Quoting northbloke:

Quote:
I find some of the posts on here bordering on the offensive.
As someone who had to live through the IRA bombing campaigns, I find it insulting to have them described as "misguided amateurs".

Hmmm, IRA = Al Qaeda/Taliban = Hitler/Nazi Party ?????

I don't think so.

Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
Stuart,
It's sad that you can equate the dealings of the terrorists groups who demand "Sharia Law" to many of those "Christian Groups". There is an immense gulf between the crimes committed by those "Christian groups" and the genocide and government takeovers committed by Al Qaeda and the like. Now, had you compared your "Sharia Law" groups to Hitler and the Nazi party, it might be a more fair comparison.

Don't misunderstand me! The acts of each of these are unconscionable. I will even agree that they are all cut from the same cloth and their desires are very similar but your claim that they are equal  is misplaced. I have to agree with bbursiek, in that, when you compare them, the "Christian" groups seem like misguided amateurs.

Since you like to quote Wikipedia, check out this list and compare again.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_designated_terrorist_organizations

P.S. The individuals within the KKK can claim what they like but to say they are a "Christian group" is a blatant attempt at subterfuge on their part and yours.

Sorry, but I don't see the "immense gulf". What IS the difference? Sticking with the IRA / Al-Qaeda comparison, the IRA has been considerably more active and killed considerably more people in England that than Al-Qaeda has achieved in the whole of  Europe (even taking into account the difference in active lifespan). If you ignored 9/11 (which was a very successful single attack), comparing Al-Qaeda to the IRA would be almost laughable. I'm also not aware of Al-Qaeda's takeover of governments or genocide. Influence perhaps, but I'm not even sure that this is as significant as the influence exerted by the IRA.

I also don't think I made any claims about groups being equal, mainly because 'equal' can mean so many different things. Scale, effectiveness, risk, consequence - I can make comparisons, but can't really say much about 'equality'.

As for misguided amateurs, I just think that your wrong. You site Muslims carrying out genocide, there are examples of Christian's carrying out genocide in the last few years. You seem to think that the KKK claiming Christian values is a distraction, well I can easily produce plenty of Muslims who would denounce Islamic terrorists as following the teachings of Islam. And actually, I think that's an important point. Many groups claim motivation that disgusts people that the claim has even been made. Failing to note the ludicrousness of claims by Al-Qaeda and many of their kind whilst simply dismissing those of the KKK is one of the things that concern me.

The Wikipedia link? Very subjective of course and you could say the same about my link, but I dn't think it i at all a fair representation. Sticking with the IRA (as I know quite a bit about it and it's not cited in your religious terrorists link), their aims may not be religion, but they are linked strongly to religion. They also targeted some of their victims based upon their religion, bringing a clearly religious aspect into their actions. To suggest otherwise really would be an attempt at subterfuge.

Stuart
P.S. If I say anything that anyone thinks is offensive (or even bordering), I'd like to know - I'm trying to avoid it and any failure is unintentional.

Quoting bbursiek: (edited for brevity)

Quote:
I think the comment about Christian terrorists  as "amateurs" was not about the IRA specifically because I think the list on Wikepedia centered on small fringe groups.

The thing is, that's exactly what most of the Islamic groups are - small fringe groups. Besides, several of those Christian groups aren't so fringe. The main reason you don't hear about them o often is because they're not 'in fashion' in the media (a known media trait). The differences aren't as big as you think.

Quote:
As an addition I was disgusted that numerous Americans chose to support the IRA in any way.

Yet US sympathy (and support) for the IRA was shockingly widespread and open. I think that it's very important to keep that in mind when claiming widespread sympathies (and support) amongst Muslim communities for Islamic fundamentalism. I very much doubt that many would think that ill of the American people, but that understanding/forgiveness does not seem to extend as far towards Muslims. Note that's not a US bash, it's  "down with the Muslims" bash.

Quote:
The comment about the Burqua is the most troubling to me. I called the "burqua" degrading because in my opinion it's exactly that. Muslim women do in some cases "choose" to wear the Burqua but it is clearly not a practical garment and is designed primarily to conceal the women's face and figure from men. I would ask this question to those who defend the burqua -- why don't Muslim men wear it if it's a "display of their faith". The answer is quite simple the burqua is part of a series of things designed to highlight the subordinate position of women in Islamic society. In general I think women in Islamic societies are treated poorly and Islam is used as the excuse to do so in most cases.

Something to ponder. Aren't skimpy tops and really tight, short skirts clearly not practical, designed primarily to display a woman's 'assets'. Is it not degrading to women, designed primarily to highlight the subordinate position of women? If not, why do so few men wear similarly revealing outfits in comparison to the number of women?

To some extent I think you're right, but nowhere near to the extent you think you are. All the women I know who wear traditional dress do so through choice and say that they'd feel very exposed if required to take them off (think being asked to strip down to their underwear).

Quote:
The notion that the beheading or other gruesome executions are somehow comparable to the delay I can only express my disbelief that someone would try to excuse or equate this gruesome practice. In the US death sentences are carried out in a way designed to minimize the suffering of the prisoner. The brutality of punishment in the Middle East is completely unacceptable.

I often ponder about punishment in the UK. I wonder what the goal of prison is. To hear some people, it's important to ensure a drawn out suffering (i.e. revenge). I wonder to myself, is it not more barbaric to lock someone up for life than to simply kill them? Given the choice between having my head chopped off and living a prison life for forty years, which would I prefer?

I'm not to say that I'm all for painful or torturous deaths, but I'm not going to be too hasty to claim the moral high-ground.

Stuart

Quoting Unicus69:

Quote:
While, they may be a catholic organisation their terror campaign is not faith based.  If memory serves, they are after independence.  That does not excuse their actions, but it isn't the same as a holy war.

Strictly speaking, the different factions relating to Northern Ireland are not religious based. However, it's a pretty strong relationship with hostilities being directed by either side based upon faith. If the faith element could be erased, the problem would very quickly vanish.

I should also put you right that the Republicans (IRA et al) are NOT after independence. They're want to absorb Northern Ireland (part of the UK) into the Republic of Ireland (and independent country) against the wishes of the people of Northern Ireland. The whole reason Northern Ireland exits is because they wished to remain part of the UK, whilst the rest of Ireland wanted independence. It gets more complicated than that (it always does), but that is the fundamental issue.

Stuart

Quoting Dan W:

Quote:
It is not my intention to depersonalize the death of a single person. But for you to say that Al Qaeda is less deadly than the IRA is (according to my source) absolutely incorrect.

According to the University of Ulster (CAIN project), The provisional IRA is responsible for 1,821 deaths from 1969 (year the provisional IRA was founded) to 2001. That covers a 32 year span. They also state that this is about 48% of the total killed during the entire conflict (1969-1998). Including both sides, this gives a total of about 4,000 killed in over 30 years.

Would you care to offer the totals for Al Qaeda during the same years? I think we all remember that Al Qaeda killed 2,998 civilians (excluding the 19 hijackers) on September 11, 2001. So, within one day they surpassed what your IRA took over 30 years to accomplish.

If these numbers are incorrect, please let us all know where we can see a more correct accounting.

That's why I said excluding 9/11. 9/11 was extremely effective, but not representative. If you take out 9/11 and, say, the ten (or twenty if you prefer) most effective attacks by the IRA, the IRA was more effective by a long shot.

Anyway, this offshoot has the potential to really undermining the topic - I read back the paragraph I just wrote above and it sounds like I'm trying to win a pissing contest!    The point is to try and keep Al-Qaeda / Islam / terrorism in perspective.

Stuart

Stuart,

Quote:
P.S. If I say anything that anyone thinks is offensive (or even bordering), I'd like to know - I'm trying to avoid it and any failure is unintentional.

I don't think you've said anything offensive - not even close. You've argued your points well and I respect your point of view. You seem like a thougtful guy. Obviously I've been critical of some of your comments but none offended me. I think it's worthwhile for people of the west to discuss these issues openly and without antagonism. It's part of what makes our larger western society so good in my mind.

As I've said before I don't hold a negative opinion of all Muslims -- but I am concerned about what I see as a widespread extremism in the Muslim faith. I see Al Qaeda as a more serious threat to the world than the IRA ever was but then again I don't come from England so it's easy for me to say that.

I hope the moderates and voices of modernity within the faith are able to steer Islam to a better and less violent future. I hope meaninful democracy and prosperity comes to the Middle East and the rest of the Muslim world and I think that at some point it will. The people of the Muslim world are after all people and share the fundamental desires we all do -- peace, security, justice, freedom. Unfortunately in the present their countries and faith have been to some extent at least hijacked by their most radical elements. Furthermore many of their young people have been educated into hatred and intolerance and as a result lack some of the perspective most westerners have.

I want to add that Stuart makes a good point about the dress of many women in the west today. I myself acknowledged in an earlier post that the pendulum has swung far too much towards the Brittany Spears "sex kitten" look which is in a certain sense degrading toward women. Other aspects of this in the west are pornography and strip clubs where women degrade themselves for men's entertainment. Despite this I would suggest women in the west have far better choices available to them then most Muslim women. However some women argue (unconvincingly to my mind) that they feel empowered by their sexuality and the "control" they have over men when they strip or dress "sexy".

I don't see dressing modestly and the burqua as remotely the same thing. Modest dress can easily be a "choice" but wearing a head to toe outfit that covers everything but your eyes is not something I see as a real choice in most cases.

Just bought Sweeney Todd which I missed in theaters so maybe I'll set back and watch a DVD which is what brought us all here right?

Brian

To bbursiek

It's good to know that the U.S. is sending only the bad ones to prison.  The following is from a Canadian newspaper article in which it was noted that the Canadian prison population increased for the first time since 1995-1996:


Canada had 110 prisoners for every 100,000 people in 2005-2006, compared to 107 the year before. That is only about a two per cent increase, but it is the first increase since 1995-1996.

The report is based on daily and monthly prisoner counts done at facilities across Canada, except for Prince Edward Island, Nunavut and the Northwest Territories, which did not have complete numbers.

Canada's rate is almost seven times lower than the rate in the United States, which had 738 prisoners for every 100,000 people in 2005-2006. The U.S. rate only counts adult prisoners, while the Canadian rate counts all prisoners, including those under the age of 18.

Rates in western Europe, which count prisoners of all ages, were closer to the Canadian rates in 2005-2006 — Sweden's was 82, France's was 85 and in England and Wales it was 148.

(English)
Robert S. Mueller, III, Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation
Chatham House, London, England, April 7, 2008
quote:

Quote:
... The bottom tier is made up of homegrown extremists. They are self-radicalizing, self-financing, and self-executing. They meet up on the Internet instead of in foreign training camps. They have no formal affiliation with al Qaeda, but they are inspired by its message of violence. Examples of this tier include last year’s plot to blow up pipelines at JFK airport in New York and a 2005 plot to attack military recruiting centers and a synagogue in Los Angeles. ...

(Dutch)
FBI: Internet ontmoetingsplaats voor terroristen