Fears grow for homeland attacks

[Hannibal 5,814]

Jim Jones and his People's Temple... 300 children and 600 adults effectively murdered

Order of the Solar Temple - mass deaths (murders/suicides) in Canada and Switzerland - and I do treat these suicides as a kind of murder due to the brain washing that has taken place plus the fact that it was take your own life or be shot (much like in Jonestown).

Anders Breivik a fundamentalist christian killed 77 innocent people

Do a little study of the Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God in Uganda... and who cares if christianity in Africa is a "different beast"? The fact is that these people are interpreting the word in a way that justifies there appalling offences... much the same way as fundamentalist islamics do. MOST people who follow the islamic faith are peace loving people... you just refuse to acknowledge that.

Even George Bush jnr himself commenced his war on terrorism using similar rhetoric to the people he was attacking... god willing we will prevail. How many innocent people died as a result of the ensuing attacks? (I suppose that good old christian saying "an eye for an eye" applies?) And no, that does not mean I support the attacks on the World Trade Centre (too easy to predict you would probably take that line of logic).

I ask you to list all of the atrocities of Islam and not only do you avoid it you bring up an individual such as Anders Breivik as an example of the problems of Christianity. Why use a person who is clearly mentally ill ? Why even consider this to be an argument against Christianity ? Are you serious ? Is this the level of your comprehension ? You seem vile, but I suspect you're just stupid.

Jim Jones ? A cult leader ? FMD

George Bush ? You're using him as your poster boy because he's a Christian ? Good ****ing grief man. You've lost what ever sense you had. Probably none.

Jim Jones and George Bush ? I'm trying to debate Islam and the effects on western civilisation and you're bringing up Bush ? I actually feel sorry for you. You are completely delusional. Neither represent Christianity. Are you really representative of the left ?

[hardtack 10,149]

I ask you to list all of the atrocities of Islam and not only do you avoid it you bring up an individual such as Anders Breivik as an example of the problems of Christianity. Why use a person who is clearly mentally ill ? Why even consider this to be an argument against Christianity ? Are you serious ? Is this the level of your comprehension ? You seem vile, but I suspect you're just stupid.

Jim Jones ? A cult leader ? FMD

George Bush ? You're using him as your poster boy because he's a Christian ? Good ****ing grief man. You've lost what ever sense you had. Probably none.

Jim Jones and George Bush ? I'm trying to debate Islam and the effects on western civilisation and you're bringing up Bush ? I actually feel sorry for you. You are completely delusional. Neither represent Christianity. Are you really representative of the left ?

You asked me to "Do me a favour, list all of the problems with Islam and Muslim immigration worldwide."... you did suggest I also name bombings etc.... I was arguing that christianity is no better than islam and was arguing that it was all down to how the word was interpreted. Fundamentalist christians such as those I listed have used their interpretation of the word of christianity to justify their actions... that was precisely the point I was making, that like those fundamentalist christians, there are fundamentalist muslims who also interpret the word of the Koran to suit their agendas. If that is a hard concept for you to get your head around, then I'm sorry, that is your problem. The reason I cited Bush in there was that he used the same rhetoric as the islamic fundamentalists that he was condemning... using his "god" as a justification for his actions and then doing precisely what his enemy was guilty of... slaughtering innocents. You I suppose, approved of his actions.

You are not trying to debate anything as you ask us to provide evidence and lists for you, yet you have offered up nothing more than a blanket statement that islam is bad and they cannot assimilate... you offered no instances of how or why, no evidence, nothing.

[DemonFrog 1,347]

You asked me to "Do me a favour, list all of the problems with Islam and Muslim immigration worldwide."... you did suggest I also name bombings etc.... I was arguing that christianity is no better than islam and was arguing that it was all down to how the word was interpreted. Fundamentalist christians such as those I listed have used their interpretation of the word of christianity to justify their actions... that was precisely the point I was making, that like those fundamentalist christians, there are fundamentalist muslims who also interpret the word of the Koran to suit their agendas. If that is a hard concept for you to get your head around, then I'm sorry, that is your problem. The reason I cited Bush in there was that he used the same rhetoric as the islamic fundamentalists that he was condemning... using his "god" as a justification for his actions and then doing precisely what his enemy was guilty of... slaughtering innocents. You I suppose, approved of his actions.

You are not trying to debate anything as you ask us to provide evidence and lists for you, yet you have offered up nothing more than a blanket statement that islam is bad and they cannot assimilate... you offered no instances of how or why, no evidence, nothing.

From reading his past quoted posts it appears as they are not drowned its OK.

[hardtack 10,149]

From reading his past quoted posts it appears as they are not drowned its OK.

The more I read 'H', the more I get the feeling his real name is David Oldfield... then again, given his previous avatar, he may well be Pauline.

[Hannibal 5,814]

You asked me to "Do me a favour, list all of the problems with Islam and Muslim immigration worldwide."... you did suggest I also name bombings etc.... I was arguing that christianity is no better than islam and was arguing that it was all down to how the word was interpreted. Fundamentalist christians such as those I listed have used their interpretation of the word of christianity to justify their actions... that was precisely the point I was making, that like those fundamentalist christians, there are fundamentalist muslims who also interpret the word of the Koran to suit their agendas. If that is a hard concept for you to get your head around, then I'm sorry, that is your problem. The reason I cited Bush in there was that he used the same rhetoric as the islamic fundamentalists that he was condemning... using his "god" as a justification for his actions and then doing precisely what his enemy was guilty of... slaughtering innocents. You I suppose, approved of his actions.

You are not trying to debate anything as you ask us to provide evidence and lists for you, yet you have offered up nothing more than a blanket statement that islam is bad and they cannot assimilate... you offered no instances of how or why, no evidence, nothing.

You are making one huge error, which I doubt you'll understand, but even if you do I doubt you'll recognise, but here goes...

Islam is militant, Islam is radical, Islam wants domination, Islam is intolerant, Islam does not assimilate. Moderate Muslims are not the problem, as they don't follow their religion to those degrees. Islam has no room to move, just like much of the Old Testament. But Christians don't worship the Old Testament, they worship the New Testament. Islam is the equivalent of the Old Testament.

Christianity (the New Testament) is not militant, it doesn't want domination, it is tolerant, it does assimilate. It does not cause worldwide indignation. Nor do Hindus or Buddhists.

You're left wing, It's in your DNA to not understand.

[Hannibal 5,814]

The more I read 'H', the more I get the feeling his real name is David Oldfield... then again, given his previous avatar, he may well be Pauline.

Tell me the policies and I'll let you know.

[hardtack 10,149]

You are making one huge error, which I doubt you'll understand, but even if you do I doubt you'll recognise, but here goes...

Islam is militant, Islam is radical, Islam wants domination, Islam is intolerant, Islam does not assimilate. Moderate Muslims are not the problem, as they don't follow their religion to those degrees. Islam has no room to move, just like much of the Old Testament. But Christians don't worship the Old Testament, they worship the New Testament. Islam is the equivalent of the Old Testament.

Christianity (the New Testament) is not militant, it doesn't want domination, it is tolerant, it does assimilate. It does not cause worldwide indignation. Nor do Hindus or Buddhists.

You're left wing, It's in your DNA to not understand.

You have provided nothing of substance beyond a few opinions that are yours alone - I can only assume from your comments that you have undertaken an in depth study of the Koran? Yes, I am left wing and I seriously believe that you are extreme right as your views and opinions (formed mostly for you by the likes of Bolt) fit the profile.

[hardtack 10,149]

Tell me the policies and I'll let you know.

Now why doesn't that surprise me?... your thoughts are all scripted by the Bolts of the world.

[Hannibal 5,814]

Now why doesn't that surprise me?... your thoughts are all scripted by the Bolts of the world.

I said, "Tell me the policies and I'll let you know.", because I need to be reacquainted with his views. A fair request considering the allegation.

You say, "why does that surprise me ?". Pray tell.

You seem all insults, but lacking of any relevant content. George Bush ?? Good God man.

[daisycutter 28,684]

Not sure that true DC.

What about abortion clinic attacks and the killing of doctors in the US by religions extremist, the war between Catholics and Protestants in Ireland, the hiding of child molesters by the Catholic Church and the secret war of the US born against against Islam just to name a few.

i see you are persisting with your arguments of equivalency. no-one is questioning christian extremism either historic or present

but ignore reality at your own peril

militant (fundamentalist) islam is a real threat to world stability

[daisycutter 28,684]

i see you are persisting with your arguments of equivalency. no-one is questioning christian extremism either historic or present

but ignore reality at your own peril

militant (fundamentalist) islam is a real threat to world stability

a little further clarification

i'm not a christian or a muslim or any other religion. i am atheistic

i am critical of "organised religion" as distinct from personal religion (of which i have no specific problem as long as it stays personal)

i believe organised christianity is in a decline and organised islam along with its concurrent militant/fundamentalist component is on the increase

i don't like seeing any increase in any organised religion no matter the denomination as i see it as harmful to modern civilisation

it's not an anti islam thing as such

i am also very much against the intrusion of religion in matters of state

that's it in a nutshell

[DemonFrog 1,347]

i see you are persisting with your arguments of equivalency. no-one is questioning christian extremism either historic or present

but ignore reality at your own peril

militant (fundamentalist) islam is a real threat to world stability

So you blindly follow the propaganda for the US, UK, our Government and others, but I don't IMO its much better to question before blindly following anyone.

The real terrorist are those that train, fund and controlled these extremists.

We have more to fear from the CIA and other Secret Police/Spy Organisations then we do from these so called international terrorist groups. In the 70's the CIA had a campaign to remove the then Australian Government as pay back for it withdrawal from the Vietnam War and other non supportive policies towards them. But that not all, the USA foreign policy has resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent people around the world. This is at a scale beyond the resources of any so called terrorist group. But lets not just focus on the US, China in Tibet and Russia also have blood on their hands.

In 1988, a Captain of an US warship entered Iranian waters without authority from his Government and shot down a passage air-plane claiming it was a threat to his ship (which was a lie) and killed hundreds of innocent people. He was given a medal for his actions by his Government. Are these the type of people we want as so called friends?

Don't get me started on the claims that the CIA actual supports and controls a large amount of the worlds drug trade. Drugs alone is directly and indirectly responsible for the death of countless lives each year around the world including Australia.

While Australia supports rogue countries who continually commit war crimes we will have to accept there will be a pay back of some type somewhere in the future.

So my recommendation is don't rely on main stream media as it will not tell you want is actually happening in the world today. It just tells you what some rich and powerful scum bag wants you to believe is true for their own benefit.

[daisycutter 28,684]

So you blindly follow the propaganda for the US, UK, our Government and others, but I don't IMO its much better to question before blindly following anyone.

The real terrorist are those that train, fund and controlled these extremists.

We have more to fear from the CIA and other Secret Police/Spy Organisations then we do from these so called international terrorist groups. In the 70's the CIA had a campaign to remove the then Australian Government as pay back for it withdrawal from the Vietnam War and other non supportive policies towards them. But that not all, the USA foreign policy has resulted in the deaths of millions of innocent people around the world. This is at a scale beyond the resources of any so called terrorist group. But lets not just focus on the US, China in Tibet and Russia also have blood on their hands.

In 1988, a Captain of an US warship entered Iranian waters without authority from his Government and shot down a passage air-plane claiming it was a threat to his ship (which was a lie) and killed hundreds of innocent people. He was given a medal for his actions by his Government. Are these the type of people we want as so called friends?

Don't get me started on the claims that the CIA actual supports and controls a large amount of the worlds drug trade. Drugs alone is directly and indirectly responsible for the death of countless lives each year around the world including Australia.

While Australia supports rogue countries who continually commit war crimes we will have to accept there will be a pay back of some type somewhere in the future.

So my recommendation is don't rely on main stream media as it will not tell you want is actually happening in the world today. It just tells you what some rich and powerful scum bag wants you to believe is true for their own benefit.

you are just moving the goal posts froggy

that's called a strawman

can we just confine it to the topic of religion and not introduce every element of world instability and conspiracy into the argument

and please don't lecture me about mainstream media, you have no idea from what sources i obtain my education

[Guest]

i see you are persisting with your arguments of equivalency. no-one is questioning christian extremism either historic or present

but ignore reality at your own peril

militant (fundamentalist) islam is a real threat to world stability

I think to be honest the argument here should not be about equivalency between Christian fundamentalism or Islamic extremism. That gets down into the kind of rah rah kind of argument that Hannibal thrives on in which we are divided into good and evil teams and nuance and shades of grey are the first casualty of the debate. Both Christian and Islamic fundamentalism are both blights on the world but the bigger question is why do people revert to terrorist acts? It's a thorny issue and arouses passions but here is my take on it. May I request also that if you do have to reply to Hannibal that you don't quote him from this point on as I don't want to read his bigoted nonsense in quotes (though that's entirely up to you)?

The issue is that people cling to extremes (islamic fundamentalism and communism) when they have little else ultimately to cling to. While there are people who fund extremist groups (the Bin Ladens of this world), a lot of the suicide bombers you will find in the West Bank are people who are oppressed and have nothing. You will not find a great deal of multi-millionaire terrorist bombers. This fact can NEVER justify what they do. It is a reason. It is not a justification.The people whose lives they take ultimately suffer too and those means to an end cannot be justifiable.

In the case of Israel (and that is not the whole ball game as far as the terrorism debate goes), what we need to achieve is a reasonable two state solution. This is a thorny issue as when I speak to some Israelis, you do understand WHY they feel scared as it would be difficult to picture constantly being bombarded with rockets or not knowing if your bus will be blown up. On the other hand, you could imagine the frustration of a Palestinian whose house has been bulldozed to make way for more Israeli settlers.

The issue isn't the moral foundation of a religion per se. It's how religion is perverted to take advantage of the vulnerable and desperate.

Edited February 1, 2014 by Colin B. Flaubert

[DemonFrog 1,347]

a little further clarification

i'm not a christian or a muslim or any other religion. i am atheistic (1)

i am critical of "organised religion" as distinct from personal religion (of which i have no specific problem as long as it stays personal)

i believe organised christianity is in a decline and organised islam along with its concurrent militant/fundamentalist component is on the increase

i don't like seeing any increase in any organised religion no matter the denomination as i see it as harmful to modern civilisation

it's not an anti islam thing as such

i am also very much against the intrusion of religion in matters of state (1)

that's it in a nutshell

(1) Same

It is my understanding from various reading in the past that the raise of Islam is due to policies to give local populations something to keep their minds away from their poor lives etc.

The West has ensured that many of the Islam countries are controlled by their own puppet governments.

IMO opinion in the developed countries you are right about the Christian Religion but in South America and African countries religion is very strong and more fundamental.

Organised religion is about control and domination of others. Which can never be a good thing.

However there has been benefits from religion in the past as it aided trade and unity of liked minded people. The values of most main stream religious are honourable and worth having in local culture as long as there is flexibility and tolerates given to others.

[mauriesy 6,859]

The problem is with extremists and fundamentalists, no matter what the religion. Taking a literal view of any religious script is very, very dangerous. As are concepts like immortality, the after-life and hell. The issue is then whether religion actually encourages that literal viewpoint.

No wonder suicide bombers are happy to do it. They've been indoctrinated by their one religion to think that what they do is 'good' and when they die they're going to a better place. However, Christian priests have also been creating fear by promoting heaven and hell as an incentive to follow their religion for centuries.

The problem with priests abusing children is not just bad choices, it's a systemic organisational issue in attracting then isolating troubled and perverted men through a doctrine of celibacy (and also locking them up together).

BTW Hannibal ...

... I agree with your view on the Old Testament. But it still forms part of the Bible, and is a favourite with most dangerous fundamentalists. When Christianity totally abandons the Old Testament it will be a good day. But there's so much doctrine there that they desperately want to hold on to e.g. Genesis, creation and metaphorical tales of 'good and evil' like Sodom and Gomorrah, that I can't see it happening.

... the Koran does contain lots of thoughts on love, tolerance and understanding. And some of the great philosophical, mathematical and medical thought, plus the establishment of universities and libraries for public use, originated in countries in the Islamic world when the West was still feudal serfdoms.

However, in my very humble opinion, belief in any God is a delusion. And when we die we go back to where we came from i.e. nothing. But everyone is free to think what they like. Simple, eh?

[DemonFrog 1,347]

you are just moving the goal posts froggy

that's called a strawman

can we just confine it to the topic of religion and not introduce every element of world instability and conspiracy into the argument

and please don't lecture me about mainstream media, you have no idea from what sources i obtain my education

True I did change the focus of my comments away from religion but in truth this thread is about us being attacked, which we are now and have been in the past. The attacks on our culture and values is not necessary coming from a particular religious belief. Also I did not want to specifically demonize one religious belief over another as they are all as good and bad as one other.

Also I had previous posted comments about this matter and took the opportunity to expand on those comments.

If you only want to focus on the propaganda from the US without looking at the real issues then this thread may only focus on religion.

It is clear to me from your posts where you get your information about this topic, which you did not deny. But its true I am only making an educated guess.

[daisycutter 28,684]

I think to be honest the argument here should not be about equivalency between Christian fundamentalism or Islamic extremism. That gets down into the kind of rah rah kind of argument that Hannibal thrives on in which we are divided into good and evil teams and nuance and shades of grey are the first casualty of the debate. Both Christian and Islamic fundamentalism are both blights on the world but the bigger question is why do people revert to terrorist acts? It's a thorny issue and arouses passions but here is my take on it. May I request also that if you do have to reply to Hannibal that you don't quote him from this point on as I don't want to read his bigoted nonsense in quotes (though that's entirely up to you)?

The issue is that people cling to extremes (islamic fundamentalism and communism) when they have little else ultimately to cling to. While there are people who fund extremist groups (the Bin Ladens of this world), a lot of the suicide bombers you will find in the West Bank are people who are oppressed and have nothing. You will not find a great deal of multi-millionaire terrorist bombers. This fact can NEVER justify what they do. It is a reason. It is not a justification.The people whose lives they take ultimately suffer too and those means to an end cannot be justifiable.

In the case of Israel (and that is not the whole ball game as far as the terrorism debate goes), what we need to achieve is a reasonable two state solution. This is a thorny issue as when I speak to some Israelis, you do understand WHY they feel scared as it would be difficult to picture constantly being bombarded with rockets or not knowing if your bus will be blown up. On the other hand, you could imagine the frustration of a Palestinian whose house has been bulldozed to make way for more Israeli settlers.

The issue isn't the moral foundation of a religion per se. It's how religion is perverted to take advantage of the vulnerable and desperate.

i don't have any major objections to the above

however it doesn't say much except to acknowledge the problems and the role of organised religious perversion

which was pretty much my point and why growing islamic fundamentalism is a real concern

the question of why some people turn to fundamentalist extremism in the middle east is not as simple as that they just have "very little"

in many cases (probably most) the religious- fuelled extremism is turned onto each other by different islamic sects (aided too by tribalism)

i have some embryonic theories on the "why" which are religo-cultural but it would be too presumptuous with my lack of in-depth knowledge to elaborate

it is certainly complex

for froggies (and others) benefit i should state i'm not an apologist for US foreign policy (nor for that matter US domestic policy)

nor do i think that all that their foreign policy is wrong. Hood would call that fence sitting but i call it avoiding taking unnecessary unequivocal sides

[daisycutter 28,684]

True I did change the focus of my comments away from religion but in truth this thread is about us being attacked, which we are now and have been in the past. The attacks on our culture and values is not necessary coming from a particular religious belief. Also I did not want to specifically demonize one religious belief over another as they are all as good and bad as one other.

Also I had previous posted comments about this matter and took the opportunity to expand on those comments.

If you only want to focus on the propaganda from the US without looking at the real issues then this thread may only focus on religion.

It is clear to me from your posts where you get your information about this topic, which you did not deny. But its true I am only making an educated guess.

no,no you are doing it again

feel free to discuss all aspects of "homeland security" in this thread

but....when you are responding specifically to my comments please keep it relevant to those comments

and stop bringing up me focussing on us propaganda when i haven't mentioned the us

and i don't see how in any way possible it is clear to you where i get my information from

if you are going to repeat the same personal dribble don't bother replying because i won't

[Hannibal 5,814]

Do leftists think that extreme Christianity could represent even 10% of the worldwide dangers posed by radical Islam ?

Extraordinary if true.

[DemonFrog 1,347]

no,no you are doing it again

feel free to discuss all aspects of "homeland security" in this thread

but....when you are responding specifically to my comments please keep it relevant to those comments

and stop bringing up me focussing on us propaganda when i haven't mentioned the us

and i don't see how in any way possible it is clear to you where i get my information from

if you are going to repeat the same personal dribble don't bother replying because i won't

[Guest]

i don't have any major objections to the above

however it doesn't say much except to acknowledge the problems and the role of organised religious perversion

which was pretty much my point and why growing islamic fundamentalism is a real concern

the question of why some people turn to fundamentalist extremism in the middle east is not as simple as that they just have "very little"

in many cases (probably most) the religious- fuelled extremism is turned onto each other by different islamic sects (aided too by tribalism)

i have some embryonic theories on the "why" which are religo-cultural but it would be too presumptuous with my lack of in-depth knowledge to elaborate

it is certainly complex

for froggies (and others) benefit i should state i'm not an apologist for US foreign policy (nor for that matter US domestic policy)

nor do i think that all that their foreign policy is wrong. Hood would call that fence sitting but i call it avoiding taking unnecessary unequivocal sides

Maybe I have simplified a little bit but I did include communism in my discussion of all things extreme for a reason. The reason why people embraced communism, in my eyes at least, is very similar to the reasons why some people cling to Islamic (and in the US, Christian, which mostly has not devolved into violence but has been discriminatory and exclusive) fundamentalism.

People during the Cold War who rabbited on about Australia and the US 'going red' through communist infiltration usually had no idea what they were on about. Look at every single country that went communist. They were ruled by corrupt monarchs (Russia), were devastated by war (the Eastern bloc of Europe after WW2 but the biggest one was Cambodia) or were racked by a mixture of poverty and corruption (the PRC and Cuba). If people are generally comfortable in their life circumstances and feel they have adequate opportunity to redress any grievances they have, they are more likely to be content in their lives. If people are pushed and pushed and they feel that their situation is helpless, at the worst they are likely to be influenced by voices that take advantage of their desperation and at best, merely ally with them.

It would now be a good time to remember that when Nelson Mandela was imprisoned in Robben Island that for a long time it was a pre requisite for many Western leaders that any deal that lead to his release included him renouncing the ANC which was branded a terrorist organization (and still is an arm of the South African Communist Party) . Of all people, Newt Gingrich raised a brilliant point about this in that there were no voices on the right to aid him or even moderate leftist voices. Due to the repression of the apartheid regime, the extremists were all he had. Of course, he never accepted their creed but because they were the only ones willing to help, he joined up with them.

[daisycutter 28,684]

Maybe I have simplified a little bit but I did include communism in my discussion of all things extreme for a reason. The reason why people embraced communism, in my eyes at least, is very similar to the reasons why some people cling to Islamic (and in the US, Christian, which mostly has not devolved into violence but has been discriminatory and exclusive) fundamentalism.

People during the Cold War who rabbited on about Australia and the US 'going red' through communist infiltration usually had no idea what they were on about. Look at every single country that went communist. They were ruled by corrupt monarchs (Russia), were devastated by war (the Eastern bloc of Europe after WW2 but the biggest one was Cambodia) or were racked by a mixture of poverty and corruption (the PRC and Cuba). If people are generally comfortable in their life circumstances and feel they have adequate opportunity to redress any grievances they have, they are more likely to be content in their lives. If people are pushed and pushed and they feel that their situation is helpless, at the worst they are likely to be influenced by voices that take advantage of their desperation and at best, merely ally with them.

It would now be a good time to remember that when Nelson Mandela was imprisoned in Robben Island that for a long time it was a pre requisite for many Western leaders that any deal that lead to his release included him renouncing the ANC which was branded a terrorist organization (and still is an arm of the South African Communist Party) . Of all people, Newt Gingrich raised a brilliant point about this in that there were no voices on the right to aid him or even moderate leftist voices. Due to the repression of the apartheid regime, the extremists were all he had. Of course, he never accepted their creed but because they were the only ones willing to help, he joined up with them.

that may be true (although i think the reason for communism in (most of) eastern europe was not one of choice but simply mandated by stalin through force)

communism's threat was not it's socialism but its intent of world communism by subversion

don't forget that christianity had exactly the same origins. it was originally the religion of the weak and oppressed

however, whatever the reasons people turn to extremism (religious or otherwise), that does not remove the risk that extremism can spread beyond its original borders

and that is a reality for any government to deal with

[DemonFrog 1,347]

I recall a number of years ago speaking to a Federal Police Bomb Disposal Officer.

He said that Australia is used as a training ground for a number of international terrorist groups.

[DemonFrog 1,347]

Edited February 2, 2014 by DemonFrog