Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Policy Discussion Thread -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonder who wrote (2286)	1/16/2003 12:37:12 PM
From: lorne	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 15987

Pearl Harbor vs. 9-11: The key difference January 16, 2003 How differently America reacted to the 9-11 attack compared with the attack on Pearl Harbor. In the Pearl Harbor attack, the Japanese naval air force launched a devastating surprise attack against U.S. military targets in Hawaii, killing 2,335 military personnel and 68 civilians. On Sept. 11, 2001, Muslim terrorists of the al-Qaida organization hijacked four commercial planes filled with civilians and used three of them as bombs to attack the twin towers of the New York World Trade Center and the Pentagon in Washington, D.C. They killed nearly 3,000 people, the vast majority of whom were civilians. After the Pearl Harbor attack, all Japanese citizens and visitors were rounded up. Most Japanese were sent to concentration camps for fear there were possible saboteurs hidden among them. Japanese were known for intense loyalty to their families and ancestors. Our leaders at the time believed we couldn't risk the possibility of some attempting espionage against our country. In the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attack, our government has bent over backwards to assure Americans that the Muslims who attacked us were an aberrant fanatical fringe group that in no way represented true Islam. We have been constantly assured that the Muslim religion is "a peaceful" religion. And yet, any careful study of the most sacred books of Islam, the Quran and the Hadith, reveals numerous commands by their God to attack and kill the infidel who does not submit to Islam. From its beginning, the Muslim religion has practiced conquest and violence to spread the faith. Muhammad, who should know more about the meaning of the religion than any man, practiced violence and conquest by the sword. A great Muslim scholar, Abdul Houssain Zarin Koub, wrote, "From the beginning, its [Islam's] spread was accomplished through physical violence, bloodshed and war. Violence not only against non-Muslim infidels, but also against fellow Muslims. "Much of Islam's spread in the world was the result of traders and Sufi missionaries, this is true. Yet the weaponry – scimitars and sabers – all through the art and symbolism of Islam, makes violence and war a central theme of Islam. … Muhammad both taught and practiced violence from the beginning." Muslims are much more inclined to become a threat to the U.S. than the Japanese residents of 1941 were. A "peaceful" Muslim can be radicalized very easily by reading and believing his holy books, by sermons from visiting fundamentalist clerics, etc. So why are we being so naive and patronizing toward them? A fundamentalist can be extremely convincing to a "moderate" Muslim, because he can base his case on the very foundations of the religion. There are differences between the so-called moderates and the fundamentalists. But those differences are rendered meaningless by the verses that teach the opposite. Islamic apologists point to the warlike nature of the Old Testament and the seeming contradiction presented by the Prince of Peace in the New Testament. But the Quran isn't two separate religions based on two separate dispensations of God, clearly divided by 400 years of silence followed by the fulfillment of the Old Testament in the life of Jesus Christ. One has to be an Islamic scholar to figure out whether Allah wants Muslims to be friends with Christians and Jews or if he wants them to crucify them. It is that split personality within Islam that separates the moderates from the militants. We are told that the moderates are in the majority, but all the evidence seems to indicate the exact opposite. In any case, there are 2 billion Muslims in the world – that is two thousand million, to put it more descriptively. If even 10 percent of Islam follows the fundamentalist Muhammad, that's 200 million militant Muslims. That's a lot, no matter how you interpret it. worldnetdaily.com

To: zonder who wrote (2286)	1/16/2003 2:50:00 PM
From: bela_ghoulashi	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 15987

>>However, one of us here is incapable of defending his opinions without personal insults, and that's not me. << 1. That's a personal insult. 2. It conflates two completely different issues. Derek is entirely capable of defending his opinions without personal insults. The real question is this: can anyone engage you in any sort of a discussion at all without eventually discharging a volley of well-deserved dismissive abuse in your general direction? I think the answer is no, and I think all the evidence supports that.