Arab-Muslim terrorist bomb Israelis and Egyptians
 

It looks like these murder dogs just won't stop.


http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/485939.html
26 people killed in Sinai attacks, most of them Israeli
By Amos Harel, Yoav Stern and Revital Levy-Stein, Haaretz Correspondents, Haartetz Service and Agencies

At least 26 people, including many Israelis, were killed and 124 were wounded Thursday night in three attacks on two Red Sea holiday resorts packed with Israeli tourists, the Israel Defense Forces Home Front Command said Friday.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/486326.html
The Egyptians brought a unit of Egyptian firefighters who did not have the proper equipment. They are working with their hands and shovels, and the Egyptian government is not allowing us to bring in our heavy equipment. It is frustrating to stand in front of the destruction, unable to help the situation," fire chief Shimon Romach said on Friday morning.

-Rudey

Dramatic stories yesterday on NPR of wounded victims walking several hundred yards to the Israel/Egypt border rather than waiting for medical aid in Egypt.

Guess you can't blame them under the circumstances.

Perhaps next time the terror alerts may be taken more seriously, though.

Yes and no. Obviously they should be taken seriously but this is treading in the water of blaming the victim instead of the killers.

-Rudey

Not at all. No blame intended. Simply pointing out that the warnings should always be taken seriously.

So what if Israel gets bombed, they're not even a real country.

Not even a real country?!?!? Now that's The Wrong Thing To Say. :mad:

Israel may be the size of the state of New Jersey, but it is the spiritual home of the Jew, the Christian and the Muslim. They've been a real country since 1948 and is recognized by most countries in the world, except those predominantly Muslim countries in the Arab world who as a matter of public policy want to see Israel and the Jews driven into the sea.

Israel may be a tiny country, but they pack a vicious, mean and nasty punch... it's a well known open secret that they possess a nuclear capability; they have an itchy trigger finger and a grudge factor that never forgives nor forgets any injustice done to its people, wherever they may be. Get them sufficiently pissed off and no country in the world is gonna hold 'em back when they wanna kick some serious ass.

And for the record, I'm not a Jew.

Offensive thing to say -- no matter what your religious, political or ideological beliefs are.

HMMMMM

THEY PACK A VERY NASTY PUNCH. Their Air Force rivals the United States and most Israelies(sp) serve or have served in the armed forces. This country is capable doing some serious damage, if they want.

Question.


Can we just slam the idiots who are killing innocent people.

How about blaming the group of murderous dogs who are killing women nad children instead of the religion?

People act like Muslims just go from country to country blowing stuff up and it's not like that.


From a fellow Muslim, we're all not muderous dogs. Must muslims tend to their own buisness and wouldn't hurt anybody.

I mean nobody see's the Klan and say Murderous Christians do they?

It is the latest fade to group everybody into one category. Many see Islam as the new communist. The latest threat to the Western Civilizations.

Easier said than done. Unless they openly claim responsibility for the terrorist attack, it's gonna be hard to really pinpoint who did it. Signs point to al-Qaeda, but HAMAS may be involved, considering the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) whacked one of their leaders not too long ago.

IDF, as well as the Mossad and Shin Beth (the Israeli FBI) does have good intel on the whackos... and I wouldn't be surprised if swift retaliation on the rat bastards and/or the organization that sponsored them.

The unfortunate thing is that many people in the USA are just downright ignorant about events happening outside their ZIP code; they get the condensed version watching the evening news, if at all. Ignorance breeds prejudice -- it's much easier for someone to lump all Muslims as "camel jockeys" (among the less offensive of epithets directed at Muslims and Arabs) than to read something that would explain the whole situation.

Islam, like most religions, is a religion of peace. It's the small minority of ignorant, power-hungry, self-righteous zealots that give the religion a bad name.

When we have pictures of Palestinians dancing in the streets and handing out candy after hearing about 9/11, it's hard to cut the folks in Gaza any slack in my mind.

But I agree. 99% of the Muslims I know are great people and there are lots of ignorant people out there. There is one sect of that religion, however, and a culture in certain countries that supports terrorist attacks and sacrificing ones own life in support of a jihad.

I think the biggest problem that we in the West see is that this sect is not being actively combatted hard enough. Some states are trying to stamp it out through a combination of force and education (Jordan seems to be a great example). However, other countries and quasi-states like Palestine, Syria and Iran seem to be ignoring the problem as it festers in their own back yards.

And as AlphaSigOU stated, it's a matter of policy for many of these countries that they'd like nothing more than to destroy Israel. They make no secret of that.

Not even worth a response.

-Rudey

Why is it that people think all Muslims are being blamed for something???

I have even posted articles written by Muslims coming out of Arab lands discussing how they are ashamed and have to realize that all these gruesome acts are coming from their own people.

ETA: Here is one such article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/08/in...rint&position=

September 8, 2004
School Siege in Russia Sparks Self-Criticism in Arab World
By JOHN KIFNER

BEIRUT, Sept 8 — The brutal school siege in Russia, with hundreds of children dead and wounded, has sparked an unusual round of self-criticism and introspection in the Muslim and Arab world.

"It is a certain fact that not all Muslims are terrorists, but it is equally certain, and exceptionally painful, that almost all terrorists are Muslims," Abdel Rahman al-Rashed, the general manager of the widely watched Al-Arabiya satellite television station wrote in one of the most striking of these commentaries.

Writing in the pan-Arab newspaper Al-Sharq al-Awsat, Mr. Rashed said it was "shameful and degrading" that not only were the Beslan hijackers Muslims, but also the murderers of Nepalese workers in Iraq, the attackers of residential towers in Riyadh and Khobar, Saudi Arabia, the women believed to have blown up two Russian airplanes last week and Osama bin Laden himself.

"The majority of those who manned the suicide bombings against buses, vehicles, schools, houses and buildings, all over the world, were Muslim," he wrote. "What a pathetic record. What an abominable `achievement.' Does this tell us anything about ourselves, our societies and our culture?"

Mr. Rashed, like several other commentators, singled out Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, a senior Egyptian cleric living in Qatar who broadcasts an influential program on Al Jazeera television and who has issued a fatwa, or religious ruling, calling for the killing of American and foreign "occupiers" in Iraq, military and civilian.

"Let us contemplate the incident of this religious Sheikh allowing, nay even calling for, the murder of civilians," he wrote. "How can we believe him when he tells us that Islam is the religion of mercy and peace while he is turning it into a religion of blood and slaughter?"

Mr. Rashed recalled that in the past, leftists and nationalists in the Arab world were considered a "menace" for their adoption of violence, and the mosque was a "haven" of "peace and reconciliation" by contrast.

"Then came the Neo-Muslims," he said. "An innocent and benevolent religion, whose verses prohibit the felling of trees in the absence of urgent necessity, that calls murder the most heinous of crimes, that says explicitly that if you kill one person you have killed humanity as a whole, has been turned into a global message of hate and a universal war cry."

A columnist for the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Siyassa, Faisal al-Qina'I, also took aim at Sheikh Qaradawi. "It is saddening," he wrote, "to read and hear from those who are supposed to be Muslim clerics, like Yusuf al-Qaradawi and others of his kind, that instead of defending true Islam they encourage these cruel actions and permit decapitation, hostage-taking and murder."

In Jordan, a group of Muslim religious figures, meeting with the religious affairs minister, Ahmed Heleil, issued a statement today saying the seizing of the school and subsequent massacre was dedicated to distorting the pure image of Islam.

"This terrorist act contradicts the principles of our true Muslim religion and its noble values," the statement said.

Writing in the Jordanian daily Al-Dustour, a columnist, Bater Wardam, noted a propensity in the Arab world to "place responsibility for the crimes of Arabic and Muslim terrorist organizations on the Mossad, the Zionists and the American intelligence, but we all know that this is not the case."

"They came from our midst," he wrote of those who had kidnapped and murdered civilians in Iraq, blown up commuter trains in Spain, turned airliners into bombs and shot the children in Ossetia.

"They are Arabs and Muslims who pray, fast, grow beards, demand the wearing of veils and call for the defense of Islamic causes. Therefore we must all raise our voices, disown them and oppose all these crimes."

In Egypt, the semi-official newspaper Al-Ahram called the events "an ugly crime against humanity."

In Saudi Arabia, newspapers tightly controlled by the government — which finds itself under attack from Islamic fundamentalists — were even more scathing.

Under the headline "Butchers in the Name of Allah," a columnist in the government daily Okaz, Khaled Hamed al-Suleiman, wrote that "the propagandists of Jihad succeeded in the span of a few years in distorting the image of Islam.

"They turned today's Islam into something having to do with decapitations, the slashing of throats, abducting innocent civilians and exploding people. They have fixed the image of Muslims in the eyes of the world as barbarians and savages who are not good for anything except slaughtering people," he wrote, adding:

"The time has come for Muslims to be the first to come out against those interested in abducting Islam in the same way they abducted innocent children. This is the true Jihad these days and this is our obligation, as believing Muslims, towards our monotheistic religion."

The rest of the article is found at the link above.

-Rudey

I am not a "Rah Rah" Isarael supporter. I just think we should honor our treaty obligations.

However, I think they have more than enough reason to use Bush's doctrine of preemption. They should invade Palestine slowly and very bloodily . . . the more they kill the better for them.

Seriously, the so-called international community has to get off their backs and let them clean house.

I know we butt heads and we're going to do it some more, but......

I'm not accusing you of anything per se Rudey. If it came off like that then that's my bad. Most of the stuff you post, you usually post something that counters it. I was talking about the overall perception that Muslims are the only people doing these things. SOme of them men are actually in other religions for not all Arabs are muslims. You don't need to be Muslim to hate the US and what it stands for. Just my take.

The more Palestinians they kill the better? Are you seriously that ignorant!????? A comment like that sounds just like something Hamas or their supporters would say about the Israelis....

Wow from the ignorance of Optimist Prime to yours... nice to see this thread bringing out the closet nut-cases...

The two statements can not be compared.

-Rudey

Well I think you can compare the two statements… in much the same way you can compare a rotten apple and a rotten orange; both taste horrible, but as for which tastes most foul it is up to personal taste. However the fact remains that they are both rotten… just at the two statements were both ignorant.

Thank you!
When are we going to stop attaching a religion to people who can only "claim" to be acting under that religion - especially when their actions are contradictory to the basic doctrines of that religion. People, please think before you type.

1) They are very much a part of that religion and adhere to it more so than you do to yours, I'd be willing to bet.

2) Nobody attacked any religion.

-Rudey

No, there is no fact that remains other than they are not similar whatsoever.

-Rudey

RACooper,

Ahhh . .. see . . . now that was a mistake. I have rather carefully refrained from commenting on your IQ :) How can you criticise Rudey when you are just as likely to make an objective issue personal?

And I actually am serious. Lets look at it totally from the view point of Israel and the security of their nation. Lets also take a historical military context , which you should know better than I.

They have militarily won the battle. There are no more set piece engagements. There are no more direct confrontations of regular army. They are facing a situation where the enemy have melted into the subject population to the point of being indivisible from them.

The population gives them a base to hide in and supplies them with both an inexhaustible supply of personel as well as weapons and consumables.

Two historical examples.

IF you will recall the Napoleanic Wars, one of the major problems that Napolean had was that he fought war in the European way where he defeated the enemies armies but left those countries with the capacity and man-power to field other armies within a very short time period.

This would oblige him to have to fight them again and again essentially paying for the same ground multiple times until he and France were so worn down they collapsed. (I am simplifying, obviously).

In other words Napolean and France eventually lost.

If you recollect Caesar's Gallic Commentaries you will recall that Gaul united and fought Caesar even after being first defeated and in the face of amazing clemency from Caesar. Can't blame them, they perceived him as a foreign invader.

Caesar eventually turned to harsh measures. Tribes that attacked him were reduced to nothing. Most of the men of military age were killed, the lands themselves were burned.

At the final decisive battle of Uxellodunum Caesar spared the surrendering soliders' lives but as an example cut off both hands of somewhere near four thousand of them and distributed those handlless people all over Gaul as a reminder.

IT effectively ended the Gallic Wars and Gaul was so pacified that it didn't even need a garrison.

Israel has tried harsh security measures, it has tried clemency and it has failed to maintain secuirty for its people.

What would you do RAcooper if you were the leader of Israel and your people were dying?

Its an academic discussion for us, but its a matter of life and death for them.

Soooo... James' advocation of a slow and bloody invasion of the Palestinian territories that kills as many as possible isn't ignorant? Well what else would you call it? Stupid? Dumb? Idiotic? Counter-productive? Hateful? Moronic? Morally flawed? lacking any decernable intelligence?

1) It is certainly true that, in the West, we tend to detach ourselves from our religious beliefs; it's something that is unfortunate but part of our culture. HOWEVER, the terrorists aren't adhering to Islam, a religion of peace. That's the point.

2) When you attach the particular religion to the act, you are attacking the religion. (Not "you" personally, Rudey - I mean "you" generally.)

I wouldn't say he made that advocation. So really stick to discussing Canada's politics and submarine issues.

-Rudey

1) Wrong.

2) Wrong.

And if you care, you can read the article above.

-Rudey

Well lets see... first off Napleon didn't lose because he left the civilian population alive.. in fact when they (the French) adopted harsh tactics to deal with the "geurillas" (it's were the word comes from) they actually exacerbated the problem and ignited more breakouts of insurgency and weakened their diplomatic position with "defeated" nations. No the real cause of Napleon's defeat stemmed from his extending his reach to far while ignoring the mounting pressure from Allies that knew that they had to pick away at Napoleonic France instead of confronting it head on until they were ready... economics and diplomacy, coupled with the depletion of French manpower, defeated Napoleon (simplifying as well).

As for Caesar... Romans always used the idea of the heavy stick to pacify regions; sometimes successfully, other times laying the ground work for centuries anti-Roman insurgancy. Rome was actually most successful with the stick-and-carrot aproach not the heavy stick. See in Gual the Romans turned the militaryistic elements of Gallic culture to their benefit... after defeating the Guals the Romans actuall co-opted them into Roman society through the military - if you look back to that period the size of the Roman Army actually doubled with an influx of Guals willing to fight for personal glory as their ancestors did and ended being absorbed into Roman society on all levels within three generations... The Romans allowed the Guals to tie-in their future and society into Rome's, ultimately leading to the Pax Romana.

Now as for what I would do... hmm perhaps undermine the anti-Israeli movement by ensuring that the Palestinians identify with Isreal's future as their own... because as long as they see their only positive future involving the demise of Israel, neither side can win. So to begin with: conspicuiouly reward Palestinians that help or serve Israel; provide "humanitarian" services to the Palestinians of a higher quality than they can currently provide themselves; make sure that the law applies equally to both Israeli and Palestinian - no favouritism either officially or unofficially; and remove restrictions on "loyal" or "friendly" Palestinians in Israeli society (education, military, government). These examples are taken from what Romans did typically to try and pacify or induct a region into the Pax Romana... unfortunately then as now it requires considerable effort and patience - a quality that many politicans and media seem to lack.... but then again the Romans were never able to solve the problems in the region either...

It would be comprable if a substantial number of Christians funded KKK activity, and called it a "charity." Also, as discpicable as the KKK is, they are not in the same league as Al Qaeda or the Islamic Brotherhod.

Islam is part of Western Civilization.

There's alot of blood of the KKK's hands. ALot of people were invited to those Georgia necktie parties before they were cracked down upon. Murder is Muder no matter how you cut it.

Many would disagree with you. You really think people like Daniel Pipes, Ann Coulter would be comfortable in saying that Islam is part of the Western Civilization?

James, I find this comment very very disturbing. Do you know the only people they will be killing is civilians and not the actual terrorists (because they are out there blowing themselves up)? Do you care they are even human beings?

*SMH*

Where did he say to kill only civilians???

-Rudey

The only people that will die are civilians, dear.

So let's sum up:

1) He didn't say that. You couldn't read properly and then made an accusation.

2) You make some silly assumption about the only people who will die.

-Rudey
--Great summary, but apologize to James for your mistake and to us for having to read it.

This is what he said. Very general. Alot can be inferred.


apologize for what? That I disagree with "the more you kill the better" lol...please, rudey.

I have to agree, that was a VERY GENERAL STATEMENT.

A lot can be inferred? So you infer from that, that no terrorists would be killed and only civilians? Wow.

-Rudey
--Apologize for making an accusation and not reading appropriately

Oh I get it. We're supposed to do the little song and dance, ha? No thank you, I pass...