DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> London, Terrorism and the World
Pages:  
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 292, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 07/08/2005 05:41:13 AM · #76
Firstly I have not read much of this thread and have just come home from a bad day at work so please excuse me for being blunt..

If YOUR country invades another country contrary to the United Nations desire you will almost certainly have people from other countries wanting to harm YOU or YOUR country, it is very simple.

I hold grave fears for my country that has blindly followed the U.S. policy to invade another country without any sound reason other then removing a dictator oh and that's right something about fictional weapons of mass destruction.

Here in Australia we have in our community refugees from Zimbabwe that have had their family homes and farms taken away from them and have fled in fear of their lives because a dictator believes that white people have stolen from him.

No G8 member is interested in Zimbabwe because they donﾃ｢冲 have OIL. America will not go to Africa in the name of LIBERTY because there is no MONEY to be made in invading Zimbabwe.

I do not condone any acts of terrorism from anyone and find these acts totally barbaric but also I do not condone invasion in the name of liberty but as we all know it is a ruse for some wealthy people to profit from, this is exactly what these fundamentals are fighting against greedy capitalist nations of the west.

My country has traditionally been a nation that has blindly followed other nations because of our heritage and cultural historical links to mother England but believe me when I say many young Australians are not happy and to quote that American social poet from the 60s ﾃ｢徼he times are a changingﾃ｢

My final point is a quote from a famous English humanitarianﾃ｢ﾂｦ.ﾃ｢拌ll we are saying is give peace a chanceﾃ｢.
07/08/2005 06:12:43 AM · #77
If you have in any way made yourself an enemy and you have begun a bloody war with him and fight him constantly, but never try to find out who your enemy is, how he thinks, what he wants and whatﾃつhis reason isﾃつfor hating you. You just declare that he is barbaric and that terrorists shouldn't be negotiated with. How is it possible to expect results in a war against terrorists? The White Man has goneﾃつback centuries with his means of fighting, no matter what he tries. Politicians aren't capable of thinking this right and we, the public, must change that.

Let's try to contactﾃつthe enemy.
07/08/2005 06:41:42 AM · #78
Jason, would you care to elaborate please?

Originally posted by theSaj:

Might it be from viewing the actions of Islam itself?

...

3. Yugoslavia

...

07/08/2005 07:07:08 AM · #79
theSaj - I think that you are my nemesis. Your opinions are the utter opposite of mine. Your opinions help me understand how GWB got elected.

Originally posted by theSaj:
"or wherever you've got your views on islam as a religion"

Might it be from viewing the actions of Islam itself?


Every paper in the UK has been praying for the understanding of people, that the actions of a few extremists do not represent the views of a religion, which utterly condemns the actions taken. Every major religious leader and a number of politicians have been spelling out the same message. We do not want a repeat of the racially and religiously motivated revenge attacks that plagued the US after 9/11. It sounds as though those messages are just not getting through to you. There is no justification for the religous discrimination that you are practicing. It utterly appalls me. Racial, ethnic, or religious prejudices have no place in any civilized society.

Personally, I do not like extremism in any form. I believe that religous extremism is one of the most dangerous forms of extremism, as it is impossible to prove to believers that they are wrong. The growth of Christian fundamentalism in the West scares me. The zeal of Jewish extremism in Israel is alarming. Islamic extremists in Iraq and the West are terrifying.

Plus - What the heck is all this reference to Islam as if it were a state? You are talking about 60-70+ countries, and communities in every other country in the world all of which are different and cannot be lumped together. In the same way, I cannot talk about "Christians" and refer to the USA, Russia, Cuba, most of South America, then say that they live in poverty in slum districts (aka some parts of S. America), they are communists (aka Cuba/ex-Russia) and spreading their message by global branding and destruction of cultural values (aka USA).

Originally posted by theSaj:


Please tell me of a single place where an Islamic populace/nation borders a non-islamic nation and there is not conflict. In fact, the vast majority of conflicts in the world are with Islam

1. USA

2. Israel

3. Yugoslavia

4. Spain

5. Russia

6. India

7. Indonesia

8. Philipines

Nearly every place this religion borders on - there is conflict by the extremists.

This list is about as facile a list of reasons as I have ever seen. Make a list of Christian led countries that have been at war in the last 20 years. Make a list of countries with a strong Jewish influence that have been at war. The lists would feature a number of the same countries - the USA would be at the top of both. The lists would be long. Your list is utterly meaningless. It is racist and religiously motivated propaganda. I despise the message that you are propagating.

Originally posted by theSaj:


And yes, sure witches or women thought to be were killed. We're talking a small handful compared to the number of women Islam kills. In fact, I'll wager that Islam kills more women in a day than the American Colonial Colonies did in their entire existance.


What the heck are you talking about? Women are revered in Islam. Some cultures in some countries do not treat women fairly: eg a very small portion of the population in India (Hindu), in some rural areas in places like Turkey (no state religion), in certain horrific and brutal juntas eg Taliban in Afghanistan (Islam), and in parts of Africa (Christian, Islamic, other). The connection: poverty, lack of education, military control. The culture is different. Some principles are less developed than in the West, along with many other aspects of culture. The culture is widely misunderstood in the West. The connection is not just a religion, even if the religion is used sometimes as a justification.

I bet - and would bet a lot - that the USA and the UK have killed more women and children on an annual basis than any other country in the last couple of years in an illegal war.

Originally posted by theSaj:


Furthermore, most of the nation looked upon that shortly there after as "wrong" and ensured it would not happen again. That is not the case with Islam, as most muslims defend the actions of such terrorists or try to conditionalize it instead of callingh it wrong. Islam is in desperate need of a renaissance.



What????? Your mind is polluted with some severe religous hatred, that has blinded you. All I see are muslims condemning an act of violence. I see some extremists (from whom the rest of society distances itself) praising it. I see some muslims not really caring vaery much, because it has happened in a country that gives their nations, culture and beliefs no respect either.

Originally posted by theSaj:


"possibly improsoned and deported to Guantanamo where proper interrogation techniques can be applied without regard to western values and basic human rights"
There is very little evidence of severe abuse in Gitmo. And I am sorry, when i hear that they're forced into hot rooms or air conditioned rooms - that's NOT torture. You should see what they do - namely cut off heads.


Look at your own constitution. I am sure that you hold it dearly. Now remember that G. Bay could not happen in the States, because it would so severely violate the constitution. So G. Bay is offshore - legally avoiding the issue, but morally shredding that constitution you hold so dear. It is smeared with the mud, blood and tears of a prison camp, where people are held without charge, without trial and in inhumane conditions. It is an utter disgrace to the US and the West, and completely unjustifiable. If those men are guilty, prosecute them. Uphold the law. Do what is right. I am appalled that the UK has relaxed its grip on the power of justice - but even we do not dare lock up returned G. Bay prisoners without trial or charge (though there is still that hard to defend tagging issue).

Your justification - that the muslims cut off heads, is laughable. First, just because there is someone out there with a worse set of morals does not make your lack of moral turpitude any better. You are one rung up from the bottom of the ladder, but the ladder is tall and there are many countries that look down on your abuse (including many Islamic states). Second, your nation has one of the worst human rights records for capital punishment in the world. Third, the number of executions is by comparison very small, limited to a single conflict and a single nation, and carried out by extremists. Your second to last rung is not a happy place to be.

Originally posted by theSaj:
The side that dies....and in the process enables many more to be killed.


So the only safe way is to lock up or kill everyone who disagrees with your view? And everyone who turns against you because you keep on locking up and killing their neghbours? When will it end?

Originally posted by theSaj:


Well, now there are two more budding (Iraq and Afghanistan) and many feel Iran will be within the decade. Jordan, Saudi Arabia and several other nations in the region have implemented low-level "local" democratic elections. Many believe it will only be about 50 years or so until those levels rise and make those nations democratic institutions. In truth, currently policy has affected MUCH change in the region. Change for better....yes...at a, sadly, high cost...


I agree that an outbreak of democracy would be good for the region. Invasion and imposition of a new government (eg Iran, axis of evil, and threatened country) would do nothing other than destabiliise the whole area. Shame that we failed to assist the Iraqi attempt at civil revolution a decade ago.

Edit: added Christians and others in Africa into the issue of treating women badly (anyone recall the horrific stories of female circumcision?)

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 07:20:39.
 07/08/2005 07:11:53 AM · #80
Matthew
Thank you for stepping forward and explaining the point of view that many of us share with you but are unable to elucidate so clearly, maturely and accurately.
Kavita
 07/08/2005 07:24:08 AM · #81
[quote=legalbeagle]
... The growth of Christian fundamentalism in the West scares me...unquote

It may intrest you that Fundamentalism originated in the U.S.A. around the 1890's....


07/08/2005 07:36:45 AM · #82
I have been resisting posting but just thought I would say well stated Mathew, you said it all in a far more eloquent way than I could of. And just to clarify I work on an estate were the tube between Liverpool Street and Aldgate runs under the site, some of these innocent people were killed and injured within 100m of my office on a train line I use almost daily, I'm feeling very lucky but also very sad and concerned for the victims and there families.
 07/08/2005 07:37:13 AM · #83
Matt/Leagalbeagle

Could you Google me where you found that there were "religiously motivated revenge attacks" throughout the US after 9/11?

"We do not want a repeat of the racially and religiously motivated revenge attacks that plagued the US after 9/11. It sounds as though those messages are just not getting through to you. There is no justification for the religous discrimination that you are practicing. It utterly appalls me. Racial, ethnic, or religious prejudices have no place in any civilized society."
 07/08/2005 07:55:56 AM · #84
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Matt/Leagalbeagle

Could you Google me where you found that there were "religiously motivated revenge attacks" throughout the US after 9/11?


From Wikipedia

"There were some incidents of hate crimes against Middle Easterners and other "Middle Eastern looking" people, particularly the Sikhs. Balbir Singh Sodhi, one of the first victims of this, was shot dead on September 15. Usually, the authorities were quick to protect the people who were at the risk of hate crimes and there was no widespread backlash among Americans against any community"

Not implying it was everyone (nor that it was not being dealt with) - but there were people out there who carried out religiously motivated revenge attacks, even if some of the victims were misidentified by a misunderstanding of race and world religion.

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 07:56:58.
 07/08/2005 08:01:34 AM · #85
Thankyou so much Matthew for stating what needed to be said so clearly on all our behalfs.

Edit: Well, those of us against hate. I can't speak for the others.

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 08:06:45.
 07/08/2005 08:04:53 AM · #86
In Spain, we suffered a terrorist islamism attack thanks for the cooperation between Aznar & Bush. Iﾃつｴm sure if Aznar wasnﾃつｴt cooperate with Busk in the Irakﾃつｴs war, weﾃつｴre living without fear and without the more than 200 victims of those attacks.
Aznar was the guilty in Spain for those attacks.
I donﾃつｴt wanna be anti U.S.(I just love your country), but I think your government made a terrible mistake with Irak. There is no democracy in Irak, no security... all are problems there!
 07/08/2005 08:05:53 AM · #87
Originally posted by BobsterLobster:
Thankyou so much Matthew for stating what needed to be said so clearly on all our behalfs.


Seconded
 07/08/2005 08:18:44 AM · #88
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
Originally posted by pawdrix:
Matt/Leagalbeagle

Could you Google me where you found that there were "religiously motivated revenge attacks" throughout the US after 9/11?


From Wikipedia

"There were some incidents of hate crimes against Middle Easterners and other "Middle Eastern looking" people, particularly the Sikhs. Balbir Singh Sodhi, one of the first victims of this, was shot dead on September 15. Usually, the authorities were quick to protect the people who were at the risk of hate crimes and there was no widespread backlash among Americans against any community"

Not implying it was everyone (nor that it was not being dealt with) - but there were people out there who carried out religiously motivated revenge attacks, even if some of the victims were misidentified by a misunderstanding of race and world religion.


I recall a few incidents but VERY few. Considering the size of the country and all the nut-jobs we have, the number of retaliatory attacks was almost negligable. I was amazed...actually proud by the restraint of most Americans, knowing how upset and infuriated we were after 9/11.

So is it safe to say that we weren't plagued by these attacks after 9/11?

" I bet - and would bet a lot - that the USA and the UK have killed more women and children on an annual basis than any other country in the last couple of years in an illegal war."

I also believe that the US together with the UK tried their very best NOT to kill innocent women and children. They probably made the greatest effort in history to spare as many innocents as possible in the taking of Bagdad. As much as I believe there needs to be a Democracy in the Middle East outside of Israel, I was not for the war. Though creating a democracy in the region made Iraq a prime choice. If you decide to take this direction to fight terrorism. I still think time will tell and there's not a single person on this planet who actually knows whether Iraq will work or not.

Huessein wasn't liked by his neighbors, he wasn't liked by his people, he thumbed his nose at UN resolutions and the grand-dady reason Iraq was the target was because they weren't a theocracy. Iran was more primed to become a democracy than any other nation in the area but...bingo....a theocracy ergo, religious war. Can't go there.

All for now...

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 08:28:21.
 07/08/2005 08:29:38 AM · #89
Originally posted by pawdrix:

I recall a few incidents but VERY few. Considering the size of the country and all the nut-jobs we have, the number of retaliatory attacks was almost negligable. I was amazed...actually proud by the restraint of most Americans, knowing how upset and infuriated we were after 9/11.
So is it safe to say that we weren't plagued by these attacks after 9/11?


Noted Steve - you were there, not me! However, still "plagued" in the sense of being morally hounded by the attacks (they should never have happened, and the tension was baseless and should never have arisen), rather than them being numerically significant.

Originally posted by pawdrix:
I also believe that the US together with the UK tried their very best NOT to kill innocent women and children. They probably made the greatest effort in history to spare as many innocents as possible in the taking of Bagdad.


I was responding to the suggestion that "that Islam kills more women in a day than the American Colonial Colonies did in their entire existance. " - point itself is a side issue. Agreed that unintended. However, it increasingly appears that war itself was illegal (not an issue for this thread) - which if another nation had done it, would make every death (whether intended or not) a war crime. Luckily for George and Tony, military supremacy and coming from a democracy (ignoring all democratic deficits and majority protests) means we get to be the judges of our own case.

Agree with you on the rest (I think!)
 07/08/2005 08:35:46 AM · #90
Originally posted by legalbeagle:
Agree with you on the rest (I think!)


Good! Because I wouldn't want to have to come back over there, just to kick your butt. I would if the exchange rate was better. Fifty cents to the Pound....jeez!

BTW thanx for the Google assistance. I hate throwing around half baked facts to make a point...even though I do it all the time. My stock and trade.

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 09:21:35.
 07/08/2005 08:40:35 AM · #91
Some of these comments amaze me. Religion has no place in todays world running or controlling a country unless ( and I mean unless!!) it is voted by its people on a regular basis. In addition to that the people of that country who are not the majority can not be prosecuted for there beliefs. A free society must prevail. Countries where this is not practiced are a threat to there neighbors, too our freedom and to there people. You cannot just sit back and hope they will be good. Look at yourself and see the freedom that you have, the things you can say and do. The places you can go and visit. Look at the countries that this very simple freedom does not exist and see how they operate. We take it for granted our freedoms. Why is it that many people do not want those same freedoms for other countries?
Iraq needs to go democratic. That entire region needs to go democratic. The people need to be free and decide for themselves. We cannot sit back and hope that someday, it may be better. There will never be a stable world until the people can be free to decide for themselves what they want without depriving others of there opinion.
If you have all these freedoms and disagree with supporting the conversion of countries that do not have that freedom. What does that say? Its ok for me but not you? Even though my ancestors fought for my freedom I am not going to fight for yours. Its not in my backyard!
Give me a break! We need to support democracy.
Western Euroup would not be what it is today if not for democracy. How cool is it to be able to travel all over euroup just at a wimm. When you want, stay as long as you want, and be free. That is nice!

Freedom.

Just my thought.

Also why is this site not allowing this thread to show up?


Message edited by author 2005-07-08 08:55:26.
 07/08/2005 09:09:28 AM · #92
I agree that democracy is a great form of government. I also agree that the separation of religion and state is a great way to run a country. Both are ideals, and neither is ultimately attainable (human fallibility). In every country in the world, there is a compromise.

Not all other forms of government are objectionable, per se. Different parts of the world evolve culturally and governmentally at different rates. There are 72 nations that are not democracies, out of 192. Many of them are successful. Places like Bhutan and Nepal have high approval ratings for their absolute monarchs. No one complains about the theocracy established in the Vatican City State. Places like Syria, Libya and Vietnam are surviving and progressing (if slowly) without a democracy.

Democracy does not fundamentally make a nation "better" or "right". It has only existed as a concept for a couple of hundred years in its modern form. Everyone coped beforehand. Adolf was elected in the 1932 elections with almost the same proportion of the vote as Tony Blair now!

Not everyone wants to be democratically governed. There is an obvious contradiction in terms with "imposing a democracy". If, as I believe, democratic rule (of one form or another: there are many types) is the best we have got and can probably get, then it will occur naturally and gradually, and that transition should occur with relatively little blood shed.

As for separation of church and state, one must look to one's own government first. The UK has some constitutional issues (bishops in the House of Lords), but the US has some bigger problems (blatant pandering to Christian Right in recent elections, influence of religious lobbying for various religions, blatant determination on religious principles of Supreme Court candidates, issues such as teaching of creationism).
07/08/2005 09:55:33 AM · #93
Originally posted by bcoble:


Also why is this site not allowing this thread to show up?


Not sure what you mean. It is on the front page. Check in your preferences and make sure that you are allowing rants to be shown.
 07/08/2005 10:14:03 AM · #94
Originally posted by Makka:

I think you'll find the comet actually released the same emmissions several hours before the probe hit! But, hey....we could always send up Bruce to save the day if that's the case!

Uneducated my arse!


Um, we weren't just measuring emmissions. A comet always has a tail and emissions. I believe one of the goals was to delve the heart of a comet.

Second, I don't see how your argument has any bearing on said missions worth...

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 11:16:06.
 07/08/2005 10:37:44 AM · #95
As I said...it's very clever thing to do...but seriously...a $330 million dollar collision! All I'm saying is isn't there better things that could of been achieved with that money? If you do a little lookey around, you'll read about the comet releasing a plume spontaneously...similar to what they were trying to achieve with the collision...not the tail emissions!

I'm not saying these scientists and missions are useless...they are truly mind boggling to believe we are actually acheiving this. It's just the money aspect and current economic climate! And funny how they timed it to be on the 4th of July!
 07/08/2005 11:03:24 AM · #96
Originally posted by Makka:
All I'm saying is isn't there better things that could of been achieved with that money?


How perfect does life have to be for the whole planet before one can indulge in scientific research into a better understanding of fundamental questions such as how did our universe and galaxy form, and how did we get here (purposes of the mission)?

If you were to wait until there was nothing "more worthy" to spend your money on, you would wait forever. And you would miss out on all of the exciting advances in technology and science consequent to setting out on such a mission (space exploration involves huge scientific advances with every mission). And, no doubt, a few military advances that the rest of us don't get to see!

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 11:04:06.
 07/08/2005 11:22:39 AM · #97
Originally posted by "makka":
All I'm saying is isn't there better things that could of been achieved with that money?

No...not really...because it's technology developed in the $330 million that improves our quality of life. It's technology developed in the space program that advances such things as fuel cells, air scrubbing technology, etc. That then gets later implemented in our vehicle technology to create a cleaner environment.

(something most of you were !@#$%ing about in another thread)

And even if the comet ejected the plume....we still need the sensors and equipment on that satellite to "capture" and record it. Which means we could have dropped the penetration part and shaved maybe $40 million off the project.

Originally posted by "legalbeagle":
How perfect does life have to be for the whole planet before one can indulge in scientific research into a better understanding of fundamental questions such as how did our universe and galaxy form, and how did we get here (purposes of the mission)?

Okay....HISTORY HAS BEEN MADE...I am in absolute agreement with Legalbeagle... ;)

If we had a transporter I'd buy ya a beer bro.

Furthermore, there is another possibility..."planetary exploration". There are many who feel we are over-populated and if we could just distribute our population the environment would benefit but we'd also have more resources per person and perhaps conflict could diminish. (Of course, in another 1,000 years it will be a discussion on whether the super-power alliance was right in it's invasion of said planetary body.) *lol*

Originally posted by "keegbow":
America will not go to Africa in the name of LIBERTY because there is no MONEY to be made


Actually we did go Africa, and we found our hands tied by the U.N. furthermore we got severely bit with our hands tied and we left. It was called Somalia. Furthermore, there is much talk about Africa right now. (You do realize that America has a large African-American population?) And we'd probably be doing more if we didn't know we'd be condemned for going into more places.

Originally posted by "srdanz":

Might it be from viewing the actions of Islam itself?

I did, I listed all of the places Islam was in conflict with as examples.

Originally posted by "IceRock":
how he thinks, what he wants and what his reason is for hating you.

I am one of the rare ones who actually read Osama's letter to America to hear what he wants and what his reason for hating us. Essentially, beyond our support of supporting Israel what he listed was our gross sexual immorality (the irony, the conservatives leading the war are in many ways defending the liberal thoughts and ideas of which they disagree with regards to this issue), banking (Islam does not believe in charging usury or interest), and other moral issues.

I also know that those things he specified are things the liberal left hold as tantamount and will not forsake. So in truth, there is no means of reconciliation between "liberals" and Al-Quaeida

I ask....DID YOU READ THE LETTER?

Yes, we're pretty polar opposites. But hey, without polar opposites we never have so much electricity...

And there is always beer! ;)

"which utterly condemns the actions taken"
See, we have not seen the religion utterly condemn. We see them always condemn with a "but" and a justification here. And perhaps that's the problem.

"We do not want a repeat of the racially and religiously motivated revenge attacks that plagued the US after 9/11"
Plagued....excuse me? There were only a small handful of such cases. But see, that's part of the problem with our media. It will hype those few cases to the extreme cause headlines sell.

"There is no justification for the religous discrimination that you are practicing."
Religious discrimination...??? in America you are allowed to worship so long as it does not harm another. But I am sorry, I won't stand by and deny that Islamic extremists carry violence to every border that Islam shares. And NO OTHER RELIGION currently does such. Most had their reformations....Islam is in dire need of theirs.

"The growth of Christian fundamentalism in the West scares me. The zeal of Jewish extremism in Israel is alarming. Islamic extremists in Iraq and the West are terrifying."
Well, it did not take any religious extremism for Germany to kill so many. Nor did it take it for Russia to mass kill tens of millions of people. (I guess that'd be labelled "secular" extremism. ;)

No the issue is the heart of man and his lack of love for his fellow man.

"What the heck is all this reference to Islam as if it were a state? You are talking about 60-70+ countries, and communities in every other country in the world all of which are different and cannot be lumped together."
However, the ayatollahs and certain head "religious" leaders are able to influence people in all said states. It'd be akin to me reference the Catholics. Are they a state? no (albeit the Vatican) but to deny the affect that the Papal seat has throughout the catholic world would be quite foolish. And that authority is to blame for quite a bit of dastardly actions on the part of mankind.

And in truth, there is a trend of conflict seen with most predominantly Muslim countries that is not seen elsewhere. Of course this does not include all. But it includes a lot. And while much of the world mourned on 9-11. There was rejoicing throughout most of the Islamic countries.

"This list is about as facile a list of reasons as I have ever seen. Make a list of Christian led countries that have been at war in the last 20 years. Make a list of countries with a strong Jewish influence that have been at war."
There is only one nation with strong Jewish influence, and that nation fights for it's existence.

As for christian countries. Sure, Europe had it's was last century. There are some squabbles in S. America. But I don't see anything like what I see with predominantly Islamic nations. Especially when seen as a "percentage".

"What the heck are you talking about? Women are revered in Islam."
Really, perhaps western Islam. And let's talk about revering. Forcing them to be sub-citizens unable to go to school, etc. when Taliban rule is implemented. Or lets address the cases in many "partnership" arab countries. Sisters who are raped by their half brothers are put to death because it's obvious their bodies were the tempters. I'm sorry...they might revere but reverence and imprisonment, control and abuse can go together. They revere but they do not respect in those regions. That is not to say everywhere. Nor is it to say we did not have the same problem in the western culture until the past hundred years or so. But it's time for those regions to catch up. In that, I will blame most cultures regardless of religion in those regions of the world.

"The culture is widely misunderstood in the West."
You're right, I can't understand blaming the woman for being raped and executing her to save the family from shame - and letting the perpetrator go free.

"What????? Your mind is polluted with some severe religous hatred, that has blinded you."
Perhaps it is different where you are. But where I am, many I talked to would condemn it quickly but only to follow it with a "but". And if you asked them to condemn it without the "but" they'd remain silent or refuse to do so.

"Look at your own constitution. I am sure that you hold it dearly. Now remember that G. Bay could not happen in the States, because it would so severely violate the constitution."
Actually, it can happen in the states. The Constitution applies to citizens and legal residents and legal visitors.

Just cause we have a base in Germany doesn't mean our Constitution doesn't apply. Gitmo is still U.S. territory. Gitmo is used because it is the established place for interning large quantities of refugees and internees. It was used during both the Cuban and Haitian refugee crisis and hence it's use for the internees.

Sorry you don't understand enough about America, Gitmo, etc. to know what you are talking about on this particular issue.

"It is smeared with the mud, blood and tears of a prison camp, where people are held without charge, without trial and in inhumane conditions."
Those are rights of citizens and guests. We held the Cuban and Haitian refugees in Gitmo with out charge, without trial for quite some time.

But I've heard first hand accounts by soldiers who have been serving at Gitmo. How the U.S. has provided Korans, prayer matts, allows for the call of Muslim prayers 5 times a day. Most of the references I've heard to torture in reference to Gitmo have been far from torture.

Not Abu Graib, was another matter. And those soldiers and the commanders of those installations should be severely punished. That was pure wickedness and evil. Despicable...and I believe the administration made it clear that those actions were despicable. But I have not heard of anything like that occurring in Gitmo.

"Your justification - that the muslims cut off heads, is laughable."
It was not a justification but an example of torture. Torture is to cause physical harm. Alternating someone from a hot room to an air conditioned room is not IMHO torture.

"Second, your nation has one of the worst human rights records for capital punishment in the world."
Please explain, I believe we try (often two or three times) every man who receives capital punishment for their crimes.

"Third, the number of executions is by comparison very small, limited to a single conflict and a single nation, and carried out by extremists. Your second to last rung is not a happy place to be."
a) not limited to a single conflict, or do you forget the executions in Philipines as well?

b) the last line "your second to last rung is not a happy place to be" does not make sense to me...not sure the meaning of the expression?

"So the only safe way is to lock up or kill everyone who disagrees with your view?"
Gee, no....I mean there are plenty of Muslims, Liberals, Satanists, walking around free in America.

But no, I do not have an issue with the couple of hundred prisoners at Gitmo most of whom were actively engaged in armed conflict with Allied forces being interned. And in truth, the conditions of the interned are nicer and more hospitable than most of them lived in before.

"Shame that we failed to assist the Iraqi attempt at civil revolution a decade ago."
Yes it is...and most Americans wanted to. Sadly, there was too much U.N. pressure not too. And yes, I lay that blame strongly on the U.N. and entity I greatly dislike.

"Edit: added Christians and others in Africa into the issue of treating women badly (anyone recall the horrific stories of female circumcision?)"
And yes, I am vehemently opposed to that practice and those abuses.

"The growth of Christian fundamentalism in the West scares me"
And if it's any consolation...there is not a growth but a decline and polarization. And that is why you are seeing such movement.

Originally posted by "Alexys":
Iﾃつｴm sure if Aznar wasnﾃつｴt cooperate with Busk in the Irakﾃつｴs war, weﾃつｴre living without fear and without the more than 200 victims of those attacks.

However, seeing as extremists have declared that they want to reclaim all of southern Spain and make it Muslim once again...i guess you're safe!

"There is no democracy in Irak, no security... all are problems there!"
Did you know 90% of the conflicts in Iraq happen in two locations. Bagdhad and the home region of Saddam.

Did you know numerous schools and institutes of highly learning have been built, re-built, or restored?

Originally posted by "pawdix":
I also believe that the US together with the UK tried their very best NOT to kill innocent women and children.

In fact, we spend a million dollars a bomb to make it kill LESS people. No, they're not perfect. Nor are we. We make mistakes. Example: we bombed a wedding in Afghanistan. The aircraft overhead mistook the firing of rifles and machine guns in celebration as an attack. It was an understandable but no less tragic mistake.

Originally posted by "legalbeagle":
However, still "plagued" in the sense of being morally hounded by the attacks (they should never have happened, and the tension was baseless and should never have arisen), rather than them being numerically significant.

As I recall the Dutch were quite up in arms and threatening after a single movie director was killed.

Yes I think it was tragic that a man was killed, an Indian Shiekh even, but there was no PLAGUE...and to use that language is extremely misleading and slanderous.

Originally posted by "bcoble":
A free society must prevail. Countries where this is not practiced are a threat to there neighbors, too our freedom and to there people. You cannot just sit back and hope they will be good.

Thanks bcoble, as this forces me to clarify my comments for legalbeagle.

LB, Malaysia is an Islamic country but it does not seem to have aggression nor extreme civil abuses. Why? I don't know...my statements were not about "universality" but rather about a "trend" that seems prevalent. And yes, christian dictatorships should be unravelled and destroyed as well.

The issue is not democracy but civil protections. However, those tend to be more easily produced and ensured within democracies. And the potential shift with a changing of a monarch poses grave concerns.

"then it will occur naturally and gradually"
BULLCRAP!!!! You can't have it occur naturally in this day and age with the armaments and weapons of destruction we have. A tyrant with a small group of armed men can ensure his position indefinitely against any uprising of an unarmed populace. His only threat is that of someone of strength within in his power circle.

"but the US has some bigger problems (blatant pandering to Christian Right in recent elections, influence of religious lobbying for various religions, blatant determination on religious principles of Supreme Court candidates, issues such as teaching of creationism)."
Man LB you are so misled. Blatant pandering to the christian right. People vote, and do so on their convictions. Now if they're convictions are based in part on their religious beliefs there is nothing wrong with that. Or are you advocating that christians in America should not have the right to vote?

"blatant determination on religious principles of Supreme Court candidates"
If anything, it's been pure opposition toward any court candidates who are conservatives.

"teaching creationism?"
Um...yeah...sure...where the heck did you hear that. Most of the fight has been over simply having a sticker that reads. Sure there's been a big push to teach abstinance along with sex-ed. Perhaps you confused the two christian right objectives.

"This material should be approached with an open mind, studied carefully, and critically considered."

Man...what type of news do you get over there???? This goes with your "plagues" comment. Sometimes I am so frustrated cause our media and TV so misrepresents what life is like over here. I mean, Osama hates us because of our culture infecting his with our TV, etc. The irony, is that most of America is not at all like what we see on TV.

*shrug*



Message edited by author 2005-07-08 11:25:01.
 07/08/2005 12:10:15 PM · #98
I normally run screaming from threads like these, but...

Originally posted by theSaj:
"Second, your nation has one of the worst human rights records for capital punishment in the world."
Please explain, I believe we try (often two or three times) every man who receives capital punishment for their crimes.

How about, until March this year the US was the LAST COUNTRY left in the world which executed minors?
07/08/2005 12:23:40 PM · #99
Originally posted by ganders:
I normally run screaming from threads like these, but...

Originally posted by theSaj:
"Second, your nation has one of the worst human rights records for capital punishment in the world."
Please explain, I believe we try (often two or three times) every man who receives capital punishment for their crimes.

How about, until March this year the US was the LAST COUNTRY left in the world which executed minors?


Have any minors actually been executed recently or did they just change a law that was no longer in use?
 07/08/2005 12:37:38 PM · #100
Originally posted by karmat:
Originally posted by bcoble:


Also why is this site not allowing this thread to show up?


Not sure what you mean. It is on the front page. Check in your preferences and make sure that you are allowing rants to be shown.


Thanks.

Indonesia is a hotbed for terrorist. (What I have heard).
The only way (I believe) that a non democratic society will survive is if the leading ruleing party follows the desires of the people. A country will not survive forcing ones will. All people everywhere wants to choose and be free. (Human Nature). You are free and they should be free. There may be a few countries that are moving forward without a democracy there are more that are not.

I guess the right word is "Civil Liberties" The country needs that to survive.
The US has lots of issues, however we have within our process the ability to change, if we so choose.

Message edited by author 2005-07-08 12:51:07.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 09/22/2025 12:13:32 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2025 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 09/22/2025 12:13:32 PM EDT.