The Opposite of Terrorism

[Leo Volont]

The Opposite of Terrorism

People largely misunderstood Gandhi and the success he had against British Imperialism. It was not that he was for peace. He wasn’t. It was only that he wanted the British to commit all of the violence, while he wanted the Hindus to be perceived as the most innocent of victims. Gandhi understood that he was assembling all the ingredients for the most massive riots in History, but he was always careful to arrange it so that it would appear that the English fired the first shots. British Imperialism was discredited at home and abroad. It became progressively more and more difficult for them to continue.

Martin Luther King Jr. operated in much the same way. While preaching peace, he knew he was instigating riots. But the discipline consisted of provoking the police to inflict the first blows. While American Cities were burning, King was always able to take cover behind his rhetoric of Non-Violence.

We saw that the Buddhist Monks had the same success when Protesting America’s Military Involvement in Vietnam, by lighting themselves on fire. This was self-inflicted, but the onus was perceived to be on the American’s who ostensibly drove them to these desperate acts protest.

Being a victim is often more effective then militancy, especially if there is absolutely no hope of delivering a ‘knock out punch’. Even after the Twin Towers were blown, the American Stock Exchange was back up in 3 days. But every American was super pissed off! The 19 Hijackers would have furthered their cause, whatever it is, so much more if they had self-immolated themselves on the Capital Mall, or gone on a hunger strike, or blocked traffic until the police used billyclubs to beat them over the head. They should have made themselves the victims. As perpetrators their lives were as thrown away as the lives they had taken.

When the English Invaders sentenced Joan of Arc to death and burned her at the stake, a visiting Bishop straight from London, who had not yet been calloused by the constant violence of the War against the French, exclaimed that they must certainly finally lose a War in which they must resort to murdering Saints. Civilization is eventually appalled by the Brutality of Force over helpless innocence.

Now, of course, I do not recommend that anybody kill themselves or rush into certain death for the sake of political protest. But in the case of the Muslims who would be suicide bombers anyway -- blowing up babies in Day Care Centers – they are ALREADY determined to die. They can die in such a way that they antagonize and offend the World. Or they can die so that they gain the World’s sympathies.

After all this time, and with so many historic instances available to show them the way to success, the Muslim insistence upon counterproductive Violence simply cannot be explained. These are not spontaneous acts of rage. People actually plan for years in advance these attacks which only strategically damage their cause in proportion as they are tactically successful. With every Battle they win, they are closer to losing their War. The only explanation is that they are all idiots. Pathologically violent idiots.

 

[surenderer]

The Opposite of Terrorism

People largely misunderstood Gandhi and the success he had against British Imperialism. It was not that he was for peace. He wasn’t. It was only that he wanted the British to commit all of the violence, while he wanted the Hindus to be perceived as the most innocent of victims. Gandhi understood that he was assembling all the ingredients for the most massive riots in History, but he was always careful to arrange it so that it would appear that the English fired the first shots. British Imperialism was discredited at home and abroad. It became progressively more and more difficult for them to continue.

Martin Luther King Jr. operated in much the same way. While preaching peace, he knew he was instigating riots. But the discipline consisted of provoking the police to inflict the first blows. While American Cities were burning, King was always able to take cover behind his rhetoric of Non-Violence.

We saw that the Buddhist Monks had the same success when Protesting America’s Military Involvement in Vietnam, by lighting themselves on fire. This was self-inflicted, but the onus was perceived to be on the American’s who ostensibly drove them to these desperate acts protest.

Being a victim is often more effective then militancy, especially if there is absolutely no hope of delivering a ‘knock out punch’. Even after the Twin Towers were blown, the American Stock Exchange was back up in 3 days. But every American was super pissed off! The 19 Hijackers would have furthered their cause, whatever it is, so much more if they had self-immolated themselves on the Capital Mall, or gone on a hunger strike, or blocked traffic until the police used billyclubs to beat them over the head. They should have made themselves the victims. As perpetrators their lives were as thrown away as the lives they had taken.

When the English Invaders sentenced Joan of Arc to death and burned her at the stake, a visiting Bishop straight from London, who had not yet been calloused by the constant violence of the War against the French, exclaimed that they must certainly finally lose a War in which they must resort to murdering Saints. Civilization is eventually appalled by the Brutality of Force over helpless innocence.

Now, of course, I do not recommend that anybody kill themselves or rush into certain death for the sake of political protest. But in the case of the Muslims who would be suicide bombers anyway -- blowing up babies in Day Care Centers – they are ALREADY determined to die. They can die in such a way that they antagonize and offend the World. Or they can die so that they gain the World’s sympathies.

After all this time, and with so many historic instances available to show them the way to success, the Muslim insistence upon counterproductive Violence simply cannot be explained. These are not spontaneous acts of rage. People actually plan for years in advance these attacks which only strategically damage their cause in proportion as they are tactically successful. With every Battle they win, they are closer to losing their War. The only explanation is that they are all idiots. Pathologically violent idiots.

Well I think this thread has officially qualified LV as not knowing much about anything.........As far as his comments about MLK one would wonder why he was arrested well over 100 times strictly for trying to obtain equal rights and never throwing a blow. LV doesnt obviously realize how hard it must be to have someone beating the crap outta you and your people and to tell them to "turn the other cheek" . Should MLK have resorted to violence? no beacause then you would claim that he also would be a terrorist. I cant help but wonder if these Angels that talk to you tell you these things......What kind of Angel from God would teach such hate? Your threads are only posted to incite anger and they are never factually accurate and offer nothing to these forums. Whenever you are challenged to prove your points on a particular subject you change threads or start a new one......truely a "rebel without a clue" my posts are never disrespectful however facts are facts and the fact of this matter is that i was one of the few who might have believed that angels might have been talking to you but now i know that they arent angels they are from Iblis(Satan)

 

[Leo Volont]

....Your threads are only posted to incite anger

'Anger'. Well, no. I inspire nothing but goodness and light compared to the Muslims who believe that the entire Civilized World will surrender to them if enough Islamic Terrorists kill enough innocent babies.

As for Martin Luther King Jr... read the History. His Civil Rights movement achieved nothing until there were riots and cities across America were being burned down. Then he got what he had been asking for. Yes, his rhetoric of Non-Violence kept him out of jail for for the most part. But we know the Truth by simply looking to see where his Leadership lead.

Was it wrong for Martin Luther King Jr to keep certain truths to himself. It is important sometimes not to tell your enemy your overall strategy. His plan, like Gandhi's, was to force the Racist American Establishment into using blatant violence to suppress his campaign for Social Justice. This would bring sympathy and international support to his Movement. And after the Establishment 'fired the first shots', so to speak, the disruptions and damage done by the Riots would only go to provide additional incentive for Social Policy Change.

Muslims will have to learn this lesson and adopt this same tactic, at least until they are generally acknowledged to be the Victims. But whenever anybody in the International Community goes out on the limb for Islam, they are invariably embarrassed by some latest atrocity where some set of Mindless Barbaric Muslims provoke the hostility of the World by blowing up even more innocent people. As I said before, if they are intent upon their own deaths and are willing to die for their cause, then it would obviously be better if they simply were to kill only themselves very publically as a staged protest. Muslims need to be Martyrs, not murdereres.

 

[surenderer]

'Anger'. Well, no. I inspire nothing but goodness and light compared to the Muslims who believe that the entire Civilized World will surrender to them if enough Islamic Terrorists kill enough innocent babies.

As for Martin Luther King Jr... read the History. His Civil Rights movement achieved nothing until there were riots and cities across America were being burned down. Then he got what he had been asking for. Yes, his rhetoric of Non-Violence kept him out of jail for for the most part. But we know the Truth by simply looking to see where his Leadership lead.

Was it wrong for Martin Luther King Jr to keep certain truths to himself. It is important sometimes not to tell your enemy your overall strategy. His plan, like Gandhi's, was to force the Racist American Establishment into using blatant violence to suppress his campaign for Social Justice. This would bring sympathy and international support to his Movement. And after the Establishment 'fired the first shots', so to speak, the disruptions and damage done by the Riots would only go to provide additional incentive for Social Policy Change.

Muslims will have to learn this lesson and adopt this same tactic, at least until they are generally acknowledged to be the Victims. But whenever anybody in the International Community goes out on the limb for Islam, they are invariably embarrassed by some latest atrocity where some set of Mindless Barbaric Muslims provoke the hostility of the World by blowing up even more innocent people. As I said before, if they are intent upon their own deaths and are willing to die for their cause, then it would obviously be better if they simply were to kill only themselves very publically as a staged protest. Muslims need to be Martyrs, not murdereres.

Ummmmm........it seemed to me that many blacks and muslims (the more you talk the more you show how little about history you really know)died as martyrs so please tell me how MLK was inciting violence by singing "we shall overcome" I dont need to read the history of MLK all i have to do is ask my family members who lived it Your view on muslims is equally simple minded when one considers that 1 out of 5 people globally are muslim but please tell me when someone internationally has "gone out on a limb" for muslims? If that would have been the case there would be no Israel-Palestine conflict. While I do agree that Muslims themselves could and should do more for their/our cause to say that all muslims are suicide bombers only makes yourself look lile a Fox-News-Hack when was the last time their was a suicide bombing? The Israeli army killed four more Palestinians today which makes either 15 or 16 this week....and this is an average week for them. A US tank today rammed a bus full of people which killed 12 people(8 women 1 child 3 men) then the tank drove off without stopping.....Does that outrage you? Do you think that these things arent provoking outrage? If you know history then you know that in Arab culture that when a murder occurs it brcomes the communities job to avenge that death....THATS where terrorism comes from by killing innocent people and calling it "collateral damage" or by saying "oops thought there was Al Queda in there"

 

[§outh§tar]

Leo Volong has time in and time out shown his confounding ignorance on what is otherwised termed "common knowledge".

Telling lies is one thing, but spitting on the graves of dead men..

 

[Leo Volont]

Ummmmm........it seemed to me that many blacks and muslims (the more you talk the more you show how little about history you really know)died as martyrs so please tell me how MLK was inciting violence by singing "we shall overcome" I dont need to read the history of MLK all i have to do is ask my family members who lived it Your view on muslims is equally simple minded when one considers that 1 out of 5 people globally are muslim but please tell me when someone internationally has "gone out on a limb" for muslims? If that would have been the case there would be no Israel-Palestine conflict. While I do agree that Muslims themselves could and should do more for their/our cause to say that all muslims are suicide bombers only makes yourself look lile a Fox-News-Hack when was the last time their was a suicide bombing? The Israeli army killed four more Palestinians today which makes either 15 or 16 this week....and this is an average week for them. A US tank today rammed a bus full of people which killed 12 people(8 women 1 child 3 men) then the tank drove off without stopping.....Does that outrage you? Do you think that these things arent provoking outrage? If you know history then you know that in Arab culture that when a murder occurs it brcomes the communities job to avenge that death....THATS where terrorism comes from by killing innocent people and calling it "collateral damage" or by saying "oops thought there was Al Queda in there"

Both Gandhi and Martin Luther King carefully engineered Riots. Yes they were careful to make it look like they were the victims, but remember that the Violence which they provoked was only Reactive. Gandhi and Martin Luther King were betting that they could trigger reflexsive violent reactions from the Establishment. They played the system.

In the same way Israel plays the Palestinians. America is now learning how to play the Iraqis. Everytime Israel seems to be losing support, or America is losing support in Iraq, they turn up the heat a little bit and let down their guard just long enough so that some Suicide Bomber can come out blow up some innocent people. Instantly the Entire World is reminded of who the Bad Guys really are.

Yes, I know there are thousands of real martyrs in Palestine and now in Iraq. But this is no excuse for the Political Insanity of appearing to be the Violent Barbarians who would Destroy all Law and Order. Islamic Terrorism only strengthens the hands of the Zionists and the Pro-Zionists in America.

In the same way, when American Blacks discontinued acknowledging Martin Luther King Jr as their monolithic and all inclusive Leader and began to advocate Violence, it only gave a resurgent strength to their opposition which eventually swept into power and defeated Liberalism in America.

Violence only works against minority movements. If Violence is your tactic, then the Majorities can always just hit back harder. You can't win playing the other guy's Game.

It is a paradox but Real Victory only goes to acknowledged victims. Stop fighting back and you will win. Peaceful Resistance, political self-immolation, hunger strikes, and forcing the Establishment to imprison every single man and woman in your society -- that is the Path to Victory. But most Muslims are too dumb to see it. History shows it works, but Muslims only read the Quaron and so what do they know.

 

[Leo Volont]

Leo Volong has time in and time out shown his confounding ignorance on what is otherwised termed "common knowledge".

Telling lies is one thing, but spitting on the graves of dead men..

What? You think I am spitting on Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr because I attribute to them the intelligence that they must have known what they had been doing their entire lives? It is such an obvious Political Game Plan, but you think they had no idea.

I know for a fact about Gandhi. Once when I visited India I met a Professor who had served with Gandhi when the British through them together in a Detention Center during the War against the Japanese. It was thought that Gandhi would betray the British to the Imperial Forces of the Rising Sun. Anyway, the Professor as a young man was endlessly bringing up the subject of Non-Violence, and eventually it annoyed Gandhi beyond his patience and he told the young man, "Think about it! I am a lawyer! The British cannot imprison a man for 'Subversion' unless he "willfully advocates Violence". So before each Riot I I go on record as not advocating Violence. I stay out of jail, but there are still Riots, are there not!?"

Martin Luther King did not advocate Violence, but 'there were still Riots, were there not?'

To say that somebody had a correct political strategy for rectifying Social Injustice is not exactly 'spitting on them'.

 

[§outh§tar]

What? You think I am spitting on Gandhi and Martin Luther King Jr because I attribute to them the intelligence that they must have known what they had been doing their entire lives? It is such an obvious Political Game Plan, but you think they had no idea.

I know for a fact about Gandhi. Once when I visited India I met a Professor who had served with Gandhi when the British through them together in a Detention Center during the War against the Japanese. It was thought that Gandhi would betray the British to the Imperial Forces of the Rising Sun. Anyway, the Professor as a young man was endlessly bringing up the subject of Non-Violence, and eventually it annoyed Gandhi beyond his patience and he told the young man, "Think about it! I am a lawyer! The British cannot imprison a man for 'Subversion' unless he "willfully advocates Violence". So before each Riot I I go on record as not advocating Violence. I stay out of jail, but there are still Riots, are there not!?"

Martin Luther King did not advocate Violence, but 'there were still Riots, were there not?'

To say that somebody had a correct political strategy for rectifying Social Injustice is not exactly 'spitting on them'.

If that mentality is true, the United States should be held responsible for the rapings and defilement that went on at that prison.

But then the Americans are crying it was a solitary act. We can apply that same justice for these men.

 

[Leo Volont]

If that mentality is true, the United States should be held responsible for the rapings and defilement that went on at that prison.

But then the Americans are crying it was a solitary act. We can apply that same justice for these men.

Yes! Exactly! "The Prison Thing" was a huge Victory for the Iraqis. The Palestinians need to learn from this. Instead of attacking Israel, they should just sit back and document the brutality perpetrated upon them by Israel. Trade in their AK-47 Assault Rifles for Sony Video Cams.

And nobody believes that America hasn't been systematically torturing the Prisoners. It is just indicative of the Character of America's Conservative Leadership that they would deny any responsibility for their own directives the moment that they become the least bit problematic. But it will teach every Soldier in the Army a lesson -- not to even scratch their elbows first without Written Orders, and then Review of those Orders for Legality by the Judge Advocates Office, or even Review by the World Court. Once Burned they should know that they can never trust their leadership again.

Some of the accused say that they went to their Unit Commanders repeatedly and asked for clarification for their orders and for official Job Operating Instructions -- what they have to do and how it should be done. And each time they were dismissed with "We don't have time for that now". It is these Commanders who should be on trial -- not the stupid grunts. You know, if the Military did not feel that these men had the education or the character to become 'Officers and Gentlemen', then they should likewise concede that they are below the level where moral responsibility can be expected of them. Officers should be responsible for their men. It is what they get paid for, and they make four times the money the grunts get. The wrong people are in jail.

 

[§outh§tar]

Yes! Exactly! "The Prison Thing" was a huge Victory for the Iraqis. The Palestinians need to learn from this. Instead of attacking Israel, they should just sit back and document the brutality perpetrated upon them by Israel. Trade in their AK-47 Assault Rifles for Sony Video Cams.

And nobody believes that America hasn't been systematically torturing the Prisoners. It is just indicative of the Character of America's Conservative Leadership that they would deny any responsibility for their own directives the moment that they become the least bit problematic. But it will teach every Soldier in the Army a lesson -- not to even scratch their elbows first without Written Orders, and then Review of those Orders for Legality by the Judge Advocates Office, or even Review by the World Court. Once Burned they should know that they can never trust their leadership again.

Well thats something I agree with more or less.

Some of the accused say that they went to their Unit Commanders repeatedly and asked for clarification for their orders and for official Job Operating Instructions -- what they have to do and how it should be done. And each time they were dismissed with "We don't have time for that now". It is these Commanders who should be on trial -- not the stupid grunts. You know, if the Military did not feel that these men had the education or the character to become 'Officers and Gentlemen', then they should likewise concede that they are below the level where moral responsibility can be expected of them. Officers should be responsible for their men. It is what they get paid for, and they make four times the money the grunts get. The wrong people are in jail.

Well it's not that the wrong people are in jail, but both the leader and the follower should be in jail.

Quite frankly I think they deserve a taste of their own medicine. Something horrific, truly despicable, inhuman, and cruel, should be done to them.

Personally, I have written many letters to the President asking that they should be subjected to twelve hours of listening to country music. That oughtta set 'em straight..

 

[surenderer]

Yes! Exactly! "The Prison Thing" was a huge Victory for the Iraqis. The Palestinians need to learn from this. Instead of attacking Israel, they should just sit back and document the brutality perpetrated upon them by Israel. Trade in their AK-47 Assault Rifles for Sony Video Cams.

And nobody believes that America hasn't been systematically torturing the Prisoners. It is just indicative of the Character of America's Conservative Leadership that they would deny any responsibility for their own directives the moment that they become the least bit problematic. But it will teach every Soldier in the Army a lesson -- not to even scratch their elbows first without Written Orders, and then Review of those Orders for Legality by the Judge Advocates Office, or even Review by the World Court. Once Burned they should know that they can never trust their leadership again.

Some of the accused say that they went to their Unit Commanders repeatedly and asked for clarification for their orders and for official Job Operating Instructions -- what they have to do and how it should be done. And each time they were dismissed with "We don't have time for that now". It is these Commanders who should be on trial -- not the stupid grunts. You know, if the Military did not feel that these men had the education or the character to become 'Officers and Gentlemen', then they should likewise concede that they are below the level where moral responsibility can be expected of them. Officers should be responsible for their men. It is what they get paid for, and they make four times the money the grunts get. The wrong people are in jail.

Oh my Goodness Leo the Palestinians did that for 40 years!!!! Only when they resorted to airplane hijackings did the world pay attention. Do you see the dead bodies of palestinians on TV daily? how about dead iraqi's? video cameras aint gonna work these guys need to learn that the only thing the West respects is power....N.Korea is the perfect example of that........they are a country that has DIRECTLY threatened the US and have Nuclear Weapons and is part of the "Axis of Evil" yet the US is trying to go to the bargining table with them.? in the west eyes Nuclear Weapons talk and thats a fact....remember that Pakistian was also on the state sponsered terrorism list untill they started testing their nuclear weapons

 

[Leo Volont]

Well it's not that the wrong people are in jail, but both the leader and the follower should be in jail.

Actually, I think that most people don't quality to be treated as though they can be assumed to behave with moral responsibility. It is like the notion of 'being competent to stand trial'. I don't believe that anyone under 40 years old and with less than a 135 IQ points should be considered morally responsible. The way it should work is that such people need to be more or less supervised -- an eye kept on them to keep them out of trouble. Not that they should ever be punished, as that would assume that they were morally responsible. They should just be warned when they are about to cross the lines which their lack of knowledge, intelligence and experience make it difficult for them to see on their own.

 

[Leo Volont]

Oh my Goodness Leo the Palestinians did that for 40 years!!!! Only when they resorted to airplane hijackings did the world pay attention. Do you see the dead bodies of palestinians on TV daily? how about dead iraqi's? video cameras aint gonna work these guys need to learn that the only thing the West respects is power....N.Korea is the perfect example of that........they are a country that has DIRECTLY threatened the US and have Nuclear Weapons and is part of the "Axis of Evil" yet the US is trying to go to the bargining table with them.? in the west eyes Nuclear Weapons talk and thats a fact....remember that Pakistian was also on the state sponsered terrorism list untill they started testing their nuclear weapons

Okay, then you should all be annihilated. Once you think Violence is your only political expression, then you are effectively damaged goods. Yes it is deplorable, but people who believe in Violence are like Mad Dogs and need to be shot in order to protect Society. It may have been aggression against you that made you all insance killers, but that is old water under the bridge. Irregardless of original blame, the World Social Order cannot tolerate a Subculture that espouses murdering Innocent Babies. The World is better off without such people.

Remember, everytime Israel or the United States maneuvers a people into Hostilities, they are the ones who win.

It is like the Old Trick that Israeli Soldiers play -- they shout insults to Palestinian Children, about the tainted virtue of their mothers or sisters or whatever ( all lies ofcourse), and as soon as the children pick up stones to throw, the Israelis machine gun them down. They write in their reports that they were attacked with missile fire and responded with small arms fire.

But are you a stupid child? Will you continue to be manipulated so that you can finally be utterly destroyed.

If you will survive as a People you need to come up with some Wisdom. But you have never been wise before, so why should we expect it now?

 

[Neildo]

I agree with you saying that Gandhi and Martin Luther King played the system using our laws to their advantage, but is there anything wrong with that? Nope. It was for the greater good and it was the only way to do what needed to be done. The Civil Rights movement was something that should have never needed to have happened because those rights should have always existed. And the British should not have stayed in India as long as they did.

And yes, the US and Israel are also playing the system using our feelings to their advantage but they're doing it for all the wrong reasons unlike Gandhi and MTK did. We don't belong in Iraq as the Brits in India didn't and the Isralites need to quit being manipulative bastards trying to take over the whole Mid East one inch at a time.

The only thing in common with all those parties mentioned above are the methods used to get what they wanted, but they greatly differ on moralities. So you're proving a point but doing so at a dangerous level.

- N

 

[Leo Volont]

I agree with you saying that Gandhi and Martin Luther King played the system using our laws to their advantage, but is there anything wrong with that? Nope. It was for the greater good and it was the only way to do what needed to be done. The Civil Rights movement was something that should have never needed to have happened because those rights should have always existed. And the British should not have stayed in India as long as they did.

And yes, the US and Israel are also playing the system using our feelings to their advantage but they're doing it for all the wrong reasons unlike Gandhi and MTK did. We don't belong in Iraq as the Brits in India didn't and the Isralites need to quit being manipulative bastards trying to take over the whole Mid East one inch at a time.

The only thing in common with all those parties mentioned above are the methods used to get what they wanted, but they greatly differ on moralities. So you're proving a point but doing so at a dangerous level.

- N

I'm just trying to teach the Muslims that if they are willing to die anyway, then their is a much more effective way of doing it. With Suicide Bombing they make new enemies and energize the old enemies every time they think they are being successful. Their strategy is boneheaded and counterproductive. They need to take their own lives in well publicized self-immolations or hunger strikes. Or they need to lay down in peaceful demonstrations and get stomped, on camera, by the Israelis or the Coalition Willing to Do Anything for a Dollar.

The Muslims need to smarten up. If they are so devoid of Intelligence and Leadership that they can't contemplate a Strategy for success, then they deserve to fail and fail big and soon. I have sympathy for them, sure, but if they are dedicated to the continued murderings of innocent babies by blowing up Day Care Centers indiscriminately, then it leaves the World no choice.

 

[the preacher]

It seem's LEO, that more people are seeing you, for what you are,
and coming to there sense's.

you are one strange creature, you seem to have an hatred for all thing's.
your thread's are usually negative and rude, "your demon's certainly control you."
nothing you say is of interest to us, it's time to leave and go back to school, and do another essay for the teacher.

 

[Neildo]

I'm just trying to teach the Muslims that if they are willing to die anyway, then their is a much more effective way of doing it.

Greed gets the best of everyone. When one blows themselves up for Allah, that's just taking the easy way out. It allows them to supposedly get their numerous virgins and be with God. The same applies to any religion if one wants to try and take the easy way out. While death is a reward, those that wish to take the quick route to be with him rather than letting things happen naturally with time, to overcome those tasks in which he's given you, I doubt they'll be at his side.

I agree that there are better ways in which to fight for their cause, but greed, combined with helplessness, is a scary combination and I can't really blame them. They fear that if they do things any other way, the Western world will reign and their values and way of life will diminish. Basically no more Muslim culture. While that may be true -- it's actually inevitable -- that is just part of the journey to see how worthy they are of God. There are other ways to fight a cause but actual physical fighting goes against those religious morals so they're digging their own hole.

This is why God is inside all of us because that's all that matters. Nobody can change that. Sure one can change a few old temples, clothing, and other materialistic religious items that don't really matter, it just goes to show how obsessed people are with physical belongings. It seems the material items are more important than the beliefs. Beliefs cannot be destroyed so they're fighting a worthless battle. Choosing material items over God -- aka idolisim -- isn't good. That's one of the hardest tasks to overcome to prove ones worthiness. Relish in the now having a good and easy life, or overcome all the difficulties to prove ones worthiness to have eternal bliss?

- N

 

[§outh§tar]

Actually, I think that most people don't quality to be treated as though they can be assumed to behave with moral responsibility. It is like the notion of 'being competent to stand trial'. I don't believe that anyone under 40 years old and with less than a 135 IQ points should be considered morally responsible. The way it should work is that such people need to be more or less supervised -- an eye kept on them to keep them out of trouble. Not that they should ever be punished, as that would assume that they were morally responsible. They should just be warned when they are about to cross the lines which their lack of knowledge, intelligence and experience make it difficult for them to see on their own.

I must disagree here. Neither age nor IQ points are valid determinants of "moral responsibility". I must strongly dissuade my fellow man from attempting to be the judge of his fellow man in this matter of "moral responsibility".

 

[Bells]

Okay, then you should all be annihilated. Once you think Violence is your only political expression, then you are effectively damaged goods. Yes it is deplorable, but people who believe in Violence are like Mad Dogs and need to be shot in order to protect Society.

Does anyone else see the hypocrisy of this statement? Proposing and advocating outright genocide to be rid of a people who use violence as political expression is VIOLENCE and is advocating violence Leo. Making such a statement puts you in the same bed as the people who strap bombs to their bodies.

I understand and I agree with your wish that the Palestinians and Muslims take the moral high ground against their enemies. However, what you fail to realise is that the Palestinians do take the moral high ground each time a child picks up a rock and faces down a tank or a group of soldiers with machine guns and are then killed. Such a stance is the moral high ground. I do not advocate the use of suicide bombs, but in many ways I also understand the desperation that would lead many of these people to take such a step. I understand their desperation when their children are gunned down for throwing a rock. I imagine myself in their position and I can see why they would want to do it. They were dispossessed of their land, their homes, their schools, families, right to their mosques, to their very lives. I imagine the unarmed father who was shielding his son against a wall, only to have his son fatally killed right beside him as he was also shot. That man and that child had the moral high ground. After something like that, can you blame this man if he strapped a bomb to his body? I don't think I could.

These people practice the non-violence that you are advocating and they are killed and no one does anything about it. This goes for both sides of the argument. The issue at hand is that only one side is being blamed for the violence, no matter how small or how non-existant it may be. How long should these people continue to be dispossessed of their land and lives before they take some form of action, while their enemy is protected and encouraged by the Christian countries that protect it? No one should die in any violent circumstance. Unfortunately, attitudes such as the one you displayed above is the prevailing view of the Christian west as they try to appease their God in adherence to their own beliefs.

 

[Leo Volont]

I must disagree here. Neither age nor IQ points are valid determinants of "moral responsibility". I must strongly dissuade my fellow man from attempting to be the judge of his fellow man in this matter of "moral responsibility".

What!? You just want to gratuitously flog people. The Morons, Idiots and Followers -- who account for most of Humanity, are demostratively not responsible for their actions. They do what society does, and they follow their leaders, and the various peer pressures. Where is the individual moral responsibility in any of this?

This is why God does not Judge Individuals, but Entire Societies. When God brought the Flood, and destroyed Sodom and Gemmorah, He was not punishing individuals. He was eliminating Collectives of Evil. Although individual people may be too stupid to be considered as morally responsible, their Society in effect damages them irreparably with Bad Traditions and Corrupt Moral Practices. It might not be their own fault, but Damaged Goods are Damaged Goods. God is only being Perfect when He throws out the Garbage that needs throwing out.