get osma bin laden, saddam and all the other extremist muslims in the world!

Its simple. to these terrorists, if you arent muslim, they want you dead. there is no talking or anything that can be done to change their maniac minds, they must be illiminated.Rory, you seem to come from the "Kill them all, let God sort it out" school of diplomacy.;) :) :)

I can assure you that trying to kill all the extremist Muslims will be a herculean job! And the longer this goes on the more extremist there will be, on both sides!

they are evil, their god does not exist in them so forget about soughting them out, just get rid of them all.
But they think God does! They can "prove" it by their illustrations. Killing them might solve the immediate problem but what about the future? Can we kill them all?

Actually, Rory, it is only 72 "virgins" and the Arab word "Ayn," is properly translated as Angel or Heavenly being, not virgin. Also, the word has no sexual implications. However, the fundamentalist maybe misusing this.

Basically, I agree with you, the bad must be weeded out. I have no problem with that but can we be sure we are "getting" just the bad? The U.S. has a bad habit of going into conflicts, ham fisted. Remember it is easy to win a war with massave fire power - it is no so easy to win the peace that way.

You say that people need to think for themselves. I agree, but what happens when they don’t think like us? That is when we need to talk, so we don’t make more bitterness, hard feelings and ultimately, terrorists.

You said, "Thats what they dont understand, we dont care about their beliefs, and we do not need to, we only need to care about protecting others lives and freedoms." Maybe that is the problem, we don’t care and it shows!


Yes, Rory, terrorism will be back, from time to time - the way things are being handled now guarantees that.

MAYBE WE COULD STOP ALL THIS GODBOTHERING AND TRY TO USE OUR BRAINS BETTER.

Religion is the biggest threat to this planet.

Ostrom

MAYBE WE COULD STOP ALL THIS GODBOTHERING AND TRY TO USE OUR BRAINS BETTER.

Religion is the biggest threat to this planet.

Ostrom
I would like that too! But religion is here. It is part of the fabric of life, a waning one perhaps, but it is here. We have to deal with it.

By the way, religion is not the biggest threat to the planet, misused religion on the other hand? OK I'll give you that.

I would like that too! But religion is here. It is part of the fabric of life, a waning one perhaps, but it is here. We have to deal with it.

By the way, religion is not the biggest threat to the planet, misused religion on the other hand? OK I'll give you that.

This is what i think about it in general. I made a new tread called it:
The dangerous religous people.

This is what it says!!
Someone said to me once that god created us as a image of himself ?

Since people are dumb, and also nasty on the side, then god must also be dumb and nasty on the side. That might explain some of the bad things happening in this world !!!!

Aybody who wants religion is welcome to it, as far as i'm concerned.
I support your right to enjoy it. However, I would appreciate it if you exhibited more respect for those people who do not wish to share your dogma, rapture or necrodestination.

Think about the "rules" of christianity for a moment. Okay- What was in that Adam ate that he wasn't supposed to eat? It wasn't just an apple-it was the fruit of the three of the knowledge of good and evil.
The subtle message? "get smart and i'll f u over sayeth the lord" god is the SMARTEST and he doesn't want any competition.
Is this not an absolutely anti-intellectual religion.

In my view there is about time that some people stop using the chimpansee side of their brain so much and open their eyes and minds. I also believe that a reason that people practice religion is that participation creates thr illusion of belonging to an extended family. Whatever the IMAGINARY GUY IN THE CLOUDS won't do for them(sometimes he's busy-inventing crack; causing drought's stirring up mischief here and there) their fellow parishioners might.

If you want to stand on the steps af any building all dressed up on sunday morning, for whatever purpose( a christian business discussion, perhaps) great go for it.
If you want to get together in any exclusive situation and have people love you, fine-but to hang all this desperate sociology on the idea of THE CLOUD GUY who has THE BIG BOOK, who knows if you've bad or good-and cares about ANY of it-to hang it all on that, folks, is the chimpanzee part of the brain working.

I SERIUSLY BELIVE THAT DUMB PEOPLE ARE DANGEROUS

Ostrom

This is what i think about it in general. I made a new tread called it:
The dangerous religous people.

This is what it says!!
Someone said to me once that god created us as a image of himself ?

Since people are dumb, and also nasty on the side, then god must also be dumb and nasty on the side. That might explain some of the bad things happening in this world !!!!

Aybody who wants religion is welcome to it, as far as i'm concerned.
I support your right to enjoy it. However, I would appreciate it if you exhibited more respect for those people who do not wish to share your dogma, rapture or necrodestination.

Think about the "rules" of christianity for a moment. Okay- What was in that Adam ate that he wasn't supposed to eat? It wasn't just an apple-it was the fruit of the three of the knowledge of good and evil.
The subtle message? "get smart and i'll f u over sayeth the lord" god is the SMARTEST and he doesn't want any competition.
Is this not an absolutely anti-intellectual religion.

In my view there is about time that some people stop using the chimpansee side of their brain so much and open their eyes and minds. I also believe that a reason that people practice religion is that participation creates thr illusion of belonging to an extended family. Whatever the IMAGINARY GUY IN THE CLOUDS won't do for them(sometimes he's busy-inventing crack; causing drought's stirring up mischief here and there) their fellow parishioners might.

If you want to stand on the steps af any building all dressed up on sunday morning, for whatever purpose( a christian business discussion, perhaps) great go for it.
If you want to get together in any exclusive situation and have people love you, fine-but to hang all this desperate sociology on the idea of THE CLOUD GUY who has THE BIG BOOK, who knows if you've bad or good-and cares about ANY of it-to hang it all on that, folks, is the chimpanzee part of the brain working.

I SERIUSLY BELIVE THAT DUMB PEOPLE ARE DANGEROUS

Ostrom
I read your new thread. Read my comments there

The difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist?

A freedom fighter fights an occupying force, tries to liberate people of an occupied land and MUST have the support of the majority of the population (right of self-determination) of that area in order to be called a freedom fighter. He only attacks military targets.

A terrorist attacks military AND civilian targets and usually does not have the support of the population (extremist).

The difference between a freedom fighter and a terrorist?

A freedom fighter fights an occupying force, tries to liberate people of an occupied land and MUST have the support of the majority of the population (right of self-determination) of that area in order to be called a freedom fighter. He only attacks military targets.

A terrorist attacks military AND civilian targets and usually does not have the support of the population (extremist).
nope the difference is of whose is labeling the two factions,and for which purpose will it serve!!
freedom fighters usualy turn into terrorist!!

the irish have the ira..and they have been involved in terrorism for years now...YEARS!!!
they forgot about them in most speeches against terrorism!!
but anyways.....
the media wants you to envision a brown skinned man with a turba and quran everytime you mention terrosrism...and that is what is in peoples minds!!!:dancer:

Of course the labels get thrown around incorrectly all the time. The question was who 'is' a terrorist, not who is 'labelled' a terrorist.

For example, a Palestinian in the West Bank who attacks Israeli military (clearly an occupation force) is a freedom fighter, however, if this same Palestinian organizes a suicide bomb against civilians, he is a terrorist.

Using your IRA example, in my opinion, if the IRA holds popular support in Northern Ireland for their cause (which may or may not be the case) and only attacks military targets, he is a freedom fighter.

However, without popular support for his cause or if any civilians become fatalities, he is a terrorist. The term 'popular support' is ambigious, and in the situation of Northern Ireland is a highly debatable subject. In my opinion, most people in Northern Ireland do not support the use of violence to unite Northern Ireland with Ireland, and would therefore 'label' the IRA as terrorist even if they would only bomb military targets.

Of course the labels get thrown around incorrectly all the time. The question was who 'is' a terrorist, not who is 'labelled' a terrorist.

For example, a Palestinian in the West Bank who attacks Israeli military (clearly an occupation force) is a freedom fighter, however, if this same Palestinian organizes a suicide bomb against civilians, he is a terrorist.

Using your IRA example, in my opinion, if the IRA holds popular support in Northern Ireland for their cause (which may or may not be the case) and only attacks military targets, he is a freedom fighter.

However, without popular support for his cause or if any civilians become fatalities, he is a terrorist. The term 'popular support' is ambigious, and in the situation of Northern Ireland is a highly debatable subject. In my opinion, most people in Northern Ireland do not support the use of violence to unite Northern Ireland with Ireland, and would therefore 'label' the IRA as terrorist even if they would only bomb military targets.

Good points Hootchman :tup:
Most persons don't view it that way. But in some cases many groups don't start off as terrorist like Al-Qaida and others who were considered to be freedom fighters and heros by the U.S during the Afgan war in the 80s'.

Now everytime anyone thinks about terrorist they see this face:

http://www.bahamasissues.com/images/news/bin_laden.jpg
cnn/ap

there is no question about the IRA, they haved killed innocent women and children by the masses for many many years, they are simply murderers who all need to be executed for their crimes and so they do not kill any more innocent people. They do no only target military targets, they are not freedom fighters, they kill irish and british, it does not matter to them, once they kill someone. Anyone that supports them need to be treated the same way.



Of course the labels get thrown around incorrectly all the time. The question was who 'is' a terrorist, not who is 'labelled' a terrorist.

For example, a Palestinian in the West Bank who attacks Israeli military (clearly an occupation force) is a freedom fighter, however, if this same Palestinian organizes a suicide bomb against civilians, he is a terrorist.

Using your IRA example, in my opinion, if the IRA holds popular support in Northern Ireland for their cause (which may or may not be the case) and only attacks military targets, he is a freedom fighter.

However, without popular support for his cause or if any civilians become fatalities, he is a terrorist. The term 'popular support' is ambigious, and in the situation of Northern Ireland is a highly debatable subject. In my opinion, most people in Northern Ireland do not support the use of violence to unite Northern Ireland with Ireland, and would therefore 'label' the IRA as terrorist even if they would only bomb military targets.

Your answer is very dumb! You don't know what you are saying. You don't even know what a terrorist is. I bet you are always this dumb in all your response to every one every where you go.
When you can shut up then you will be right, your statments are very dump. You must be very lonely.

When directing a reply to someone, you should include a quote so we know who you are talking to!

Yeah Iupdate let us know who this is because I haven't ever seen any dumb persons on Bahamas Issues.

Rory this one is for you and any one like you...
Your answer is very dumb! You don't know what you are saying. You don't even know what a terrorist is. I bet you are always this dumb in all your response to every one every where you go.
When you can shut up then you will be right, your statments are very dump. You must be very lonely.

Any one who kill or support killing is a terrorist!
When and where have killing or war EVER, EVER, EVER brough peace?
kILLING CAN BRING NO PEACE, WHEN WILL YOU LEARN?



This is what I am talking:

READ AND LEARN

Leaders react to Hamas founder's killing

The European Union has condemned Israel's killing of Hamas spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmed Yassin as "very, very bad news" for the Middle East peace process.

Many governments around the world have called for calm in the Middle East in the wake of Sheikh Yassin's killing.

The 67-year-old wheelchair-bound cleric was killed in an Israeli helicopter strike in Gaza City, prompting Hamas to declare all-out war on the Jewish state.

EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said: "This type of action does not contribute at all to create the conditions of peace.

"This is very, very bad news for the peace process."

The Israel army has confirmed it killed Sheikh Yassin and Israeli Government spokesman Avi Pazner says Hamas has been weakened by the killing.

"Obviously Hamas is not dead and continues to exist as a very dangerous terrorist organisation," he said.

"But Hamas has been weakened and will be weakened without its leader.

"Sheikh Yassin was the founder of Hamas, of its terrorist ideology. He's personally responsible for ordering the most dreadful terrorist attacks in Israel."
International law

But Britain says the killing is unlikely to help fight terrorism.

Foreign Secretary Jack Straw says that while Israel has a right to defend itself against terrorism, it cannot use means outside international law.

"We therefore condemn it. It's unacceptable, it's unjustified and it's very unlikely to achieve its objective," he said.

Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has announced his country is pulling out of celebrations to mark its signing of a peace deal with Israel following the assassination.

Germany is "deeply concerned" by the killing, according to Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer, who has appealed for calm.

"The situation is that everything must be done so that further escalation can be avoided," he said. "The Government is deeply concerned about this development."

France has condemned the killing, also describing it as against international law.

Danish Foreign Minister Per Stig Moeller reiterated his country's opposition to Israeli assassinations of prominent militants.

"As you know we are against extrajudicial killings. Terror and violence and retaliation is not the way ahead," he said.

"Killings and terror bombings will not help us. This is not a way ahead."

Polish Foreign Minister Wlodzimierz Cimoszewicz, recalling the March 11 train blasts in Madrid which killed more than 200 people, said he feared Sheikh Yassin's killing would spill over into wider unrest.

"I am afraid that it may have very, very negative consequences not only in terms of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict but I am afraid that the threat of terrorist attacks against other countries, including Europeans, is growing," he said.

"I understand that Israel defends its own country [but such action] is probably not the best way of promoting Israeli security."
'Terrorism'

Iran's Foreign Ministry says the killing was an act of state-sponsored terrorism against the Palestinian people.

Foreign Ministry spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi said: "This is a criminal act and another example of the Zionist regime's sponsored terrorism and barbarism."

"Unfortunately the indifference of the world community towards the oppression of the Palestinians has made the Zionist regime even more insolent in its actions," he added.

Iran's former president, Akbar Hashemi Rafsanjani, warned that Sheikh Yassin's "martyrdom" would trigger an "even more serious struggle by the oppressed Palestinians against the Israeli terrorist occupiers and their US supporter".

Japan urged Israel to exercise restraint and not to accelerate violence in the Middle East.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Yasuo Fukuda said: "Our country asks the Israeli Government to exercise all restraint so that things will be brought back under control."

Japan's Foreign Minister, Yoriko Kawaguchi, called on both Israel and the Palestinians to exercise restraint to calm the situation.

"The Japanese Government expresses concerns over the killing," Ms Kawaguchi said in a statement.

"It appears the vicious cycle of hatred and violence has been expanding and the Japanese Government is also greatly concerned about that," she said.

Ms Kawaguchi says the Israeli Government and the Palestinians should make efforts to prevent the situation from deteriorating even further.
Violence

Lebanese President Emile Lahoud said Israel was mistaken if it thought violence could suppress the will of the Palestinians.

"Assassinating any symbol cannot kill those rights but will increase the resistance... Israel will find the same fate in the occupied territories as it found in south Lebanon," he said.

Kuwaiti Prime Minister Sheikh Sabah al-Ahmad al-Sabah says the killing "will spur violence".

He told reporters at Parliament that "violence begets violence".

The Prime Minister also called on the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations to intervene.

Yasril Ananta Baharuddin, the chairman of Indonesia's parliamentary foreign affairs commission, condemned the killing, saying: "It only shows that Israel does not have the good will" to abide by the peace process.

"It also shows that everything they (Israel) did so far is only for the sake of their own interests," he said.

He says that if the killing does not stall the peace process outright, "it will hinder the process and slow it down".

The US-backed interim Governing Council in Iraq warned that the assassination could fuel violence in Iraq and endanger the whole region.

Adnan al-Assadi, the number two official in Iraq's Shiite fundamentalist Dawa party, said: "This could happen in Iraq because the Israelis are well protected in Israel and the Americans are vulnerable here in Iraq. It could escalate the dangers in Iraq.

"Such assassinations only feed terrorist networks which will use it as justification to conduct attacks under the pretence of revenge," he said.

Islamic Jihad leader Ramadan Shallah, in a statement on the Arab satellite television Al-Jazeera, condemned "deaf and blind Arab leaders who only speak to defend Israel".

"If you do not abandon your silence and support the Palestinian people who are being strangled by Israel, if you do not move, the fate of your thrones at the hands of your peoples will be no better than that of Sheikh Yassin's wheelchair," he said.

-- Reuters/AFP/Kyodo :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: :bouncy: