It is a waist to have this piece of art burried in the thread of a bigot, like this thread is, and on a forum like this one.
Now off to give order that my daughter’s books must be taken away, that she must be locked up until I marry her off and that she must be teached that me and her brother are only one step below God.
We Muslim men must stop all this women learning stuff and all this women having ideas that they are good for other things then serving us and give us lots of sons, before it takes roots. Better begin in this instant. Even the daily wives beating must wait until this is done.
Let me clarify a little point: When I used the term “mad dog” in my post, I did not mean to imply that I believe the killer is insane. Far from it. In fact, I believe that he is quite sane (at least by his own lights) and that the murder is a coldblooded calculated act of political and cultural terrorism. When I say “mad dog” I mean to imply that, by becoming a terrorist, the killer has rejected humanity and divorced himself from civilized society.
To gum:
Thank you for the links to various news items which added information to the story. Far from being a lone nut, the killer may be part of an active terrorist cell in the Netherlands - a cell which may be plotting the methodical assassination of other members of Dutch society. The ex-Islamic woman who cooperated with Theo on the film “Submission” has received a little note - “You are next.” Dutch Islamic websites were flooded with posts celebrating the murder. Way to go, Abdul. Remind us again how much the Islamic world “disapproves” of the terrorists among them.
Also, the Dutch appear to be quite upset about the whole thing. Well, they should be.
To the terrorists:
So you left a note pinned to Theo’s chest with a knife? Nice touch - very melodramatic. But you do not have to try so hard to impress us. I, for one, am absolutely convinced that you should be hunted down and killed like vermin.
We do. Islam as a religion, condemns terrorism. But whilst you believe that the extremeist minority speaks for us all, you will never hear the voices condemning the murder, because the extremeist voices will be loud, whilst the moderate voices will not.
Like I said earlier, I may as well piss into the wind for the fat lot of good it does trying to convince people like you.
Look Roseworm old chap - here’s how it works from someone very closely connected to the media:
An event happens - particularly a horrific event. Is that the story? No. When was the last time you saw a media report that simply stated the facts with no attempt to interpret or explain?
The media have to report the event quickly. Do they canvass a wide cross section of a given group and then produce a story saying “charcter acted alone to the horror of 86% of any given group” and include page after page of of people deploring his action? Or…
Do they phone the usual media whores who know that to get on telly, into print etc they have to act like performing seals and give the audience what they want and as such come out with inflamatory, and more importantly newsworthy stories.
Look up wankers like Abu Hamza and you’ll see what i mean. Hamza speaks for ONE mosque in London (and probably not for eveyone there) and yet his media profile is such that you would think he was a main stream Islamic leader. But he gives good copy.
I sympathize with you far more than you realize. This is undoubtedly my fault for coming across as such a hard-nosed hardass.
I believe you when you say that most Muslims reject terrorism.
I sincerely believe that, at the end of the day, the average Muslim just wants to live peacefully and get on with his life.
Not all Muslims are terrorists, but the problem is, almost all terrorists are Muslim. Everytime someone turns on the TV and hears about some savage outrage perpetrated somewhere in the world, the perp is practically always a Muslim. The constant daily drip-drip-drip of bad news has a cumulative effect. Is it any wonder that a person might start thinking: “Muslims-are-terrorists, Muslims-are-terrorists, Muslims-are-terrorists…”
This makes it very difficult for decent people like yourself to advance your argument.
In the wake of Theo van Gogh’s murder, the Dutch are making ugly noises. They are losing patience with non-violent solutions to the problem. This is very ominous. The situation is about to spiral out of control.
I stand by what I said. No matter how difficult (and bloody) it may be, the Muslim people must make a strenuous effort to rid themselves of their terrorists, even if this requires a civil war within the Islamic world itself. At least then they can look the rest of the world in the eye and say: “There. Our house is cleansed. And we did it ourselves.” And they can be proud.
Actually old chap here in england almost all terrorists used to be Irish. They’ve gone away but there are still people who are bombing others, attacking their homes and places of work and desecrating the graves of their relatives.
We call these people vegans. The man who murdered Pim Fortyn was a vegan too.
No, they are not. Or did terrorism only start on 9/11? There are Christian terrorists, there are terrorists of all faiths and creeds. Its only in the past few years that the UK has been free of terrorism. The people who were vilified were the partisan groups doing the bombings. Not the Catholics as a whole, and not the Protestants as a whole. Refer to the terrorist groups as anti-US, anti-capitalism, whatever, but don’t tar an entire community with the words “Muslim terrorist”.
You condemn this murder as much as I do, but your use of inflammatory language makes us appear to be on vastly different sides.
Ask a Brit that a few years back and they would have given you a different answer. Ask a Spanish person and they’d talk about AQ but they’d also think of their own country men and women.
Most terrorist that you hear about are Muslim. If Palestinians were Christians there would still be terrorists among them. Religion doesn’t make the terrorist, perceived injustice and anger born out of frustration makes terrorists. These things are cyclical AFAICS. Lots of terrorists were mainland Europeans during the 60-70’s. Then we Irish really got going and kinda had a monopoly for a while.
A lot of the guys fighting in Iraq now are called terrorists are using nasty urban warfare tactics but calling them all terrorists is a bit of a stretch if you ask me. They’re are continuing a war that was started against their country and has killed a lot of their countrymen and women (I know you will most likely view the people that are killing your soldiers as terrorists but I beg to differ when it comes to a lot of them) . Also again if the population was Christian I guarantee you that they’d be blowing the shit out of US convoys as well.
Like I said, best of luck. I’ve known several Muslims beyond a superficial level. One is a naturalized citizen and contributes to his adopted country’s defense. Another one, when I mentioned that I had just watched the movie “Shoah”, shot back scornfully, “Why do you care about the Jews?”. I’ll take as many of the first type as you want to send, but the second type ought to go back to Egypt where she can wallow in her own misery.
You suggest that there are other kinds of terrorists and that Muslim terrorists receive a disproportionate amount of attention. Fair enough. May I suggest that that is because their deeds are disproportionately bloody? And that they kill a lot more people than all the other kinds of terrorists put together? 3000 dead Americans on 9/11 is a lot of corpses - hard to shrug off. Everytime they release a video in Iraq showing them hacking off someone’s head while shrieking “Allah Akbar!” in an ecstactic frenzy…Well, it does not paint a very pretty picture of Muslims in general. And I know that is unfair.
Another point: About half of the attackers in the Beslan school massacre were Muslim mercenaries recruited from other countries. This suggests a unity of purpose among Muslim terrorists all around the world. It sends a very bad, very ugly message to the rest of us.
The US (and most western) TV news tends almost exclusively to favour atrocities involving the US. And the US is currently involved in a “war” against Islamist terrorists, and Islamic insurgents. OF COURSE you only ever see Muslim atrocities. But actually, in addition to the atrocities caused by Muslim extremists, there are millions of atrocities happening every day, all over the world not caused by Muslim extremists. But they’re rarely deemed newsworthy.
For instance, did you know that just a few days ago, Thai police locked up a large number of protesters (coincidentally, they happened to be Muslim) in several trucks. Hermetically sealed trucks. 78 of them suffocated to death. An atrocity. I’ll lay you a dime to a dozen that this didn’t get onto a single primetime TV news network in the US.
The reason that the 9/11 terrorists managed so well was that they had the support of a nation state behind them - Saudi Arabia. Other “muslim” terrorists have been similarly backed in the past by Libya, Syria, Lebanon Iran etc.
As to the beheadings. There is no justification for this, but what they are doing is manipulating the media in a very savvy way (see my comments above about how to feed the media beast). The Irish terrorist held their areas in similar terror (and still do I believe) by using kneecappings, beatings, tarring and feathering and enforced exile. The Irish were cunts. The people doing this in Iraq are cunts - they have that much in common.
Also the Irish terror groups also had support from a global network (including personnel ) mainly idiot yanks.
Thank you. I don’t think most people realize just how much of the IRA terrorism was funded by donations from Americans. For decades, cans were passed in Irish pubs in Boston and other cities with large Irish populations collecting donations for the IRA. We funded terrorism. WE. Not our government, us, as private citizens, funded years of IRA terror.
Amongst other things, you fail to understand the causes of Beslan massacre. While Russia and other parties have tried to conflate it with the so-called War on Terror, it was not in fact a problem stemming from Islamic fundamentalism.
The war in Chechnya and the massacre in Beslan was the result of years of war between ethnic Chechnya and Russia, confused by the rising of armed gangs and organised crime. It’s a conflict which stems to the 1850s, when the region was conquered by Imperial Russia, followed by rebellion in the chaos following the Russian Revolution, which in turn preceded a period of Soviet domination, followed by another rebellion, armed intervention and then near-continual conflict since 1994. There have been atrocities committed by both sides: separatists and the Russian army. There’s a separatist movement which claims to base itself in Islam, but fundamentalism is only one facet of a very complex regional problem.
So when you conflate this tragedy with Islamic terrorists, you overlook the fact that the Chechnyan problem predates 9-11 and goes further than a thematically simple struggle between the forces of democracy, equality and apple pie on one hand, and wicked extremism, headscarfs and terrorism on the other.
Fact is, acts of warfare (which are now all called acts of terror, oddly–witness the labelling applied to insurgants in Iraq) and regional conflicts have existed LONG before 9-11 and long before some neo-con had the bright idea to combine them all into a tasty War Against Terrorism and serve it up to sound-bite hungry public.
I believe if the Irish Troubles were occuring now, certain policitians, media and commentators would find some way to link this to 9-11 and fighting terrorism. That conflict had nothing to do with terrorism per se (other than as a method of war); Beslan’s tragedy and Van Gogh’s murder are similarly distinct and doesn’t deserve to be lumped in as part of a fictional us versus them global war. To do so is to gravely misunderstand the causes behind each and will avoid doing justice to the victims of murder.
The story from Thailand is disturbing and I do not condone what happened. But sadly, I am not particularly surprised by it, either. In order to deal with their own Muslim problem, the Thai government seems to be taking cynical advantage of the current international situation.
Even the US government has agreed to turn a blind eye to whatever the Russians may do to Chechen Muslims, in return for Russian cooperation in the War on Terror. This is RealPolitik in its ugliest form, but it would not be happening if the Muslim terrorists had not made themselves so conspicuous that other nations are making common cause against them. And there are countries on our side who will inevitably use methods that we ourselves deem unacceptable.
The War on Terror is going to last for a long time and it is not going to be pretty.
What? More unacceptable than starting a war in Iraq, in direct contravention to what the UN had to say on the subject and killing hundreds of thousands of people in the process with no end in sight?
Wow, hope I’m dead and buried before these other countries get going.
Last for a long time? Tell me how the fuck can you or anyone else tell when this “war” is over? It will never be over. It will be used to scare ignorant fuckers in compliance from now till doomsday. It’s just so easy to play with the publics head is amazing. They’ll accept almost every kinda of guff if feed to them correctly.
The war of terror is a myth. It’s being used to expand policies that were already there but couldn’t be rolled out.
Guess what? I know entire communities on ‘more than a superficial level’. I know leaders of said communities on ‘more than a superficial level’, and I know their stances. Your sample size is statistically small.
I’ve personally know two Americans who wanted all “Queers” outlawed as they were an affront to their superstitions. The talked about Catholics as it they were Satanists and KNEW that everyone apart from their little group of friends were gonna BURN. They weren’t too fond of blacks either BTW.
Can I generalise huh, can I? I’m really good at it