Colin Yai

In order to understand this seemingly senseless struggle ,we need to understand what motivates Islam which is really what this is about ,

Islam is a radical, political fascistic communistic movement whose ultimate goal is the submission of the entire planet to what is called sharia law and what they call "A superior way of life" for humanity (Sic)

The goal is the same from the Sunni perpective (Arab world)and the Shia perspective (Iran),the directives are coming from the coran and other so called holy books which are considered as no less than the word of god ,the followers of the movement (Islamists) are executing the plan begun about 1400 years ago .

According to the coran etc...anything is fair game to achieve the objectives of Islam ,murders,lies,deception,suicide bombs mass killings pillaging ,taking of booty,taking of slaves ,as examplified and taught by the prophet himself, all these things are permitted(By Sharia Law) against the "Infidels".

Iran's nuclear ambitions are but one building block in the grand Islamic strategy which vies to conquer the West ,Europe ,the Americas and of course the rest of the planet ,Iran and Saudi Arabia have vasts ressources (Oil money) to further their aims .

One basic tenet of the "faith" "movement" is : Islam must dominate and not allow any "Unholy" infidel power to control it or dictate it anything they are really not interested in negotiating ,as they think we are caught between a rock an a hard place,and I dont think they are really afraid of a few billions deaths especially infidels if that is what it takes to accomplish the task .

Any “Infidel” is fair game in his/her property and life ,that is what the good book says ,that’s what they follow ,no muslim will rise one finger to go against what another muslim does as long as he / she follows the coranic laws and rules ,which basically are : Do what you want with non-believers if you can do it and get away with it .

Once Iran succeed in building their bomb ,because without a doubt that's what they are doing ,it's anyone's guess as to what they'll do with it ,but i am afraid nothing good for us ! Maybe another thread ...I'd love to get some thoughts about that .

On one side Pakistan ,also with nuclear capabilities ,on the other Iran ,as of now Europe is being invaded by no less than 50 millions of muslims foot soldiers already ,the invasion of the US has started building up already as mega mosqus are being built at a frantic pace ,enough said by me anyone interested follow those links

Know your ennemy ! And do not underestimate it also ..

So far they are beating us(West) soundly just about everywhere ..

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/

http://muslimbrotherhoodinamerica.com/the-course/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qxA_OHOwbac&feature=relmfu

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/no-more-Muslim-immigration/

http://www.jihadwatch.org/islam-101.html

There is a lot more to learn about this fascinating subject

A draw you say ,surely you write in jest ,the Title of this thread is "Islamist Militants Attack Nigerian Churches killing 6" any chance of producing "Christian Militants attack UK Mosque killing 6" any chance of finding an equivalent headline?

You were asking about attacks on religious buildings in the UK as was Scott....if you want to continue this let's do it via SMS as I'm sure it's boring the pants off everybody else!

A draw you say ,surely you write in jest ,the Title of this thread is "Islamist Militants Attack Nigerian Churches killing 6" any chance of producing "Christian Militants attack UK Mosque killing 6" any chance of finding an equivalent headline?

I agree all religions have a history of atrocities especially back in the 1500's as you say, however the vast majority of religions have evolved from the dark ages and no longer persecute and murder those of other faiths and burn thier places of worship in the name of thier gods.

It's more a function of place/country than religion per se. Religious persecution barely exists today in some countries but is sadly alive and well in parts of Africa, Asia and S.America and involves Buddhists, Christians, Hindus and yes, Muslims too.

You could compare religious persecution with the ill-treatment of indigenous people and how both vary considerably from one country to another in terms of scale, timing and levels of acceptance.

Still avoiding Answering my question in my post #13 I see

From your exchanges with Scott it would seem that the score is:

Muslim church torchers 0; Christian mosque roasters 0.

An appropriately dull goalless (if not rather pointless) draw! Next?

PS you can't hide from history, it shapes much of what we are, who we are, where we are and how we are. While it may mean little to you, to millions history is not of the past but resonates loudly in the present, and ignorance of it can thus be hugely detrimental.

I agree all religions have a history of atrocities especially back in the 1500's as you say, however the vast majority of religions have evolved from the dark ages and no longer persecute and murder those of other faiths and burn thier places of worship in the name of thier gods.

It's more a function of place/country than religion per se. Religious persecution barely exists today in some countries but is sadly alive and well in parts of Africa, Asia and S.America and involves Buddhists, Christians, Hindus and yes, Muslims too.

You could compare religious persecution with the ill-treatment of indigenous people and how both vary considerably from one country to another in terms of scale, timing and levels of acceptance.

Ah the religion of peace and tolerance.

Not sure if any major religion can really boast much about peace and tolerance!

There are now over 1,500 mosques in the UK ,are you aware of any instance were one has been burned to the ground and its occupants murdered ?

(Honest question): Have any Churches in the UK been burned to the ground (by Muslims) or there occupants murdered?

I am really not having a go at you on this issue, but I am wondering if this has been the case in the UK.

Ah the religion of peace and tolerance.

Not sure if any major religion can really boast much about peace and tolerance!

There are now over 1,500 mosques in the UK ,are you aware of any instance were one has been burned to the ground and its occupants murdered ?

Historically the UK has a pretty shocking record (as do most European nations) of persecution of religious minorities, especially Catholics and Jews. One of the good things a more liberal society has brought the UK is a greater degree of tolerance backed up by legal sanctions to ensure that such persecution is no longer tolerated or escapes legal retribution.

Have a read of John Coffey's excellent book: Persecution and Toleration in Protestant England, 1558–1689.

Written pre Sept 2001, Coffey pointedly compares contemporary islamphobia with the English fears of the "Popish Plot" in the 17th century.

http://www.telegraph...elicopters.html If this is true, its some what hypocritical of the Russians when they warn the west of "outside " interference" in Syria's affairs .

This could get a lot uglier before it gets better. Of course the Russians are just giving some 'customer care' to a valued client of it's arms industry. I am a little amused by the report in the link that implies that Mrs Clinton seems to have expressed surprise that the Syrians have dared to attack enemy rebel positions with attack helicopters. What does she think Assad would do,? roll over and say to the rebels 'ok i mustn't get to rough, you win'?

I just wonder how this bloody mess will eventually "pan out" IMHO I cannot see the "rebels" winning ,Assad has too many powerful friends ,and the West appears to be wary of intervening Military wise on the rebels behalf ,could be they may have learned something eh , any one any thoughts on this?

It is a tinderbox Colin.

I have just spent a week or so in a country in the ME, where an old pal of mine from flight school days is now a very senior officer in the Military. As an Arab he forecast the problems many years ago when we decided we were going back in to Iraq. He considered it the worst move ever as it was Iraq and in particular Saddam that provided a buffer to the shi'ite Muslim problem that was threatening from Iran. Although there were many Shias in Iraq, the small but far more powerful Sunni population suppressed the Shia's and a state of awkward and uneasy tension stayed in balance. My friend said many years ago that getting rid of Saddam would prove a mistake as it would open the lines of communication to Lebanon and Palestine and would ease the flow and supply of arms from Iran through Iraq and Syria into Israel's neighbours, as the majority of the population in Iraq was always Shia. There is actually an uneasy alliance between Saudi and Israel as both countries want rid of the Shia issue spreading from Iran, and both are lobbying the US to do battle on their behalf. Nothing would please the House of Saud and the Israeli's more than if the US launched a full on attack against Iran. Whilst that may not be an imminent possibility, it is drawing closer and Syria is a lynch pin in the whole process.

Why did so many of the Arab allies want to be involved in the coalition in Libya? Because it helped get rid of another Shia stronghold. In terms of governance of large countries, it is now being eroded to just syria and Iran. Although Iraq is now Shia, it would be able to put up little resistance to another military intervention by the west, albeit the existence of Iraq as a Shia nation is very troubling to Saudi. The Saudi's do not want any Shia run countries, hence their eagerness to send their own troops and quickly quell the Shia uprising in Bahrain. Although the Arabs talk about their brother Muslims, the divide between Shia and Sunni sees no love lost and in many senses they are bitter enemies. One of the main reasons that Israel has not been hit by an onslaught of terrorist attacks is because Hezbullah and Hamas canot get there Shi'ite' together (couldn't resist the pun), as they are too busy fighting each other, Hezbullah being Shia and Hamas Sunni. One hope that would help ensure that Islam does not eventually dominate the world is that Shia and Sunni will continue to fight each other until one or the other does not exist. The important issue for the west is to avoid taking any action that would unite them all so the veneer of thin ice that covers the situation in Syria will, i think, be left to run it's course, with unfortunately, the likely death of many many more innocent women and children.

As I leave to get another coffee, after my little diatribe I am left with one resounding thought...(profanity edited out) religion!

Ah the religion of peace and tolerance.

Not sure if any major religion can really boast much about peace and tolerance!

Meanwhile back in the US, with munition consumption by the military at a five year low, major arms manufacturers are talking about layoffs.........

It seems to me that the Russians want there to be an intervention. Why else would they supply arms and expertise to the Syrians? They know what is going on and they know the arab world wants them to stop. Perhaps the Russians are hoping western intervention will influence the situation in Egypt and the surrounding region. More westerners "attacking" arabs with the expected collateral damage plays right into the hands of various anti western groups in the region.

It's time the west listened to the arabs and those on the extreme left that demand the west stop interfering. This is an arab problem and it is up to the arab community to deal with it. How any arab can demand western intervention after loudly condemning similar activity in the past is beyond me. Yes, there are massacres going on in Syria and yes children are being used as shields, being abused and sexually molested as part of the campaign of intimidation. However, it is not the responsibility of Nato or the USA to intervene as this is an internal struggle with Iran and Russia helping to execute these atrocities. Let the world go and talk to the Russians and Iranians, and let the UN pass sanctions on the Russians. This is a UN responsibility and the UN should ask for countries like Brazil, Turkey, China and India to send peacekeepers. Let these people deal with IEDs and suicide bombers in Burqas going kaboom. The west has done enough and its time the kiddies in the region grew up and accepted the responsibilities that accompany nationhood.

http://www.telegraph...elicopters.html If this is true, its some what hypocritical of the Russians when they warn the west of "outside " interference" in Syria's affairs .

This could get a lot uglier before it gets better. Of course the Russians are just giving some 'customer care' to a valued client of it's arms industry. I am a little amused by the report in the link that implies that Mrs Clinton seems to have expressed surprise that the Syrians have dared to attack enemy rebel positions with attack helicopters. What does she think Assad would do,? roll over and say to the rebels 'ok i mustn't get to rough, you win'?

It would appear that the majority of those who were fighting to free Libya were not from Libya at all. They were paid mercs/terrorists who went in to get the job done. Some have decided to stay to get a slice of power and many have moved on to the next job, Syria. It frightens me to read the 'alternative' accounts being submitted by many journalists, in that the atrocities are being caused by the terrorists, not the Assad regime. The fall of Assad will annex lebanon and palestine, which will be easy pickings at a time and choosing of Israel. The complete disarray that still exists in Egypt's military and that will exist in Syria's military will render them next to useless in stopping the Lebanon and Palestine being next on the list. Iran will effectively be totally isolated. The knock-on of all this would be an Iran that is cornered like a wild dog, and would be very unpredictable. Iran has a strong military, lets hope they have no nukes. As for Syria, Assad will fall, just a matter of when.

Thank goodness for Russia and China

They are real crusaders for human rights.

no different to USA and NATO who target and murder

anyone they want

Thank goodness for Russia and China

They are real crusaders for human rights.

Hmm, From ignoring ongoing carnage a few months ago to now fearing future not yet occurred massacres, how the worm has turned.

The general public in the West are being led by the nose by thoroughly dishonest reporting from the mainstream media regarding what is happening on the ground in Syria. Here is a rare example giving eyewitness accounts of a totally different scenario to the official version of events. This is a respectable publication i think, among its contributors is Charles Krauthammer, who i think has credibility with some on this forum. Likewise the German daily newspaper which is the source of this report is a respectable newspaper. This sort of thing is rarely reported by the Western media who are acting as propagandists and never deviate from the official government line. If the West is not very careful they will open a can of worms in Syria and leave the country controlled by various Islamic terrorists who have no love of us. Pretty much like Libya now. Be careful what you wish for!

http://www.nationalr...john-rosenthal#

The general public in the West are being led by the nose by thoroughly dishonest reporting from the mainstream media regarding what is happening on the ground in Syria. Here is a rare example giving eyewitness accounts of a totally different scenario to the official version of events. This is a respectable publication i think, among its contributors is Charles Krauthammer, who i think has credibility with some on this forum. Likewise the German daily newspaper which is the source of this report is a respectable newspaper. This sort of thing is rarely reported by the Western media who are acting as propagandists and never deviate from the official government line. If the West is not very careful they will open a can of worms in Syria and leave the country controlled by various Islamic terrorists who have no love of us. Pretty much like Libya now. Be careful what you wish for!

http://www.nationalr...john-rosenthal#

at least someone on TV can see through the lies

Thank goodness for Russia and China

I'm too lazy to research it, but didn't Pakistan have something to do with the mistake that caused the deaths? That might be why the US does not feel the need to apologize.

I am against intervening in Syria as I was against intervening in Libya, but I think that there is a good chance that it will happen and it will be for humanitarian reasons. We are too broke to do it and no one will appreciate it, but it is hard to ignore what these savages are doing to their own people.

Obviously Obummer's "Hope and Change" didn't work like all the other things he promised.

Yeah, it's sad how long it takes to stop a train set in motion by your predecessor at 100 miles an hour down a hill toward disaster.

The housing crisis - which started the "train wreck" - was the result of the policies of Bill Clinton, but Obama promised to fix it all and has failed dismally. It is time to stop blaming everyone else.

Only Coal Folium?, both China and India are investing billions in the vast deposits of Copper and Iron ore in Afghanistan

Copper & iron ore are not yet energy resources!!

But Assad is murdering his people wholesale, Mugabe murdered his people wholesale, there was wholesale slaughter in Rwanda on a par with the holocaust. You will be telling me next we went in to Iraq because Saddam killed some of his own people.

Just to be boring can I throw in a few more precise details...

Rwanda's slaughter of Tutsis Apr-Jul 1994 probably killed 0.5-1.0million people (an horrendous 20% of the population). It's the DRC that has seen 4-5 million deaths and still continuing. Genocide yes, comparable to the Holocaust.....?

Mugabe's worst crime was the Gukurahundi in Matabeleland in 1983-84 when the 5th Brigade killed around 20,000 Ndebele. I am no fan of Mugabe's to put it mildly and his worst crime has been to destroy the economy and healthcare systems of his country which has dramatically increased mortality rates but wholesale slaughter is a bit of a stretch. Being cynical you could argue that Mugabe is more notorious than what has happened in the DRC because there are no white farmers/settlers in the latter.

The old canard about the west only intervening in countries with energy resources is oft repeated but not totally accurate. For instance in the last 30 years:

Sierra Leone (UK), Ivory Coast (France), Bosnia (NATO), Kosovo (NATO), Grenada (USA), Panama (USA), Haiti (USA), Lebanon (USA, France, UK), Afghanistan (NATO) [cue it's all about pipelines...], Somalia (USA) etc etc

What do they all share in common? A serious lack of commercially viable energy resources. (OK, there is coal in Afghan).

The motivations behind intervention are wide-ranging and while it's easy to be cynical and Madsen about it all, it doesn't really stack up with reality. Is it all about humanitarianism...obviously not. Is it all about oil etc....apparently not. People have always profited from conflict, nothing new or controversial there.