| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 11/23 |
| 2005/10/6-9 [Reference/Religion] UID:39999 Activity:nil |
10/6 "nobody seriously thinks what happened in Bali has anything to do with
Iraq. There are, in the end, no root causes, or anyway not ones that
can be negotiated by troop withdrawals or a Palestinian state. There is
only a metastasising cancer that preys on whatever local conditions are
to hand. Five days before the slaughter in Bali, nine Islamists were
arrested in Paris for reportedly plotting to attack the Metro. Must be
all those French troops in Iraq, right?"
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16801982%255E7583,00.html
\_ I agree with everything he sais about Islam, but the claim that
Christianity is not also guilty of this mentality is absurd.
American religious right leaders have publicly stated exactly the
same objectives as these islamists. They may not have have power
right now, but they're still just as much a threat to the survival
of our civilization. No one should ever forget that Jerry Falwell
sided with the terrorists on 9/11, and that he continued to be a
VIP guest at the Bush whitehouse after that time.
\_ Oh for crying out loud, not this again. Falwell did /not/ side
with the terrorists. If you want to debate that point yet again,
start a thread, but your revisionist history is pathetic. And
sign your name. -emarkp
\_ You're both right/wrong: http://csua.org/u/dna
\_ Um, no. Your link doesn't say that Falwell sided with the
terrorists. I'm aware of the content your link has, which
is why I know that Falwell didn't side with the terrorists.
How am I wrong on this? -emarkp
\_ Because you're bothering to argue with an obviously
inflammatory remark. --erikred
\_ You're both right/wrong:
http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/f/falwell-robertson-wtc.htm
\_ Yeah, Christians haven't done a large scale massacre of members
of a different religion for almost 10 years. Why can't those
Islamists be more like that?
\_ Are you refering to Bosnia? I think if it's Christians v
Muslims it still fits the framework. It's not that all
the other parties are totally innocent, just that it seems
to be much more universal with Muslims.
\_ And the US helped the Muslims there against the Christinas.
Of course the Muslim world don't want to remember this.
\_ Nor did we ever want to mention that they were Muslim.
We called them "Albanians" and "Serbs". Not "Islamists"
and "Christianistas"
\_ And white Christians were doing the killing so it can't
REALLY be about religion. Must be nationalistic. Yeah...
\_ And white Christians were doing the killing so it
can't REALLY be about religion. Must be nationalistic.
Yeah...
\_ What's wrong with that? Are you saying that if we were
helping Muslims without calling them Muslims, we were
not helping Muslims; while if we are attacking Muslims
without calling them Muslims, we are still attacking
Muslims? This is double standard.
\_ Er, no, I'm not saying that. I'm suggesting that
the word choices are interesting. good muslim ==
"albanians" imo because "muslim" has a negative
connotation with a large portion of the american
public.
of our civilization.
We called them "Albanians" |
| 11/23 |
|
| www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,16801982%255E7583,00.html E MAIL THIS STORY Mark Steyn: Islamist way or no way October 04, 2005 IT'S not just the environmentalists who think globally and act locally. T he jihadi who murdered Newcastle woman Jennifer Williamson, Perth teenag er Brendan Fitzgerald and a couple of dozen more Australians, Indonesian s, Japanese and others had certain things in common with the July 7 Lond on Tube killers. For example, Azahari bin Husin, who police believe may be the bomb-maker behind this weekend's atrocity, completed a doctorate at England's Reading University. The contribution of the British educati on system to the jihad is really quite remarkable. But, on the other hand, despite Clive Williams's game attempt to connect the two on this page yesterday, nobody seriously thinks what happened in Bali has anything to do with Iraq. There are, in the end, no root cause s, or anyway not ones that can be negotiated by troop withdrawals or a P alestinian state. There is only a metastasising cancer that preys on wha tever local conditions are to hand. Five days before the slaughter in Ba li, nine Islamists were arrested in Paris for reportedly plotting to att ack the Metro. So much f or the sterling efforts of President Jacques Chirac and his Prime Minist er, Dominique de Villepin, as the two chief obstructionists of Bush-Blai r-Howard neo-con-Zionist warmongering these past three years. When the suicide bombers self-detonated on Saturday, the travel section o f Britain's The Sunday Telegraph had already gone to press, its lead sto ry a feature on how Bali's economy had bounced back from the carnage of 2002. We all want to believe that: one terrorist attack is like a tsunam i or hurricane, just one of those things, blows in out of the blue, then the familiar contours of the landscape return. But two attacks are a pe rmanent feature, the way things are and will be for some years, as one b y one the bars and hotels and clubs and restaurants shut up shop. Many o f the Australians injured this weekend had waited to return to Bali, jus t to make sure it was "safe". But it isn't, and it won't be for a long t ime, and by the time it is it won't be the Bali that Westerners flocked to before 2002. I found myself behind a car in Vermont, in the US, the other day; it had a one-word bumper sticker with the injunction "COEXIST". It's one of tho se sentiments beloved of Western progressives, one designed principally to flatter their sense of moral superiority. The C was the Islamic cresc ent, the O was the hippie peace sign, the X was the Star of David and th e T was the Christian cross. But the real ity is, it's the first of those symbols that has a problem with coexiste nce. Take the crescent out of the equation and you wouldn't need a bumpe r sticker at all. Indeed, coexistence is what the Islamists are at war w ith; or, if you prefer, pluralism, the idea that different groups can ru b along together within the same general neighbourhood. There are many t rouble spots across the world but, as a general rule, even if one gives no more than a cursory glance at the foreign pages, it's easy to guess a t least one of the sides: Muslims v Jews in Palestine, Muslims v Hindus in Kashmir, Muslims v Christians in Nigeria, Muslims v Buddhists in sout hern Thailand, Muslims v (your team here). Whatever one's views of the m erits on a case by case basis, the ubiquitousness of one team is a fact. their passions forge their fe tters," wrote Edmund Burke. And, in that sense, Bali is more symbolic of the Islamofascist strategy than London or Madrid, Beslan or Istanbul. T he jihad has held out against some tough enemies: the Israelis in the We st Bank, the Russians in Chechnya; Oh, to be sure, to the more fastidious Islamist some of those decadent hedonist fornicating Westerners whooping it up are a little offensive. But they'd be offensive whoever they were and whatever they did. It's the reality of a pluralist enclave within the world's la rgest Muslim nation that offends. richmedia=yes&site=theaustralian§ion=opinion&adsize=300x2 50&pagepos=1 So even Muslims v (your team here) doesn't quite cover it. You don't have to have a team or even be aware that you belong to any side. You can be a hippie-dippy hey-man-I-love-everybody-whatever-your-bag-is-cool backp acking Dutch stoner, and they'll blow you up with as much enthusiasm as if you were Dick Cheney. As a spokesman for the Islamic Army of Aden put it in 2002, explaining why they bombed a French oil tanker: "We would h ave preferred to hit a US frigate, but no problem because they are all i nfidels." In our time, even the most fascistic ideologies have been sav vy enough to cover their darker impulses in sappy labels. The Soviet blo c was comprised of wall-to-wall "people's republics", which is the preci se opposite of what they were: a stylistic audacity Orwell caught perfec tly in 1984, with its Ministry of Truth (that is, official lies). But th e Islamists don't even bother going through the traditional rhetorical f eints. " wrote Matthew Arnold in the famous concludi ng lines to Dover Beach, "where ignorant armies clash by night". Blow up the London Unde rground during a G8 summit and the world's leaders twitter about how tra gic and ironic it is that this should have happened just as they're taki ng steps to deal with the issues, as though the terrorists are upset abo ut poverty in Africa and global warming. So, even in a great blinding flash of clarity, we can't wait to switch th e lights off and go back to fumbling around on the darkling plain. Bali three years ago and Bali three days ago light up the sky: they make unav oidable the truth that Islamism is a classic "armed doctrine"; The reality of Bali's contribution to Indonesia's economic health is irrelevant. The jihadists would rather that the country be poo rer and purer than prosperous and pluralist. If the Islamofascists gain formal control of Indonesia, i t won't be a parochial, self-absorbed dictatorship such as Suharto's but a launching pad for an Islamic superstate across Southeast Asia and the Pacific. The reality is that there are more Muslim states th an a half-century ago, many more Muslims within non-Muslim states, and m any more of those Muslims are radicalised and fundamentalist. As Bas sam Tibi, a Muslim professor at Gottingen University in Germany, said in an interesting speech a few months after September 11, "Both sides shou ld acknowledge candidly that although they might use identical terms, th ese mean different things to each of them. The word peace, for example, implies to a Muslim the extension of the Dar al-Islam -- or House of Isl am -- to the entire world. This is completely different from the Enlight enment concept of eternal peace that dominates Western thought. Only whe n the entire world is a Dar al-Islam will it be a Dar a-Salam, or House of Peace." That's why they blew up Bali in 2002, and last weekend, and why they'll k eep blowing it up. It 's about a world where everything other than Islamism lies inruins. Mark Steyn, a columnist with the Telegraph Group, is a regular contributo r to The Australian's Opinion page. |
| csua.org/u/dna -> www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/f/falwell-robertson-wtc.htm com All rights reserved Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson say immorality and anti-Christian groups should share in the blame for the Terrorist Attacks on America-Truth! Summary of eRumor There are several different versions of the eRumor. Some say that in an Interview on Pat Robertson's 700 Club telecast, Robertson and the Rev. J erry Falwell seemed to be resting the blame for the World Trade Center a nd Pentagon attacks on 9/11/01 on their political and moral enemies rath er than the terrorists themselves. Others simply repeat their remarks t hat gays, abortionists, the ACLU, and the People For the American Way sh ould share in the blame for a spiritual vulnerability that allowed the a ttack to take place. The Truth According to the CBN website, the Interview took place on Thursday, Septe mber 13 (Some versions of the eRumor say it was Wednesday). Both men spoke harshly of the terrorists and clearly blamed them for the attacks. During a discussion about whether this crisis might bring revival to Amer ica, Jerry Falwell said God may have allowed what the nation deserved be cause of moral decay and said Americans should have an attitude of repen tance before God and asking for God's protection. He specifically liste d the ACLU, abortionists, feminists, gays, and the People For the Americ an way as sharing in the blame. APOLOGY The was national publicity over the Robertson-Falwell interview and stron g reaction from representatives of some of the groups that Falwell named . On 9/14/01, Falwell issued an apology for his comments and said he believ es that the terrorists alone were responsible for the attacks. He reite rated, however, that theologically he believes that groups that have wor ked to secularize America have helped remove the nation from its spiritu al foundations. Pat Robertson, on his website, distanced himself from the comments that h e had agreed with at the time they were made. political statement of blame direc ted at certain segments of the population that was severe and harsh in t one, and, frankly, not fully understood by the three hosts of The 700 Cl ub who were watching Rev. Robertson said he cons idered the comments "totally inappropriate" and that critics had taken t he words out of context. THE TRANSCRIPT Here are their comments in context: Pat Robertson began the interview asking Falwell what his response has be en to the terrorist attacks. Falwell said there had been a massive pray er gathering of members of his congregation along with students from Lib erty University. He told the TV audience that they had humbled themselv es before God, prayed for President Bush and his advisers and for the vi ctims of the attacks. Falwell then likened the attacks to Pearl Harbor and that at that time, H itler wanted to destroy the Jews and conquer the world. Now, "Islamic f undamentalists, radical terrorists, Middle-Eastern monsters" want to des troy Israel and conquer the world. The two men then talked about religious revival and whether the events of September 11 might spark spiritual renewal in America. Then Falwell said, "What we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could b e miniscule if, in fact, God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve." I think we've just s een the antechamber to terror, we haven't begun to see what they can do to the major population." Falwell said, "The ACLU has got to take a lot of blame for this. I point the thing in their face and say you helped this happen." Robertson said, "I totally concur, and the problem is we've adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government, and so we're responsible as a free society for what the top people do, and the top people, of co urse, is the court system." In other wo rds, when the nation is on its knees, the only normal and natural and sp iritual thing to do is what we ought to be doing all the time, calling o n God." A real example of the story as it has been circulated: Urgent! Falwell can't seem to figure out that it was terrorists who are responsib le for the World Trade Center attack, not gays and abortionists. Hi- I sat this morning still reeling from the deaths of my writing/business p artner David Angell and his wife Lynn who were on board the first plane to hit the WTC. My sorrow turned to anger when I heard that Jerry Falwel l and Pat Robertson had blamed gays, pro-choicers, liberals and others f or inviting the wrath of God to visited on the US. "I guess we got what we had coming" said one of them on "The 700 Club". At a time when unity is essential, these two "men of God" have chosen div isiveness. They are sad pathetic creatures, yes, but I have suspected th at for a while. The great irony is th at when we have been the victims of hate borne out of religious extremis m, Falwell and Robertson seem to have no problem fomenting the same. I am forwarding this to everyone on my list from good friends to people w ho might not even remember ever corresponding with me. If you are moved to let them know what you think or to pass it on to others, please do. There is so much hurt in the world now, my own included, why must these two add to it? |
| www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/f/falwell-robertson-wtc.htm com All rights reserved Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson say immorality and anti-Christian groups should share in the blame for the Terrorist Attacks on America-Truth! Summary of eRumor There are several different versions of the eRumor. Some say that in an Interview on Pat Robertson's 700 Club telecast, Robertson and the Rev. J erry Falwell seemed to be resting the blame for the World Trade Center a nd Pentagon attacks on 9/11/01 on their political and moral enemies rath er than the terrorists themselves. Others simply repeat their remarks t hat gays, abortionists, the ACLU, and the People For the American Way sh ould share in the blame for a spiritual vulnerability that allowed the a ttack to take place. The Truth According to the CBN website, the Interview took place on Thursday, Septe mber 13 (Some versions of the eRumor say it was Wednesday). Both men spoke harshly of the terrorists and clearly blamed them for the attacks. During a discussion about whether this crisis might bring revival to Amer ica, Jerry Falwell said God may have allowed what the nation deserved be cause of moral decay and said Americans should have an attitude of repen tance before God and asking for God's protection. He specifically liste d the ACLU, abortionists, feminists, gays, and the People For the Americ an way as sharing in the blame. APOLOGY The was national publicity over the Robertson-Falwell interview and stron g reaction from representatives of some of the groups that Falwell named . On 9/14/01, Falwell issued an apology for his comments and said he believ es that the terrorists alone were responsible for the attacks. He reite rated, however, that theologically he believes that groups that have wor ked to secularize America have helped remove the nation from its spiritu al foundations. Pat Robertson, on his website, distanced himself from the comments that h e had agreed with at the time they were made. political statement of blame direc ted at certain segments of the population that was severe and harsh in t one, and, frankly, not fully understood by the three hosts of The 700 Cl ub who were watching Rev. Robertson said he cons idered the comments "totally inappropriate" and that critics had taken t he words out of context. THE TRANSCRIPT Here are their comments in context: Pat Robertson began the interview asking Falwell what his response has be en to the terrorist attacks. Falwell said there had been a massive pray er gathering of members of his congregation along with students from Lib erty University. He told the TV audience that they had humbled themselv es before God, prayed for President Bush and his advisers and for the vi ctims of the attacks. Falwell then likened the attacks to Pearl Harbor and that at that time, H itler wanted to destroy the Jews and conquer the world. Now, "Islamic f undamentalists, radical terrorists, Middle-Eastern monsters" want to des troy Israel and conquer the world. The two men then talked about religious revival and whether the events of September 11 might spark spiritual renewal in America. Then Falwell said, "What we saw on Tuesday, as terrible as it is, could b e miniscule if, in fact, God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve." I think we've just s een the antechamber to terror, we haven't begun to see what they can do to the major population." Falwell said, "The ACLU has got to take a lot of blame for this. I point the thing in their face and say you helped this happen." Robertson said, "I totally concur, and the problem is we've adopted that agenda at the highest levels of our government, and so we're responsible as a free society for what the top people do, and the top people, of co urse, is the court system." In other wo rds, when the nation is on its knees, the only normal and natural and sp iritual thing to do is what we ought to be doing all the time, calling o n God." A real example of the story as it has been circulated: Urgent! Falwell can't seem to figure out that it was terrorists who are responsib le for the World Trade Center attack, not gays and abortionists. Hi- I sat this morning still reeling from the deaths of my writing/business p artner David Angell and his wife Lynn who were on board the first plane to hit the WTC. My sorrow turned to anger when I heard that Jerry Falwel l and Pat Robertson had blamed gays, pro-choicers, liberals and others f or inviting the wrath of God to visited on the US. "I guess we got what we had coming" said one of them on "The 700 Club". At a time when unity is essential, these two "men of God" have chosen div isiveness. They are sad pathetic creatures, yes, but I have suspected th at for a while. The great irony is th at when we have been the victims of hate borne out of religious extremis m, Falwell and Robertson seem to have no problem fomenting the same. I am forwarding this to everyone on my list from good friends to people w ho might not even remember ever corresponding with me. If you are moved to let them know what you think or to pass it on to others, please do. There is so much hurt in the world now, my own included, why must these two add to it? |