P
pro_universal
Guest
Yes, absolutely. It was wrong and criminal.
- Status
C
cestusdei
Guest
You will now procede to ignore it and similiar atrocities. Meanwhile turning the conversation away from Islamic persecution of Christians. You will not focus on this or any other such incident. You will blame the victim or someone else or Bush. The next time I post something like it you will demand massive verification. Then once proven you will again ignore it until forced to repudiate it. Then repeat the above as necessary.
If you used half your intellect and feigned horror to attack the Muslims who did this rather then me it would be impressive. Instead we get the usual, “oh that’s to bad now let’s move on to something else, quickly.”
If you used half your intellect and feigned horror to attack the Muslims who did this rather then me it would be impressive. Instead we get the usual, “oh that’s to bad now let’s move on to something else, quickly.”
V
Verita
Guest
I have one thing to say about the whole Iraq incident: hindsight is 20/20.
I don’t know whether or not we did the right thing or the wrong thing. I don’t think there are any people who are really qualified to judge that, either. What I do know is that the past can’t be changed. What’s done is done. We should stop complaining about the past and should start looking to the future, to make sure that we do the right thing from now on.
I will say this for Bush, at least he does recognize that the Muslims are a threat. History has shown us this, but most people seem to have grown complacent and forgotten.
I don’t know whether or not we did the right thing or the wrong thing. I don’t think there are any people who are really qualified to judge that, either. What I do know is that the past can’t be changed. What’s done is done. We should stop complaining about the past and should start looking to the future, to make sure that we do the right thing from now on.
I will say this for Bush, at least he does recognize that the Muslims are a threat. History has shown us this, but most people seem to have grown complacent and forgotten.
V
Valke2
Guest
How has he recognized that muslims are a threat? He continues to have warm relations with the Saudi’s, when the majority of those responsible for 9/11 were from SA. He has downplayed the importance of getting Bin Laden drastically since he decided to invade Iraq. ANd he invaded one of the few mid-eastern countries that did not have an Islamic fundamentalist government.
V
Verita
Guest
I’m not talking about the individual decisions he has made. I don’t necessarily support them but I don’t condemn them either. I’d like to see you do better. It’s easy to criticize when you aren’t responsible for the safety of the nation.
V
Valke2
Guest
A potatoe could have done better. Because a potatoe would have just sat there. It would not have ordered an invasion of a country that had nothing to do with 9/11. As far as catching Bin Laden, a potatoe would have done at least as well as Bush. But a potatoe would not have flown Bin Laden’s family out of the US in the days following 9/11.
P
porkscratchings
Guest
As usual u neocons miss the point completely.
The point is - a pathetic attempt to dress up an imperialist invasion as something to be welcomed by the unfortunate iraqis - has been done b4.
It didn’t work for Hitler’s street cred, and it won’t work for Bush either.
Need i remind u guys that the US installed Saddam in the first place - overruling the will of the Iraqi pple?
Does this sound like the caring sharing US to u?
I think it is u who is blind.
E
Eden
Guest
This thread is about a priest who was beheaded in Iraq. Please start a new thread about President Bush if you want to continue this. Otherwise, pro’s tactics of diversion will have succeeded. This thread is about an innocent man who was butchered for being Christian.
P
porkscratchings
Guest
Correct. This thread is about a man who was murdered for being a Christian. So why have u guys allowed the thread to descend into a muslim baiting hate thread? Why criticise pro_universal but not one word against the OPs for express hate against folks who happen to be muslim?
The killing of an innocent man for being christian - is WRONG!!
The killing of thousands of muslims because the US blames ALL of them for the actions of extremist terrorists - is WRONG!!
If this is religion in all its ugliness - then it is no surprise that many folks don’t want to know.
V
Valke2
Guest
point taken. has there been any other news about this since it happend?
E
Eden
Guest
I haven’t seen anything about this in the news since Oct. 13th, which I believe was the date he was buried.
Creating a thread about a member of clergy being dismembered because of his faith is not about hating Muslims. As the ex-Muslim Dr. Wafa Sultan has said, the problem is not with the people but with the teachings. She asked, how can you take the surah (below) that calls for unbelievers to be smited above their necks and smited on all their finger-tips and teach it to children and explain it “in a good way”?
"I will instil terror into the hearts of the unbelievers, smite ye above their necks and smite all their finger-tips off them It is not ye who slew them; it was Allah" Surah 8:12, 17
While the Muslim on Muslim murders in Iraq are happening by the use of explosives or guns, the “unbelievers” are almost always killed by beheadings. How can anyone take that fact and read the above surah and conclude that fanatical Muslims have perverted Islam? They are doing just what Muhammed commanded. So, this is not about hating Muslims. This is about speaking out against these teachings.
P
porkscratchings
Guest
Eden said:
Like u can explain those old testament passages that sanction genocide against unbelievers, and justify taking land from them, raping their women and smiting them and their children? Or the numerous quotes that predict ugly ends for unbelievers?
U judge all muslims by a quote that most muslims do not practise against anyone, believer or not. The Surah states that punishment is Allah’s perogative, not stating it is ok to murder pple. Shall we take a dip into Christian history for a comparison?
it is public knowledge that Bush believes his acts are sanctioned by God, and that his govt is supported by neocons many of whom happen to be Christian. No doubt they can find many quotes in their Bible to justify bombing any nation they please - even if the UN votes no. So much for respect for democracy.
I have no problem with s o disagreeing with religion. I have issues with the same s o justifying shooting and blowing up many thousands of pple just because they happen to share the same faith as a few extremists. i have serious issues when folks then try to sell me this act of oppression as ‘doing the iraqi/afgani (insert weak non-western ethnicity of ur choice) pple a favour’.
Now tell me why the life of one nun and one priest merits more comment than the lives of thousands of muslims? R they not just as important - or is their worth in ur eyes determined by their religion?
V
Valke2
Guest
I can explain them. First and foremost, it has been more than 2,000 years since Jews used those passages for justification for any acts of violence against individuals. But you raise valid points that I have no good answer for.
E
Eden
Guest
As a Christian, that is easy to answer. Christ came to fulfill the Old Testament. With Christ’s Resurrection and death, we have the beginning of the New Covenant and the New Testament.
While you state that most Muslims do not practice the directive in this quote, even 1% of Muslims practicing it is too many.
Bush is an Evangelical. If you would like to know the Catholic teaching on this, Bush would not be the source.
O.K. Good. Because I disagree with some of the teachings of Islam.
This thread was not started to justify the killing of innocent Muslims. It was started to discuss the beheading of a man by Muslims in Iraq because he was Christian.
In the Christian faith, the lives of innocent Muslims are just as valuable as the lives of this priest and nun’s were. No one here rejoices in the deaths of innocents, Muslim or otherwise. Christ never taught that non-believers are dirty, loved less by God or should be killed.
P
porkscratchings
Guest
A New Testament that hates Jews and consigns all unbelievers to eternal damnation. A scripture that determines human worth based on whether or not the person is a Christian, and such a determination has been used to justify atrocities against believer and unbeliever alike thru history.
Would the same be said for 1% of Christians doing the same thing in the name of their God?
Islamic terrorists practise their own self-invented brand of Islam, which has nothing to do with the islam practised by everyone else. They r happy to blow up muslims as well as non-muslims. Why do u treat muslims as the same but reject Bush’s Christianity as being the same as ur own?
OK, like I disagree with some of the teachings of Islam and Christianity. No problemo.
But u cannot discuss the beheading of the Christian in isolation without discussing other killings. They are part of the same problem of one man/group deciding for himself/themselves that someone or some group deserves to be destroyed. If muslims r to blame for the death of the Christian (not just the fanatics within their faith) as some folks on this thread have suggested, then it is just a short step for another poster to make the connection that Bush/US should also answer for the deaths of thousands of muslims. Which they have done, in my view.
Agreed.
C
cestusdei
Guest
neocon? I guess if neocons get angry because priests are beheaded by Muslims then I am one.
The alternative to democracy in Iraq is what they used to call punitive wars. In effect you go in, kill lot’s of people and break lot’s of things, then leave. No attempt to rebuild or assist or occupy. It is the old-fashioned way of basically creating such fear that if some jihadi suggests attacking the US the others will run away. It is far more bloody, but it can be very effective. It is like taking the Sunni triangle and just leveling it completely to eliminate resistance. It would work. So I assume you neolibs prefer that strategy?
The alternative to democracy in Iraq is what they used to call punitive wars. In effect you go in, kill lot’s of people and break lot’s of things, then leave. No attempt to rebuild or assist or occupy. It is the old-fashioned way of basically creating such fear that if some jihadi suggests attacking the US the others will run away. It is far more bloody, but it can be very effective. It is like taking the Sunni triangle and just leveling it completely to eliminate resistance. It would work. So I assume you neolibs prefer that strategy?
V
Valke2
Guest
So I think we have established that we all live in a neighborhood of glass houses.
C
cestusdei
Guest
The World Trade Center had lots of glass. Had.
V
Valke2
Guest
So did the Federal Building in Oklahoma.
D
davy39
Guest
How many of these people were killed by their fellow Iraquis? A lot of them were killed for co-operating with the coalition troops. Some were killed by terriorist car bombs. Does anybody have a breakdown of the figures?
- Status