe, over time they will die off because no one cares about their message. up until now, we have been attacking them with force, which, lo and behold, is fuel for their fire.

3rd. the middle east is no more dangerous than it was in the 1960s. dont let the fear monging press prevent you from going. thousands of american tourists go their, (not counting israel) and you never hear about any problems. you know why? cause there arent any. generally the tourist areas are under such heavy security that any danger is non existant. so go and be amazed. my house there is a "new" house. it was built in 1920. There are families that live in the same home that their family has lived in for 300 years. Psssh, there are areas of Damascus that are older than the United States or even the New world. Ive been to places like Straight street, as mentioned in the Bible, or the Section of the Damascus wall where st. paul was lowered in a basket to escape the romans. you know whats better than telling you? showing you.

here are my pics from my trips to syria.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/h...55024/

[audtatious]

BEIT LAHIYA, Gaza Strip (AP) - A blast flattened the house of a militant commander in the Gaza Strip Thursday, killing four people, wounding 40 and burying an unknown number of others, Palestinian officials said. Israel, which routinely accepts responsibility for attacks on military targets, denied involvement. But Hamas said the blast was caused by an Israeli airstrike and responded with a heavy barrage of rockets and mortar shells into southern Israel, wounding an Israeli woman.

The spiraling violence threatened to undermine last-ditch efforts to secure a truce between Israel and Hamas and stave off an Israeli invasion of Gaza.

Israel's denial raised the possibility that the blast was caused by explosives meant for use against Israel that went off prematurely.

Ambulances rushed to the scene and residents of nearby homes brought shovels and bulldozers to help dig people from the rubble. Three people covered in blood were carried out on stretchers and hurried into ambulances that sped them away to the local hospital.

It was not clear whether the Hamas commander, Ahmed Hamouda, was inside the two-story house at the time of the explosion.

Cars parked nearby were destroyed and covered with dust, and windows of neighboring houses and shops were shattered by the impact of the blast. Electricians were on the scene trying to disable live wires in the house, which had been reduced to a pile of debris.

Hamas security officials pushed back a screaming mob of hundreds to keep them from disrupting the rescue efforts.

"It was a huge explosion," said Majid Abu Samra, a local resident. "The house was destroyed, and there are people still buried under the rubble. I evacuated two women who were covered in dust and blood."

Dr. Moaiya Hassanain of the Gaza Health Ministry said an infant girl, a teenage boy and a man were killed. The man's identity was not immediately known because the body was burned so extensively.

Maj. Avital Leibovich, an Israeli army spokeswoman, said the military was not operating in the area at the time. "We deny any connection to this incident," she said.

Hamas insisted that Israel was to blame even after it denied involvement.

"This heinous massacre reflects the ugly face of the Zionist Nazi occupation," said Abdel Latif Qanou, a Hamas spokesman.

Shortly after the explosion, Hamas said it fired a barrage of mortar shells and rockets toward southern Israel. Israel's national rescue service said a 59-year-old woman was moderately wounded when a rocket struck a home on an Israeli communal farm. Palestinian officials said Israeli tanks fired on the launching area used by Hamas.

The house explosion brought to five the number of Palestinians killed in violence Thursday. Earlier in the day, Israeli troops killed two Palestinian militants in a clash elsewhere in northern Gaza.

The new outbreak of violence came as a key Israeli envoy, Amos Gilad, was visiting Egypt in a bid to wrap up a deal to halt the daily rocket and mortar attacks on Israel from Gaza and the Israeli land and air strikes they provoke.

Israel has repeatedly threatened to launch a massive ground offensive in Gaza if the rocket fire persists. But on Wednesday, Israeli leaders decided against an invasion for the meantime, saying they wanted to give Egypt more time to broker a truce between Israel and Hamas. At the same time, Israel—convinced Hamas would take advantage of a lull to rearm—said it would push forward with preparations for a military campaign.

Israeli government and security officials said Israel was willing to give the Egyptian mediation efforts about two more weeks to succeed, but if those efforts fail, it would invade Gaza.

Egypt is acting as middleman in the truce talks because Israel has no contacts with Hamas, which has killed more than 250 Israelis in suicide attacks and rejects the Jewish state's right to exist.

Major points of contention remain, most prominently, Israel's demand to link the truce to the release of an Israeli soldier held captive by Hamas for two years, and Hamas' demand that Israel open Gaza's border crossings.

Israel blockaded Gaza a year ago after Hamas, a militant Islamic group that has killed hundreds of Israelis, violently seized control of Gaza from security forces affiliated with the moderate Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas. It has tightened the sanctions in recent months in response to stepped-up militant attacks.

The closure has prevented the vast majority of Gaza's 1.4 million people from traveling abroad, and led to widespread shortages of fuel, electricity and basic goods.

Israelis who live near Gaza are pressuring the government to launch a punishing assault on Gaza to stop the Palestinian rocket and mortar attacks, which have disrupted life in southern Israel and killed four people this year, including a man killed last week.

Their appeals have considerable support among the broader Israeli public. But past military operations have failed to stop the barrages, and high casualties on both sides would likely result.

A major incursion into Gaza also would be liable to force Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to call off peace talks his government has been holding with Israel since late November. Abbas, who has ruled from the West Bank since Hamas seized power in Gaza last year, still claims to represent the people of Gaza.