Afghan teacher shot dead after condemning suicide bombings as un-Islamic

[Annie]

Are you serious??? So your saying that if these terrorists (which I agree they are) were to have a greater number, and fighting in a conventional manner (i.e. tanks, missles, infantry, etc...) we would still call them racists??

LOL.

Have you seen what we've resorted to calling AL Sadr's militia??? An Army...don't know why though. Many would call Iran's military a terrorist organization, but it's not what's in the books now is it?

The British viewed the colonists' tactics to be cowardly and terroristic during the Revolution because some of it was unconventional.

You wish they were stronger? If so, what do you think our response would be?

 

[BrianH]

You wish they were stronger? If so, what do you think our response would be?

LOL, you have a weird way of twisting words or making up your own meanings of my words.

Did I ever say I wished they were stronger???

IN fact, I wish they were all destroyed into oblivion...

What I did say, was that if they were stronger, and fighting a more conventional warfare (tanks, missles, aircraft, etc..), we wouldn't be calling them terrorists.

 

[Annie]

LOL, you have a weird way of twisting words or making up your own meanings of my words.

Did I ever say I wished they were stronger???

IN fact, I wish they were all destroyed into oblivion...

What I did say, was that if they were stronger, and fighting a more conventional warfare (tanks, missles, aircraft, etc..), we wouldn't be calling them terrorists.

What would we be calling them? How would we be addressing them differently?

 

[RetiredGySgt]

The fact that muslims understand what the terrorists are doing. And if the terrorist were fighting back with tanks, jets, armies, etc...we wouldn't be referring to them as terrorist, but armies.

You can not be serious, equating armies fighting in the field AGAINST other armies as the same as the wanton murder of civilians. You can not be serious comparing Colonial ARMY tactics with planting bombs on busses full of children and women and disco techs or pizza parlors. You are an idiot if this is what you are claiming as being the "same".

As for Muslims, the vast majority APPROVE of terror, as ong as it is not targetting them. That has been proven in polls across the years and countries. The Koran is understood by most Muslims to sanction the MURDER of infidels. It states it IN the Koran.

 

[Anguille]

The British viewed the colonists' tactics to be cowardly and terroristic during the Revolution because some of it was unconventional.

There is no hard evidence to prove it, but the British may have used biological warfare during the American Revolution, by purposefully spreading smallpox.

War is a dirty business, no matter what side you fight on.

 

[Anguille]

Typical attempts to put words into my mouth (sigh). I never said that the oppose/support cancel each other out. I grant you that the Muslims that support Muslim terrorists are probably in greater number per capita than are the Christians that support Christian terrorists. I simply don’t participate in absolutist thinking. There are probably some people that wear such rose-colored classes – that let their own preferences cloud their thinking and facts – that they may suggest that no Muslims oppose Muslim terrorism and that all Christians support Christian terrorists.

I don’t play that game. As part of a famous song says, “there is good and bad in everyone”.

Matt, your thinking on this subject is very level headed. What you say about bean counting is to the point. Adding them up doesn't tell us anything useful about how to understand and manage terrorism.

 

[Anguille]

No, like ELF, that burns down real people's houses or the more mild mannered PETA, that throws blood on furs and posts as vile as pics as the most fervent pro-lifers, or GreenPeace that attacks ships at sea.

I'm sure there are Christians and Jews in those organizations too.

 

[Anguille]

I'm sorry I assumed a base of knowledge, won't happen again.

...as she stormed out in a huff.

 

[AllieBaba]

I can show passages in the Koran that condemn this.

Christians have killed doctors that provide abortions because they think that their Bible / God condone it.

And I can show passages from the BIble that condemn that.

There are many, many more dangerous conservative muslims than conservative Christians, and it's boring that every time someone condemns radical Islam for killing wantonly, there's a chorus of "Christian conservatives are just as bad!"

What a bunch of hooey.
Besides which, the tiny handful of cases where nutjobs have targeted abortion clinic doctors do not compare with nutjobs taking out schools of children, or people on a bus. Just random, innocent people.

 

[AllieBaba]

I'm sure there are Christians and Jews in those organizations too.

Peta was also convicted of staging animal "abuse" situations, in one case paying a seal hunter to brutalize a seal because they couldn't get footage brutal enough any other way. I remember this from a few years back...you could hear the poor guy on the tape who was beating the seal begging to stop, and the camera guy (Petafile) telling him, "No, not yet...."

At least that movement lost momentum. Before 9/11 it was going to strong and getting crazier by the minute.

 

[Anguille]

Peta was also convicted of staging animal "abuse" situations, in one case paying a seal hunter to brutalize a seal because they couldn't get footage brutal enough any other way. I remember this from a few years back...you could hear the poor guy on the tape who was beating the seal begging to stop, and the camera guy (Petafile) telling him, "No, not yet...."

At least that movement lost momentum. Before 9/11 it was going to strong and getting crazier by the minute.

Where and when were they convicted of paying seal hunters to brutalize animals? Sounds more like the seal hunter was begging them to stop filming.

 

[AllieBaba]

Peta was convicted.
And that wasn't the only time they got busted for staging incidents.
I dont know if I can find it, though. It happened something like 9 years ago.

 

[BrianH]

RGS, go back and read my post. You've obviously not comprehended what I posted. I'm not equating it with anything. that would be like equating today's tanks with tanks in 1917.

WHAT I did say, was that if the terrorists consisted of a significantly larger force, and fought a more conventional warfare----even if their motives were the same--- they would not be called terrorist. What do they call Al Sadrs militia now???
Read a little history, and you'll find that the Muslims during the crusades were not called terrorists or anything to signify it. It was Muslims against Chrsitians, and in the Muslims' eyes, they were killing the infidels. Under this logic, you could consider Hitler to be a terrorist, but he was rarely called so. He wished to kill off an entire race of people, not to mention others who he disliked, not to mention take over the world. Sounds pretty terroristic to me, however, considering he fought with a LARGE army and used conventional warfare, he was not called a terrorist.

I dont' condone anything that the terrorist do, and I indeed believe that the people we're dealing with should be called terrorists. This all stemmed from something Kathianne said about Muslims supporting terror. And my answer was that the Muslims don't view it as terrorism because it's their only way to fight (because they have no conventional means). And, if they did fight a conventional warfare, with conventional weapons, we would not call them terrorist, just like we didn't call Saddam's army terrorist, but Saddam's Army.

I'm agreeing with you RGS, but explaining a different point that probably has no relevance anyway....

 

[Anguille]

Peta was convicted.
And that wasn't the only time they got busted for staging incidents.
I dont know if I can find it, though. It happened something like 9 years ago.

Of course you can't find it, Allie Blah Blah Blah.

 

[jillian]

Of course you can't find it, Allie Blah Blah Blah.

Actually, my experience with PETA people is that they don't care whether what they say is the truth or a lie. I don't say that in an offhand manner, but I would direct you to Peter Singer's Animal Liberation. That is the manifesto for the animal rights movement. In it, Singer says that the ends justify the means and it doesn't matter if what they say is true or not.

And mostly, a fish is not a dog is not a pig is not a boy and people like that imbecile Cleveland Amory who said he'd let his own child die rather than give it a baboon heart really shouldn't be accepted into any type of civil society. Their priorities and morals are skewed.

And the "staged" incidents for which PETA was investigated is, I believe, the allegations they made about the chickens used by KFC.

This link is just a little something I found on the subject:

Question
How can an animal activist NOT help animals?

Answer
Animal rights people draw negative attention to animal related issues. In the past 20 years animal rights groups have
* released thousands of mink from a fur farm that have gone on to decimate British wildlife
* performed countless acts of vandalism and terrorism against people working in animal-related fields, particularly those involved in extremely important medical research
* laid false scent for fox-hounds leading them on to railway tracks and resulting in several of their deaths
* sprayed pepper spray in the eyes of fox-hounds and hunt horses
* cut the tendons of hunt horses causing several to have to be destroyed
* accused people of child abuse for feeding their children meat and milk - when in fact it is child abuse NOT to feed them these things as they are absolutely imperative for growing children
* preyed on the sick by suggesting wholly unfounded links between eating animal products and cancers.
* got fox hunting banned resulting in a massive increase in the number of foxes being shot which will eventually wipe them out all together, not to mention the thousands of livelihoods that are now threatened.
* chained themselves to railings at rodeos in the United States, not because rodeos hurt animals (they don’t) but purely because they believe we should not be involved with animals in any way.
* PETA alone have destroyed millions of dogs given to them by well meaning members of the public for rehoming, there have actually been prosecutions for animal cruelty against senior members of PETA when dogs were found dumped in a bin having been bludgeoned to death
* released dogs at a number of dog shows resulting in several being injured in fights and killed on the roads.
* opened gates at several equestrian institutions and let out all the horses resulting in several being killed and injured on the roads.
* several animal rights groups, such as ALF, are recognised as terrorist organisations and a threat to national security and several more, including PETA and the HSUS are under investigation for possible links with terrorist groups including giving money to known terrorist groups.

But the biggest way they cause harm is in the wholly false information they give out. There is barely a single true word on any animal rights website, in any animal rights leaflet and their followers are brain washed into believing these outright lies are the truth. For example on one website is a picture of some sheep gathered into a holding yard and the caption says that this is how sheep live all the time. They totally fail to mention the green field that is actually IN the picture into which the sheep will no doubt be turned once they have been wormed/dipped/sheared etc.
They also take isolated incidents of documented cruelty cases and use those pictures and say they are how all institutions within that industry - be it farming, horse riding, slaughter plants etc, are run and that this cruelty is normal. The slaughter videos on PETAs website for example fall into four categories - 1) filmed in Mexico where there is a very poor animal welfare record 2) over 30 years old before all the current regulations were brought in 3) completely fabricated, set up by PETA members and all acts within those videos performed by them including building the stage and the ensuing animal cruelty or 4) taken from the very few documented cruelty cases recorded in slaughter plants since the current regulations were brought in. Their information is almost wholly false and not a word they say should be believed by anyone. If any article from any animal rights website was presented to a member of the veterinary profession such as myself it could be pulled apart and proven to be completely untrue in a matter of minutes.

Not a single penny of the money raised by animal rights groups goes to actually helping animals, they don’t run proper shelters, they don’t help clean up birds after oil spills, they don’t provide vet care for poor owners, they don’t inspect facilities when suspected cruelty is reported, they don’t run schemes for neutering pets to avoid over population problems, they don’t have programmes to aid the conservation of endangered wildlife, ALL they do is political activism and in many cases terrorism. This is supremely unhelpful to the cause of animal welfare.

check out these websites.
http://www.cdfe.org/peta_watch.htm
http://brianoconnor.typepad.com/animal_crackers/2004/03/reactionaction.html
http://www.animalscam.com/index.cfm
http://www.animalrights.net/
http://www.naiaonline.org/body/articles/archives/Stop_Animal%20_Rights_Terrorist...
http://www.pathwai.org/
http://www.animalowners.org/intro.html
http://www.direct-action.info/
http://www.abpi.org.uk/amric/amric.asp
http://www.rds-online.org.uk/pages/home.asp?i_ToolbarID=8&i_PageID=94
http://www.aalas.org/index.aspx
http://www.simr.org.uk/
http://www.vare.org.uk/
http://www.medicalprogress.org/
http://www.fbresearch.org/
http://www.maninnature.com/index.html
http://www.iwmc.org/
http://www.ussportsmen.org/
http://www.consumerfreedom.com/
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-1564363,00.html
http://www.huntfacts.com/AR Agenda.htm

This link in particular demonstrates attempts by animal rights terrorists to harm human beings - note the money paid to a person convicted of attempted murder and that paid to a person convicted of torching a science lab.
http://www.mensnewsdaily.com/blog/2005/08/are-humans-and-animals-separate-but.ht...

These websites support my claims about PETA dumping dogs in bins and giving money to known terrorist organisations.
http://www.cdfe.org/ny_post.htm
http://www.petakillsanimals.com/
http://www.american-partisan.com/cols/2003/gibson/qtr3/0903.htm
http://www.animalscam.com/organizations.cfm

Animal welfare is a very important issue that all humans with a conscience should be concerned about - but animal RIGHTS is a joke. Unfortunately not a very funny one for the countless people whose livelihoods and even lives are threatened and the animals who's welfare and in some cases very existence is in jeopardy as a result of their actions.

Hope this answers your question.

http://en.allexperts.com/q/Animal-Rights-2716/REAL-FACTS.htm

 

[Anguille]

But where is the part about PETA being convicted for supposedly paying a seal hunter to beat a seal?

 

[Anguille]

Actually, my experience with PETA people is that they don't care whether what they say is the truth or a lie. I don't say that in an offhand manner,...

I have not had any experience with PETA, you seem to have had some and have a negative view of them.

I don't know much about them other than that they are a hot topic for many people. I am in no position to judge them. I'm sure I don't agree with them about use of working animals, but I do admire how they've helped bring the issue of humane treatment of animals into the forefront.

 

[Shogun]

im a lifelong member of the People for the Eating of Tasty Animals.

 

[Anguille]

im a lifelong member of the People for the Eating of Tasty Animals.

LOL! You've said that before. You get a break because you're nice to baby ducks and squirrels.
I eat tasty animals too, but not ones that are raised living in their own shit in factory farms.

 

[AllieBaba]

I have not had any experience with PETA, you seem to have had some and have a negative view of them.

I don't know much about them other than that they are a hot topic for many people. I am in no position to judge them. I'm sure I don't agree with them about use of working animals, but I do admire how they've helped bring the issue of humane treatment of animals into the forefront.

The Humane Society was doing fine on it's own before the militant animal rights freaks took up the cause.