Israeli soldier post pics of herself and Palestinian prisoners on where? FACEBOOK

[Chocoholic]

it's about respecting human beings. Even prisoners.

Agreed, but I've never considered the beheading of American prisoners and putting these videos on Arab television/YouTube, respectful. That "comparison" I'll never be able to erase from my memory; if you saw one, you might understand.

Furthermore, I've stated the IDF soldier's actions were stupid. The IDF condemned her actions, launched an investigation and provided all the photos as part of that investigation, which is still ongoing.

Those are Islamic values too, just for the record.

Your argument is less than compelling considering; suicide bombings, human shields, stoning/honor killings, mothers' strapping bombs on their babies, martyrdom and martyrdom reparations. I'm not saying there aren't peaceful Muslims, because there certainly are. I'm saying some of the tenets and specious doctrine embraced/interpreted as fundamentals of Islam are heinous and most disturbing.

This is not anomalous behavior exclusive to a few Islamic radicals. It's found in the government, ruling powers, kingdoms of some Islamic/Arab countries. I trust you heard of Wahhabism which is the dominant sect in Saudi Arabia? Wahhabism is a literal interpretation of the Quran, its Creed provides for a military conscription for war against the infidel. This is why Osama bin Ladin has been popular; having remained protected and elusive from capture. And while the Saudi Government condemned bin Laden, they never condemned his message - until that happens, expect the brutality to continue unabated.

Political Islam and/or Islamic puritanism; is the God given authority which the Taliban (Hamas, al Qaeda, Hezbollah et al) uses as a license to kill in the name of allah. Whether infidel, Shi'as or peaceful, moderate/liberal Muslims, they've all been exposed to this Islamic Muharib (taking a human life to prevent the corruption of the faith). Just ask the Islamic Studies Professor whose house was bombed for befriending "infidels".

Here's an Arab explaining (and showing) why Hamas killed Palestinians - their own people - at a wedding.
http://www.youtube.com/watch#!v=dK-DYB6YgU8&feature=fvw

And some Christian conservatives only support Israel because they want them to rebuild the Temple so Jesus can come again.

Israel is also the Holy Land to Christians who believe that Jesus lived and walked there. I've never heard a Christian say, we're going to drive the Jews into the sea, or Death to the Jews! No, they co-exist peacefully.

If that's all our money's going towards, why don't we just buy planes straight from Boeing.

Ok, I can put you down for how many F-16's?? Israel has over 300, surely you'll take at least 2.

(And no, those companies wouldn't all go out of business without Israel.)

That's some leap! I said these bi-lateral contracts keep Americans employed and in this economy most would agree, that's a good thing. You might be surprised to learn that the US is using Israeli arms in Iraq too - I recall one is a mortar launcher. Both countries pursue interests in several joint projects.

And if the Israelis and Americans alike remembered that extremist militants did not represent the greater whole.. well we'd be doing a hell of a lot better.

And the crazies might take that, as tacit approval...

[Drolefille]

Dear lord why did you screw with the font.

Originally Posted by Chocoholic

Agreed, but I've never considered the beheading of American prisoners and putting these videos on Arab television/YouTube, respectful. That "comparison" I'll never be able to erase from my memory; if you saw one, you might understand.

Wow. Way to build that strawman and knock it right down.
In this paragraph you have assumed that a)someone might consider those videos respectful, b) it's natural to compare that to this situation, c) that I've never viewed those videos and d) that if I did see those videos, I'd agree with you. Sorry. You're wrong on all 4 counts.

Furthermore, I've stated the IDF soldier's actions were stupid. The IDF condemned her actions, launched an investigation and provided all the photos as part of that investigation, which is still ongoing.

Good we're on the same page here.

Your argument is less than compelling considering; suicide bombings, human shields, stoning/honor killings, mothers' strapping bombs on their babies, martyrdom and martyrdom reparations. I'm not saying there aren't peaceful Muslims, because there certainly are. I'm saying some of the tenets and specious doctrine embraced/interpreted as fundamentals of Islam are heinous and most disturbing.

Suicide bombings - specifically prohibited by Islam, politically motivated with religion mostly serving as the rallying cry.
Human Shields - Military/political tactic - used by non-Muslims
Stoning/Honor Killings - Something that is in the Hebrew/Christian scriptures too (and was done, frequently), currently in place and enforced more by cultural forces than purely religious ones. That is, not ever Muslim country or family would even consider the idea, but residents of and immigrants from certain countries see it as normal. It was happening there before Islam got there.
"Mother's strapping bombs on their babies" - this isn't a few radicals? Really?

You're looking at things that represent extremists and then claiming that they're not extreme. Islam isn't why people are bombing buses in Israel. Those people see it as their only method of fighting since they don't have armies. They're wrong to say the very least but that's what's in their head. Individuals might be religiously motivated but that doesn't make them representatives of Islam any more than abortion doctor killers are representative of Christianity.

This is not anomalous behavior exclusive to a few Islamic radicals. It's found in the government, ruling powers, kingdoms of some Islamic/Arab countries.

Some.. So SOME radicals
Out of over 1 billion Muslims, you don't think that this is a small percentage?

I trust you heard of Wahhabism which is the dominant sect in Saudi Arabia? Wahhabism is a literal interpretation of the Quran, its Creed provides for a military conscription for war against the infidel.

And just like a literal interpretation of the Bible is ineffective and would allow you to own slaves, forbid you from wearing mixed fabrics, stone women for adultery if she was raped in a city and didn't cry out loud enough (but not in the country where they couldn't hear her), and tell you the Earth was only several thousand years old, a literal interpretation of the Koran is not particularly a valid one.

Wahhabism is fairly extreme as far as beliefs go, and one that persecutes women, for example. However, Saudi Arabia doesn't have some of the strife of other countries because of the wealth and culture of the country itself- they will always have religious "tourism" money even if the oil runs out - not because of its brand of Islam.

This is why Osama bin Ladin has been popular; having remained protected and elusive from capture. And while the Saudi Government condemned bin Laden, they never condemned his message - until that happens, expect the brutality to continue unabated.

Bin Ladin is actually pissed off at the Saudis for allowing Americans in. There's a reason he's not living there despite that being his country of origin. So you think that if the Saudi government specifically condemned his "message" we'd capture him tomorrow?

Political Islam and/or Islamic puritanism; is the God given authority which the Taliban (Hamas, al Qaeda, Hezbollah et al) uses as a license to kill in the name of allah. Whether infidel, Shi'as or peaceful, moderate/liberal Muslims, they've all been exposed to this Islamic Muharib (taking a human life to prevent the corruption of the faith). Just ask the Islamic Studies Professor whose house was bombed for befriending "infidels".

Evil people use religion, like they use any belief system, to justify their acts and to try to get others to follow them. Sometimes those evil people are crazy and sometimes they're intentionally manipulative. There is a huge history of Christian aggression based on then killing the pagans/infidels/heathens/etc. There is biblical documentation of the Hebrews killing tribes and cities of people because God told them to.

People kill "in the name" of a lot of things.

And find an unbiased source for a video next time if you want me to watch it.

Israel is also the Holy Land to Christians who believe that Jesus lived and walked there. I've never heard a Christian say, we're going to drive the Jews into the sea, or Death to the Jews! No, they co-exist peacefully.

Right, if we're following my point that some Christians only support Israel so they can make Jesus come again, they wouldn't want to kill the Jews, they just want the Jews to kill the Muslims and rebuild the Temple so big JC will come back and send the Jews to hell for not being Christians.

Also, you don't think there are Palestinian Christians who have said that? Or are you conflating Arabs and Muslims again? Perhaps other Christians haven't said that in Israel because they aren't the ones being killed in return.

(Also, pretty much every "the Jews run Hollywood/Washington/the world" anti-Semitic rambling from the US has been said by a Christian IME)

Ok, I can put you down for how many F-16's?? Israel has over 300, surely you'll take at least 2.

Bad logic. If my tax money bought those 300 planes over there, we could easily buy them over here instead.

That's some leap! I said these bi-lateral contracts keep Americans employed and in this economy most would agree, that's a good thing. You might be surprised to learn that the US is using Israeli arms in Iraq too - I recall one is a mortar launcher. Both countries pursue interests in several joint projects.

Assuming that those companies would go out of business because we stopped giving Israel aid is some leap. Your claim was that we're giving Israel money and they're just spending it on American things. That's not a good reason to keep giving it to them. There probably are good reasons to give it to them, but you provided a very bad one.

I'm not surprised at all, I just don't care. Why wouldn't we buy arms from someone else if they made good ones?

And the crazies might take that, as tacit approval...

The "crazies" will twist whatever you do into supporting their worldview. So you do the right thing no matter what (build Park51 in NYC, treat all prisoners with respect, treat all humans with respect, and so on) and then you haven't let terrorism compromise your values. Which means you win.

[Chocoholic]

Dear lord why did you screw with the font.

I like a larger font so I don't have to sit on top of my laptop just to see... I break so many that way. lol

In this paragraph you have assumed that a)someone might consider those videos respectful, b) it's natural to compare that to this situation, c) that I've never viewed those videos and d) that if I did see those videos, I'd agree with you. Sorry. You're wrong on all 4 counts.

I was responding to a comment you made earlier; essentially, respect should be given to all prisoners. And in a perfect world that would happen – however, we don’t live in a perfect world. We could give Islamic prisoners the key to Emerald City, and the outcome won’t change - militant beheadings shall continue as justifiable. Islamic militants need rehab and education, not candy and flowers.

Suicide bombings - specifically prohibited by Islam, politically motivated with religion mostly serving as the rallying cry.

Specifically prohibited by Islam, care to cite your source?

Human Shields - Military/political tactic - used by non-Muslims

Red herring. Specifically used by muslims in Gaza knowing the IDF wouldn’t shoot at children.

Stoning/Honor Killings - Something that is in the Hebrew/Christian scriptures too (and was done, frequently), currently in place and enforced more by cultural forces than purely religious ones. That is, not ever Muslim country or family would even consider the idea, but residents of and immigrants from certain countries see it as normal. It was happening there before Islam got there.

Yes and this archaic practice is still ONLY in use by those in Muslim countries or where Muslims are practicing Shaira Law - like the US and UK. Google honor killings.

"Mother's strapping bombs on their babies" - this isn't a few radicals? Really?

One mother is more than enough and imo, has no business having children. It’s child abuse. In this country that woman would lose her children and most likely prosecuted for child endangerment.

Those people see it as their only method of fighting since they don't have armies.

They "don't have" armies?!? Did I read that correctly? Regardless, of what you think of their armies - they have armies. You should really take a trip... I bet you think that Palestinians are living in tents, with nothing; not even running water, right?

Individuals might be religiously motivated but that doesn't make them representatives of Islam any more than abortion doctor killers are representative of Christianity.

More red herrings. One lone nut job vs. nut jobs from the fastest growing religion in the US (and worldwide) – exponentially increases the number of nut jobs. Period.

Some.. So SOME radicals
Out of over 1 billion Muslims, you don't think that this is a small percentage?

Not when their respective governments embrace the doctrine, i.e., Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia, now you have an entire country of wahhabism acceptance/adherence. No religious freedom there.

And just like a literal interpretation of the Bible is ineffective and would allow you to own slaves, forbid you from wearing mixed fabrics, stone women for adultery if she was raped in a city and didn't cry out loud enough (but not in the country where they couldn't hear her), and tell you the Earth was only several thousand years old, a literal interpretation of the Koran is not particularly a valid one.

Once again, you fail to acknowledge that the bible doesn't make the laws of this country. Most acknowledge it as a moral code written two-thousand years ago. You certainly wouldn't walk into family court in this country argue one party committed adultry, file a motion for contempt and hope the court orders they be stoned to death. The difference being is that Islamic law is a comprehensive system covering the relationship with allah, family, money, society and country - given and governed by allah.

Wahhabism is fairly extreme as far as beliefs go, and one that persecutes women, for example. However, Saudi Arabia doesn't have some of the strife of other countries because of the wealth and culture of the country itself- they will always have religious "tourism" money even if the oil runs out - not because of its brand of Islam.

You’re kidding right? It’s evident to me you know nothing of Sharia Law and the oppressive nature of wahhabi – Saudi women cannot vote, be educated like their male counterparts, they can’t drive, they have to have a familial/guardian male with them at all times, they’ve covered from head to toe in njib and female children are married off. Women cannot chose who they'll marry. Saudi Arabia is globally ranked as 130th out of 136th counties in terms of human rights violations. If you don’t see that as strife against women – I don’t think we can continue this conversation. Please read on. http://www.islamfortoday.com/ummzaid06.htm

Bin Ladin is actually pissed off at the Saudis for allowing Americans in. There's a reason he's not living there despite that being his country of origin. So you think that if the Saudi government specifically condemned his "message" we'd capture him tomorrow?

Is that what you understood from my post?

Evil people use religion, like they use any belief system, to justify their acts and to try to get others to follow them.

Ah, so you feel Islam is evil.

And find an unbiased source for a video next time if you want me to watch it.

LOL! It was a video made by an Arab Christian!

Right, if we're following my point that some Christians only support Israel so they can make Jesus come again, they wouldn't want to kill the Jews, they just want the Jews to kill the Muslims and rebuild the Temple so big JC will come back and send the Jews to hell for not being Christians.

I’m not buying that nonsense.

Also, you don't think there are Palestinian Christians who have said that? Or are you conflating Arabs and Muslims again? Perhaps other Christians haven't said that in Israel because they aren't the ones being killed in return.

I conflated no such thing. There are Mizrahim (Jews kicked out of Arab countries), Christian Arabs etc –

(Also, pretty much every "the Jews run Hollywood/Washington/the world" anti-Semitic rambling from the US has been said by a Christian IME)

Yes, I generally glean that kind of information from “Stormfront” …

Bad logic. If my tax money bought those 300 planes over there, we could easily buy them over here instead.

LOL! Yes, because your contribution has such military strategic value… Just how large is your yard and where exactly is it.

Assuming that those companies would go out of business because we stopped giving Israel aid is some leap. Your claim was that we're giving Israel money and they're just spending it on American things.

I’m sorry that’s how you interpreted my comments and that you’re not familiar with foreign aid in the ME – most clamor about how their tax dollars are given just to Israel, when they know nothing about the strings attached and the quid pro quo of these agreements and the congressional approval of said deals. Egypt has no strings attached, theirs is strictly economic aid. But I did hear that the US will start selling Egypt and the Saudis military weaponry, planes etc. It’s nice to know we still make something…

The "crazies" will twist whatever you do into supporting their worldview. So you do the right thing no matter what (build Park51 in NYC, treat all prisoners with respect, treat all humans with respect, and so on) and then you haven't let terrorism compromise your values.

Park51 is entirely separate argument – one I don’t oppose due to the first amendment argument. But I’d hate to see some other nutjob blow that thing up and harm innocent NY’ers again, in the process.

Which means you win

I'm somewhat amused by this remark. There's a certain idealistic naiviete to it. So you both maintain you both have won?

[AOII Angel]

Drole....I love you. You know what you are talking about. Unfortunately, this Choconut lost the ability to apply logic to his arguments years ago, that's why he is able to believe this drivel!

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Chocoholic

I like a larger font so I don't have to sit on top of my laptop just to see... I break so many that way. lol

Learn to hit Ctrl+mouse scroll instead of the horror of font tags you use all over the place.

I was responding to a comment you made earlier; essentially, respect should be given to all prisoners. And in a perfect world that would happen – however, we don’t live in a perfect world. We could give Islamic prisoners the key to Emerald City, and the outcome won’t change - militant beheadings shall continue as justifiable. Islamic militants need rehab and education, not candy and flowers.

It means that you can't justify Israel (or the US or anyone) treating prisoners badly because other people are worse. If we're the "good guys" it is incumbent on us to follow the rules. The less we follow the rules the more justification "they" have not to. And even when they don't follow the rules, we do it because it is right.

Specifically prohibited by Islam, care to cite your source?

Source
Source
Source
Go ahead and read those, I'll be waiting.

Red herring. Specifically used by muslims in Gaza knowing the IDF wouldn’t shoot at children.

Right. It's a military thing, not a religious practice.

Yes and this archaic practice is still ONLY in use by those in Muslim countries or where Muslims are practicing Shaira Law - like the US and UK. Google honor killings.

So, those honor killings in India where women and men are killed for marrying outside of their caste are not actually happening?

Honor killings are against the law even in countries where they occur. It is not an issue of everything being hunky dory with the government it's a cultural issue involving local control and coverup of these crimes.

Punishments like this go back to the code of Hammurabi.

However, the important point for this discussion is that it is part of the culture of those countries, not part of Islam. Indonesia does not have a similar problem for example.

One mother is more than enough and imo, has no business having children. It’s child abuse. In this country that woman would lose her children and most likely prosecuted for child endangerment.

No shit sherlock. I'm not saying it's fun times, I'm saying it's neither common nor religious.

\They "don't have" armies?!? Did I read that correctly? Regardless, of what you think of their armies - they have armies. You should really take a trip... I bet you think that Palestinians are living in tents, with nothing; not even running water, right?

So, the Palestinians are on equal footing with the Israelis militarily? Yeah. Right.

More red herrings. One lone nut job vs. nut jobs from the fastest growing religion in the US (and worldwide) – exponentially increases the number of nut jobs. Period.

These are only "red herrings" in the sense that you brought the subject up and cannot defend it. Suicide bombers are no more representatives of Islam than the IRA are representatives of Catholicism.

when their respective governments embrace the doctrine, i.e., Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia, now you have an entire country of wahhabism acceptance/adherence. No religious freedom there.Once again, you fail to acknowledge that the bible doesn't make the laws of this country. Most acknowledge it as a moral code written two-thousand years ago. You certainly wouldn't walk into family court in this country argue one party committed adultry, file a motion for contempt and hope the court orders they be stoned to death. The difference being is that Islamic law is a comprehensive system covering the relationship with allah, family, money, society and country - given and governed by allah.

You're conflating two points here.
One is that not all Muslims, even those living in places like Saudi Arabia, follow the literalist interpretation of the Koran.
Two is that said literalist interpretation is very flawed for the same reasons literal interpretations of other religious texts are flawed. Particularly when the texts are twisted for political purposes.

You are treating Islamic law as a solid universal block that has no differing perspectives. This is no more true than the idea that there are just Christians and they all agree on everything. We've had countries run entirely on "Christian" rules in the past, and our own country still carries plenty of those biases with us today.

You’re kidding right? It’s evident to me you know nothing of Sharia Law and the oppressive nature of wahhabi – Saudi women cannot vote, be educated like their male counterparts, they can’t drive, they have to have a familial/guardian male with them at all times, they’ve covered from head to toe in njib and female children are married off. Women cannot chose who they'll marry. Saudi Arabia is globally ranked as 130th out of 136th counties in terms of human rights violations. If you don’t see that as strife against women – I don’t think we can continue this conversation. Please read on.

I rather specifically said that it was persecuting women. I'm quite aware of what SA is like. I'm also aware that this is not the only form of Sharia and that Sharia varies wildly based on who's administering it. Again you're treating 1 billion people as if they all think like one person.

Is that what you understood from my post?

You said:
"And while the Saudi Government condemned bin Laden, they never condemned his message - until that happens, expect the brutality to continue unabated."
So yes, I interpreted that to mean you think that if the Saudis condemn his message we'd see an end to "brutality" or something similar.

Ah, so you feel Islam is evil.

No, I'm starting to think you're a moron, though.

LOL! It was a video made by an Arab Christian!

And titled "Innocent Hamas & Evil Israel - Liberalism at Work"
Yeah, you're right it's totally neutral!

I’m not buying that nonsense.

Me neither, but some do.

I conflated no such thing. There are Mizrahim (Jews kicked out of Arab countries), Christian Arabs etc –

When you say "Muslim/Arab" it sure sounds like you do.

Yes, I generally glean that kind of information from “Stormfront” …

So stop assuming it's an Islamic thing.

LOL! Yes, because your contribution has such military strategic value… Just how large is your yard and where exactly is it.

I'm rather obviously referring to American money in general.

that’s how you interpreted my comments and that you’re not familiar with foreign aid in the ME – most clamor about how their tax dollars are given just to Israel, when they know nothing about the strings attached and the quid pro quo of these agreements and the congressional approval of said deals. Egypt has no strings attached, theirs is strictly economic aid. But I did hear that the US will start selling Egypt and the Saudis military weaponry, planes etc. It’s nice to know we still make something…

I really don't bitch about my money going to Israel as a rule. We send a lot of foreign aid to a lot of places. You raised the issue as a point in the discussion.

Park51 is entirely separate argument – one I don’t oppose due to the first amendment argument. But I’d hate to see some other nutjob blow that thing up and harm innocent NY’ers again, in the process.

No shit. Really? How generous of you.
Why would that even come into your mind when discussing it?

I'm somewhat amused by this remark. There's a certain idealistic naiviete to it. So you both maintain you both have won?

Why do you care what the other side says? This shouldn't be some geographic pissing match (even though it is all too often.) And we've already acknowledged they're crazy, so your best bet is to convince the non-crazy people about how crazy the extremists are.

If you compromise your values for the terrorists, you lose. That's how it works. Their goal is to inspire terror, right? If you start clamoring about how you don't know if you can trust Muslims now, you only prove their point about the West wanting to destroy them.

We keep thinking that if we bomb (or shoot, or whatever) them we'll change their minds or something and we don't realize that for every civilian we kill, and we cannot help but kill some, we create enemies of their whole families, friends, neighbors.

Originally Posted by AOII Angel

Drole....I love you. You know what you are talking about. Unfortunately, this Choconut lost the ability to apply logic to his arguments years ago, that's why he is able to believe this drivel!

*sigh* Idiocy on these issues is just frustrating. This isn't us versus them.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Chocoholic

I don't think Israelis will behave like extremist militants, anymore than the US will

Ironic.

Originally Posted by Drolefille

And some Christian conservatives only support Israel because they want them to rebuild the Temple so Jesus can come again.

O so you've been talking to my parents?

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

Ironic.


O so you've been talking to my parents?

Dood. Finding out about that aspect of the "Support Israel" lobby was an eye opener for me. I'm just like jaw dropped "REALLY? YOU REALLY THINK THAT?" about the whole thing.

[agzg]

This thread has become the new "how to get to heaven when you die" thread for me.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by agzg

This thread has become the new "how to get to heaven when you die" thread for me.

Popcorn fodder or "dear lord won't it die?"

[agzg]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Popcorn fodder or "dear lord won't it die?"

Take a guess.

[preciousjeni]

Originally Posted by Drolefille

Dood. Finding out about that aspect of the "Support Israel" lobby was an eye opener for me. I'm just like jaw dropped "REALLY? YOU REALLY THINK THAT?" about the whole thing.

My mother gets VERY angry when people don't blindly support Israel. It's to the point that she has threatened to forcibly remove people from her home.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by preciousjeni

My mother gets VERY angry when people don't blindly support Israel. It's to the point that she has threatened to forcibly remove people from her home.

Woooow.

[Chocoholic]

It means that you can't justify Israel (or the US or anyone) treating prisoners badly because other people are worse. If we're the "good guys" it is incumbent on us to follow the rules. The less we follow the rules the more justification "they" have not to. And even when they don't follow the rules, we do it because it is right.

We follow the rules, sans, a few recalcitrant acts by individual soldiers. “Because it is right” means nothing without education, leaders who teach tolerance and religious objectivity and prevent the manipulation of religion for political or other means or ends.

Source
Source
Source
Go ahead and read those, I'll be waiting.

You’re kidding right? About.com – now there’s a scholarly source, LOL! The Statesman, what is that, a Texas newspaper? Suite101.com, if you bothered to check the contributors’ credentials I’m sure you would have been embarrassed. I’m almost embarrassed for you… Do you like 'The Atlantic' http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs.../06/brooks.htm

I’ll say it again, until you educate these young Muslim men, they’ll remain susceptible and receptive to a spurious version of Islamic nationalism taught and based upon nonsense promised to them by the Taliban et al. Therefore, our actions will mean bupkis, without first teaching them religious tolerance and educating them beyond the current level. If not; nothing changes and the cycle continues. In the very least, we should expect this from their leaders.

Why would that even come into your mind when discussing it?

Because, just last week a kid viciously stabbed a Muslim cab driver in NYC for no reason other than he was Muslim. It’s obvious to me that nutjobs know no bounds or borders. And the only reason I brought it up is due to the contentious, emotional hot button that discussion has evoked – right up to Sen Harry Reid and the POTUS.

Why do you care what the other side says? This shouldn't be some geographic pissing match (even though it is all too often.) And we've already acknowledged they're crazy, so your best bet is to convince the non-crazy people about how crazy the extremists are.

Agreed, it shouldn’t be a pissing match. I wanted you to clarify your position, and now you’ve done so. Thanks.

If you compromise your values for the terrorists, you lose. That's how it works. Their goal is to inspire terror, right? If you start clamoring about how you don't know if you can trust Muslims now, you only prove their point about the West wanting to destroy them.

I understand, and I agree. However, that doesn’t mean you capitulate to demands for fear of reprisal and threats of discrimination. In this country, we have the principle of separation of church and state; therefore, we don’t place footbaths in our public universities, prayer rooms in our middle schools, allow drivers licenses’ with photos of burqa-covered women. Yet with each of these, CAIR threatened legal action.

We keep thinking that if we bomb (or shoot, or whatever) them we'll change their minds or something and we don't realize that for every civilian we kill, and we cannot help but kill some, we create enemies of their whole families, friends, neighbors.

Once again, we agree. And those families grow up, and new generations are born and they’re taught who their enemies are and the cycle continues.
BTW thanks for that font tip.

[Drolefille]

Originally Posted by Chocoholic

[We follow the rules, sans, a few recalcitrant acts by individual soldiers. “Because it is right” means nothing without education, leaders who teach tolerance and religious objectivity and prevent the manipulation of religion for political or other means or ends.

No, "because it is right" means everything. You can't control what the other guy does in any situation, you can only be responsible for you.

You’re kidding right? About.com – now there’s a scholarly source,

The credentials of the author, which you could have seen had you bothered.

Huda is a Muslim educator and writer with nearly two decades of experience researching and writing about Islam on the Internet. An American woman of Irish/English descent, she has been a Muslim for the past 20 years.
Experience:

Huda is an educator, freelance writer and editor. She is the author of The Everything Understanding Islam Book, originally published in 2003, with a 2nd Edition in 2009. She currently teaches elementary school in the Middle East.
Education:

Huda holds a M.Ed. degree, and is fluent in both French and Arabic.

LOL! The Statesman, what is that, a Texas newspaper? Suite101.com, if you bothered to check the contributors’ credentials I’m sure you would have been embarrassed. I’m almost embarrassed for you…

The Suite101 author's credentials:

Lamyaa Hashim has lectured internationally on Islamic and Middle Eastern Socio-Economics and Palestinian issues for over 25 years. She served as the world news editor for Islamic Horizons magazine in the early nineties, and her journalism and poems have appeared in various publications around the world and translated into several languages. She reported live from the Middle East as a correspondent for the radio program Sout El-Arab Wel Aruba (Voice of the Arabs and Arabia), and is an avid human rights supporter.

One would think the alleged ties to Hamas, which are unproven, would actually make an article by her stating that suicide bombings are unacceptable more relevant, not less.

And the New Statesman is a British political magazine, the author is the senior political editor and worked for Channel 4. For someone so quick to toss away sources, you provided none that contradict. If you want scholarly sources you're on your own and hopefully you speak Arabic.

Do you like 'The Atlantic' [URL]http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2002/06/brooks.htm

I do. You'll note that it discusses suicide bombing as a Palenstinian cultural issue, not an Islamic issue.

I’ll say it again, until you educate these young Muslim men, they’ll remain susceptible and receptive to a spurious version of Islamic nationalism taught and based upon nonsense promised to them by the Taliban et al. Therefore, our actions will mean bupkis, without first teaching them religious tolerance and educating them beyond the current level. If not; nothing changes and the cycle continues. In the very least, we should expect this from their leaders.

Do stop acting as if they're country rubes. Highly educated people get taken in by lies and scams all the time. And it's not like you're volunteering to teach "them" (which, you know, don't because in your case it would be counterproductive).

I understand, and I agree. However, that doesn’t mean you capitulate to demands for fear of reprisal and threats of discrimination. In this country, we have the principle of separation of church and state; therefore, we don’t place footbaths in our public universities, prayer rooms in our middle schools, allow drivers licenses’ with photos of burqa-covered women. Yet with each of these, CAIR threatened legal action.

Suffice to say, in most parts of the country people only complain when it isn't their religion that's being allowed by the public school/space/university. Threatening legal action is nothing new.

BTW thanks for that font tip.

Now stop touching the font and color sections of the edit box. Stop. It's bad.

[Chocoholic]

Now stop touching the font and color sections of the edit box. Stop. It's bad.

I touched it once, to see how it worked, I haven't touched it since - I have no idea what "color sections" you're referring to, I only see black type and the light blue background.

For someone so quick to toss away sources, you provided none that contradict. If you want scholarly sources you're on your own and hopefully you speak Arabic.

Sorry, I couldn't get past About.com, went to Suite101's home page to see the contributors, left unimpressed and really went no further.

From my link:
http://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs.../06/brooks.htm
Before 1983 there were few suicide bombings. The Koran forbids the taking of one's own life, and this prohibition was still generally observed. But when the United States stationed Marines in Beirut, the leaders of the Islamic resistance movement Hizbollah began to discuss turning to this ultimate terrorist weapon. Religious authorities in Iran gave it their blessing, and a wave of suicide bombings began, starting with the attacks that killed about sixty U.S. embassy workers in April of 1983 and about 240 people in the Marine compound at the airport in October. The bombings proved so successful at driving the United States and, later, Israel out of Lebanon that most lingering religious concerns were set aside.

The tactic was introduced into Palestinian areas only gradually. In 1988 Fathi Shiqaqi, the founder of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, wrote a set of guidelines (aimed at countering religious objections to the truck bombings of the 1980s) for the use of explosives in individual bombings; nevertheless, he characterized operations calling for martyrdom as "exceptional." But by the mid-1990s the group Hamas was using suicide bombers as a way of derailing the Oslo peace process. The assassination of the master Palestinian bomb maker Yahya Ayyash, presumably by Israeli agents, in January of 1996, set off a series of suicide bombings in retaliation. Suicide bombings nonetheless remained relatively unusual until two years ago, after the Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat walked out of the peace conference at Camp David—a conference at which Israel's Prime Minister, Ehud Barak, had offered to return to the Palestinians parts of Jerusalem and almost all of the West Bank.

At that point the psychology shifted. We will not see peace soon, many Palestinians concluded, but when it eventually comes, we will get everything we want. We will endure, we will fight, and we will suffer for that final victory. From then on the struggle (at least from the Palestinian point of view) was no longer about negotiation and compromise—about who would get which piece of land, which road or river. The red passions of the bombers obliterated the grays of the peace process. Suicide bombing became the tactic of choice, even in circumstances where a terrorist could have planted a bomb and then escaped without injury. Martyrdom became not just a means but an end.

Do stop acting as if they're country rubes. Highly educated people get taken in by lies and scams all the time. And it's not like you're volunteering to teach "them" (which, you know, don't because in your case it would be counterproductive).

Most people are aware that there are tribes, where these "rubes" still practice in child marriages, are uneducated, live in abject poverty and this is what makes them receptive to the promises of the Taliban. It's their impoverished existence, with little or no opportunity for improvement which leaves them vulnerable.

Suffice to say, in most parts of the country people only complain when it isn't their religion that's being allowed by the public school/space/university. Threatening legal action is nothing new.

That's odd, most attended religious or private schools where their children would receive the education desired, not the other way around.

No threatening legal action is nothing new, but capitulating to CAIR by settling to their demands is. It appears to be the post 9/11 gift that keeps on giving...

I'm going back to Delphi, I like the format better.