They shoot children, don't they?

[Zhukov]

They shoot children, don't they?
Dennis Prager (archive)


September 7, 2004

According to The New York Times, when the terrorists took over the Russian elementary school, they shouted "Allahu akbar" ("Allah is the greatest").

Does this surprise you, dear reader? Does it shock you that the people who deliberately attacked a school and then systematically shot and blew up little children did so in the name of Islam?

Unfortunately, the question is rhetorical. Having targeted little children for death, there is no atrocity, no barbarity, no act of evil that the human race cannot imagine fanatical Muslims committing.

We have already become almost inured to:

The slaughtering of innocent human beings as if they were animals while chanting Muslim prayers.

The reintroduction of black slavery and genocide against blacks.

The murder of daughters and sisters for imagined or real sexual behavior.

The stoning of women accused of adultery.

The burning of Hindu temples and Christian churches, and the destruction of among the greatest Buddhist sculptures.

The ban on women driving cars or learning to read.

The idolization of young men who blow themselves up while murdering and maiming innocent non-Muslims -- and the theology of sexual rewards in heaven for doing so.

These are some of the atrocities being committed by Muslims in different parts of the world today.

It is, of course, only a minority of Muslims that engages in such horrors, but it is only Muslims who are doing all these things. Christians aren't -- even among Palestinians, there are no Christian terrorists. Jews aren't -- and when one Jew did deliberately kill innocent Palestinians in 1994, the rest of the Jewish world was horrified and demonstrated its revulsion in word and deed. Buddhists aren't -- despite the destruction of Tibet by the Chinese Communists, no Buddhists have murdered innocent Chinese, let alone non-Chinese who deal with China.

With the psychopathic cruelty at a Russian elementary school, have we reached the point where people of goodwill can ask serious questions about Muslims and Islam? Or are any challenging questions still to be dismissed as "Muslim bashing" or, even more absurdly, "racist," as if religion were a race?

The truth is that everyone with a conscience has questions about Muslims and Islam. But the most powerful religion in America, the religion of tolerance, has rendered it almost impossible to ask any such questions. Most people are so afraid of being branded intolerant that the most natural and goodhearted questions are only posed by the handful who have the courage to do so (usually conservative Christians).

But good Muslims should welcome fair questions and not dismiss them as manifestations of bigotry. Most Americans have no a priori view of Islam. As far as they are concerned, it is one more religion that its practitioners ought to be able to practice in peace just as the members of every other faith in America do.

I know I have questions, and I know they come from a non-prejudiced place. And I can back up this claim.

Between 1982 and 1992, I moderated an extremely popular weekly radio show in Los Angeles on ABC radio. It featured a Roman Catholic priest, a Protestant minister and a rabbi. Beginning about 1987, I regularly invited Muslim representatives, marking the first time that Muslims were given such wide exposure on mainstream American radio or television. I developed such a good rapport with the Muslim community and its leaders that I was repeatedly invited to speak at the Islamic Center of Southern California, one of the largest and most prestigious institutions and mosques in the country.

And I in turn invited Muslim leaders to speak before major Jewish institutions.

Given this background, it is with the greatest sadness that I feel compelled to ask two questions:

First, is there anything in Islam or in the way Islam is now taught and practiced that dulls the conscience and thereby enables many religious Muslims to engage in or support atrocities that other groups, religious and secular, find inconceivable?

Second, the laudable condemnations of Islamic terror made by the Islamic Center notwithstanding, why are there virtually no public demonstrations of Muslims against the unspeakable evils committed by its adherents?

And while posing questions, here are two for liberals: Why are almost the only people asking these questions aloud conservative and religious? Where are you when it comes to acknowledging evil?

Yes, some people do shoot children, and good people have a right to ask why.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/dennisprager/dp20040907.shtml

 

[Arabian]

Really am so sorry for what happened in Russia, and am sure that all Muslims allover the world who really believe in Allah is terribly sorry for that
And I gonna give you a verse for what angel said to Allah when Allah intended to create a the mankind

002. Al-Baqarah
30. And (remember) when your Lord said to the angels: "Verily, I am going to place (mankind) generations after generations on earth." They said: "Will You place therein those who will make mischief therein and shed blood, - while we glorify You with praises and thanks (Exalted be You above all that they associate with You as partners) and sanctify You." He (Allâh) said: "I know that which you do not know."




I wanna say that it’s the life if there are no bad people you will never know the good guys
And I wanna say that those people who kill others her blood is effused in Islam as Allah says
Sura 025. Al-Furqân verse 68

68. And those who invoke not any other ilâh (god) along with Allâh, nor kill such life as Allâh has forbidden, except for just cause, nor commit illegal sexual intercourse and whoever does this shall receive the punishment

So In Islam those people is the least not the most and aren't admitted in Islam and in a period of time there were somekind of them in Egypt but our government arrested them all and we have never heard about them after that

As I said we don admit them , but why we don’t shame the admitted government who humiliate and don’t admit with the war laws like what Russia did in the
Bosnia-Herzegovinia while their attacks on it
And what do America do with Iraq prisoners and what happen in Jamaica prisons and what Israel do with the Palestinians prisoners (its a whole governments admitted by the whole world)
Is that mean that people only live in big countries and other countries children should be dead is that what they call equality or democracy
Is the destruction for whole country including children live in it, called war against terrorism?
Or it is just a mask to serve their needs

And at the end I am really so sorry for those innocent children I know that sorry isn’t enough but what else can I do

 

[liberal4now]

What do you think Bush is doing in Iraq? Shooting children.

 

[Arabian]

What do you think Bush is doing in Iraq? Shooting children.

dear liberal4now
let me ask you
when he make an attack with plan , did this attack distinguish between children and old man
when they take your father from your home without any reason will you be happy or feel safty , what feeling would you have towards these people
and is a matter of children only, are the childrens who only have rights, and others don't and over that we all once were childrens
on the other hand
after he arrested saddam what else he want????????

 

[Zhukov]

And what do America do with Iraq prisoners

You have equated intentionally shooting children in the back of the head with sexually humiliating grown men.

Why? To divert attention away from the atrocities committed in your religion's name I suspect. You do a great diservice to your religion, and are unfortunately very representative of it. No condemnation. Only thin words of sympathy and more excuses.

What do you think Bush is doing in Iraq? Shooting children.

Do please provide proof that Pres. Bush is in Iraq executing children. I would love to see it.

 

[Arabian]

You have equated intentionally shooting children in the back of the head with sexually humiliating grown men.

Why? To divert attention away from the atrocities committed in your religion's name I suspect. You do a great diservice to your religion, and are unfortunately very representative of it. No condemnation. Only thin words of sympathy and more excuses.





Do please provide proof that Pres. Bush is in Iraq executing children. I would love to see it.

ohh man
i said that im sorry for those children and i imgine if those were mine i may will go crazy im really so sorry for them and i really dont agree with those people who did so
all i said is that they are least not most and they aren't addmitted by any country, and if that happened in any muslim countries and arrested they will be executed for their acts we don't courage the terrorism and arab aren't terrorists if some terrorists live in a country is that mean that the whole country is terrorists
and all what i said that when they attacked al iraq with the forced plane they didnt ditinguish if they are shooting childrens or old guys
even if they shoot elders or adults, dont they have the right to live their life
those chidren in russia have their dreams they wished to make it true
and those also who live in iraq and afghanestan and Bosnia-Herzegovinia.
who lost their family had also their dreams to live in their own country with their family without any fear ,live in free country with their family

 

[wade]

About the original post: I'd point out it was the Jews (Zionists actually) that invented modern terrorism when the bombed the Jeruslem Hotel way back in the 50's. And yes, childeren were amoung the over 90 deaths and twice that number of wounded.

As far as "Bush" killing children in Iraq, I'm sure some have died as a result of US action. But the US has done everything possible to avoid civilain causalties. There is a huge difference between targeting children specifically and the unfortunatel loss of innocent life that is inevitable in war. The US is not carpet bombing civilian areas like the Russians in Chechnya. I think the charge that "Bush is shooting children in the back" is ludicrous!

Finally, I'd point out that while some of the terrorists in the Russian school attack were moslim, evidently not all were. This is about more than religious fanatiscism - it's about revenge for Russian atrocities in Chechnya which are virtually ingnored, and therefore effectively condoned, by the West.

Wade.

 

[dumphauler]

. This is about more than religious fanatiscism - it's about revenge for Russian atrocities in Chechnya which are virtually ingnored, and therefore effectively condoned, by the West.

Wade.

That's it , rite on the head!

 

[padisha emperor]

Zhukov

Do please provide proof that Pres. Bush is in Iraq executing children. I would love to see it.

you are clever, you know what he meant.

This war was lead by Bush orders, so he may be consider as the responsable of the "collateral dammages".

You know, Napoleon was consider after Waterloo as a danger for international paece and as a war criminal......
And he did'nt make worst than Bush....

 

[Zhukov]

And he did'nt make worst than Bush....

Not entirely sure what you meant by that. But if you consider trying to conquer all of Europe for your personal aggrandizement better than what we have going on today, I question your judgement in such matters.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

What do you think Bush is doing in Iraq? Shooting children.

Your level of thought is that of a child. You need to see beyond the fashionableness of hating america. We stopped the nazis. The communists. Now 're stopping world terrorism, and all you do is bitch and moan like a child.

 

[padisha emperor]

Not entirely sure what you meant by that. But if you consider trying to conquer all of Europe for your personal aggrandizement better than what we have going on today, I question your judgement in such matters.

No, I was not speaking of that

this was his problem.
War was in Europa before and after him, so if he was punish as a war criminal for it, it is stupid. George III, Louis XIV and Louis XV wanted to conquer the world

He was condamned because he was occupating several countries.....like Bush - only one, but with the same situation for him like Napoleon in Spain, that's not a good point for W. )

 

[Zhukov]

He was condamned because he was occupating several countries

No he was condemned first and foremost because he lost.

He lost because he waged war not for protection or defense, but because of desire and ambition. He waged war against Russia, for instance, for no other reason than because he thought he could win.

 

[padisha emperor]

No he was condemned first and foremost because he lost.

He lost because he waged war not for protection or defense, but because of desire and ambition. He waged war against Russia, for instance, for no other reason than because he thought he could win.

If all the looser of wars at this time and before have been condemned AS WAR CRIMINAL.......such lot of people in jails !
Condemned, yes, but as a war criminal, maybe not.
That was I meant


the origin of the napoleonic wars are with the war of thr French revolution : France wass under attack, France defended itself. France won, and the prussian and austrian invasion failed.
After, France did war in Italy to fight Austria, who was a threat for France. France did war in Egypt to prejudice England's interests.
Again war in Italy against Austria, for the same reason than during the first Italy campain.

You know, France at this time was threat by : England, of course, Prussia, Russia and Austria - for the mightiest - .

France attack Russia because England said to Russia that Napoleon was a danger, and Russia break the Peace of Tilsit (1808).

Napoleon go in Russia, win in Borodino, near Moscow, and made his entrance his Moscow. bad luck, the city burned. (probably the Russians).
And after, you know the end : an awful winter : Napoleon was not defeat by Koutouzov, but by the Winter.


In fact, the idea to take Napoleon for a comparaison was not a good idea...you misunderstand all my message ( I think you do it on purpose.. )

Bush, the new Torquemada : against the no christians, with the help of God, fighting muslims.

 

[Zhukov]

Napoleon go in Russia, win in Borodino

Well....that's debateable. Napoleon was certainly in possesion of the field at the end of the day, but at what cost?

I disagree with your assesment of the motivation for events that occured after 1798, but we've diverged from the point.



What would you have our President do?

This has been going on for about 1500 years, this fighting between the christians and the moslems. But with respect to the fatalities among the innocent whats important is intent.

If Pres. Bush could snap his fingers and make every Islamofascist die and thus avoid unnecessary deaths don't you think he would? Or do you believe he doesn't care about (or perhaps enjoys?) the deaths of innocents in Iraq and Afghanistan?

Should Churchill have been tried as a war criminal for carpet bombing civilian targets? How about de Gaulle after the French naval bombardment at Haiphong?

What was their intent? What was their goal?

Now lets examine the other side. If the Islamofascists could snap their finger and kill every non-moslem man, woman, and child in the USA don't you think they would? Or are they just all talk, and really very nice people?

It's unfortunate and tragic when any innocent person dies and one can only hope some good will come of it.

 

[wade]

Now lets examine the other side. If the Islamofascists could snap their finger and kill every non-moslem man, woman, and child in the USA don't you think they would? Or are they just all talk, and really very nice people?

Oh, I think if the NeoCon's could just snap their fingers and every moslem man, woman, and child in the World would vanish they'd do it in a heart-beat. A lot of other groups as well.

Wade.

 

[rtwngAvngr]

Oh, I think if the NeoCon's could just snap their fingers and every moslem man, woman, and child in the World would vanish they'd do it in a heart-beat. A lot of other groups as well.

Wade.

IT's democrats who want to leave all the various brown people of the world out of the world economy with their idiotic economic protectionism. Reconcile that one, UberNinny.

 

[Zhukov]

Oh, I think if the NeoCon's could just snap their fingers and every moslem man, woman, and child in the World would vanish they'd do it in a heart-beat. A lot of other groups as well.

I doubt it.

For the islamofascists we have their word on it.

For the 'NeoCons' there is nothing to support that.

In fact the current Head NeoCon has his finger on a button that could do just that, and yet he hasn't. Do you have an explanation for that?

 

[liberal4now]

"Your level of thought is that of a child. You need to see beyond the fashionableness of hating america. We stopped the nazis. The communists. Now 're stopping world terrorism, and all you do is bitch and moan like a child."

No, your level of thinking is like that of a child. The bush admin. is making terrorism worse. Look at what is happening in Iraq. Everyday there are car bombings, people are dying. The situation in Iraq is not getting better. It is getting worse. Terrorism is not going away. Even the mighty bush man can't win the war on terrorism. The moron said so himself and then later retracted it.

 

[Avatar4321]

"Your level of thought is that of a child. You need to see beyond the fashionableness of hating america. We stopped the nazis. The communists. Now 're stopping world terrorism, and all you do is bitch and moan like a child."

No, your level of thinking is like that of a child. The bush admin. is making terrorism worse. Look at what is happening in Iraq. Everyday there are car bombings, people are dying. The situation in Iraq is not getting better. It is getting worse. Terrorism is not going away. Even the mighty bush man can't win the war on terrorism. The moron said so himself and then later retracted it.

Sighs, Please explain how killing terrorists makes it worse? How is the world worse off when 3/4ths of known Al Queda leadership is dead or captured?