Can we admit that it's a little bit about religion though? I'm not mad at one religion, Islam or any other particular religion, but religion does give humans an extra excuse to create divisions amongst themselves, in all kinds of big and little ways.
Sure, religion plays a part in it because it's something that people feel passionately about that can be exploited by people trying to achieve whatever end they're after. My point is that while religion is serving that role now, if religion disappeared the problem of terrorism wouldn't disappear because people would find some other point to exploit.
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
The charges against Manafort are much more serious than I'd thought they'd be, it could be he's being over-charged to put pressure on him to flip....I don't think any of the Manafort or Gates stuff hurts Trump in anyway, unless they know things and flip for a deal. The Papadapoulos stuff is way more threatening to Trump and that seems to be getting the least amount of coverage.
Or, this whole thing has been a waste of time from the start, has revealed only paperwork issues by principals other then the purported subject of the investigation and thus Mueller needs to prove it wasn't a waste of time to begin with. Because nothing of this is in any way related to the initial allegations, none of it points to criminal activity by Trump, and none of it shows actual coordinated intereference with an election
Ah, yes, receiving $75 million from a foreign government, stashing it in offshore accounts and not declaring a cent of it, either in terms of the source or of taxes: a "paperwork issue." Question: at which point does tax evasion and money laundering stop being just a "paperwork issue?" Or is this something that can only be decided after seeing if there is a D or an R next to the name?
If the underlying act would've been legal had it been properly handled. This is one of those things where Manafort was running a scam on the Government and then a Russia narrative sucked him in to an investigation. Remember always keep your personal life clean, you never know when the authorities might actually start paying attention to you.
Ah, yes. It's all just a massive coincidence that Manafort laundered Russian money, that Russia hacked the operatives for the campaign that he was going up against, and that his campaign took the most pro Russia stance in American electoral history. Total nothingburger that people are reaching here, Im sure.
Ukraine Money, and was running this for years before mainstream Republican Party elites pushed Manafort on Trump for less then a month before Trump fired him and hired KA Conway
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
My family is protestant and originally from the UK. Although I was in Canada at the time, many close members of my family went through the IRA era of terrorism. Not once did I hate Catholics or Irish people. I'm not arguing some sort of left/right political position or echoing left-wing talking points. I'm taking the same position on the current crop of Islamic terrorists as I took on Catholic terrorists years ago. I'm not 'afraid' to admit anything, I'm being logically consistent.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
My family is protestant and originally from the UK. Although I was in Canada at the time, many close members of my family went through the IRA era of terrorism. Not once did I hate Catholics or Irish people. I'm not arguing some sort of left/right political position or echoing left-wing talking points. I'm taking the same position on the current crop of Islamic terrorists as I took on Catholic terrorists years ago. I'm not 'afraid' to admit anything, I'm being logically consistent.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
You're comparing the IRA, a group of people essentially rebelling against the UK, to Islamic fundamentalists who think killing infidels gets them to their heaven. False equivalency.
The charges against Manafort are much more serious than I'd thought they'd be, it could be he's being over-charged to put pressure on him to flip....I don't think any of the Manafort or Gates stuff hurts Trump in anyway, unless they know things and flip for a deal. The Papadapoulos stuff is way more threatening to Trump and that seems to be getting the least amount of coverage.
Or, this whole thing has been a waste of time from the start, has revealed only paperwork issues by principals other then the purported subject of the investigation and thus Mueller needs to prove it wasn't a waste of time to begin with. Because nothing of this is in any way related to the initial allegations, none of it points to criminal activity by Trump, and none of it shows actual coordinated intereference with an election
Ah, yes, receiving $75 million from a foreign government, stashing it in offshore accounts and not declaring a cent of it, either in terms of the source or of taxes: a "paperwork issue." Question: at which point does tax evasion and money laundering stop being just a "paperwork issue?" Or is this something that can only be decided after seeing if there is a D or an R next to the name?
If the underlying act would've been legal had it been properly handled. This is one of those things where Manafort was running a scam on the Government and then a Russia narrative sucked him in to an investigation. Remember always keep your personal life clean, you never know when the authorities might actually start paying attention to you.
Ah, yes. It's all just a massive coincidence that Manafort laundered Russian money, that Russia hacked the operatives for the campaign that he was going up against, and that his campaign took the most pro Russia stance in American electoral history. Total nothingburger that people are reaching here, Im sure.
Ukraine Money, and was running this for years before mainstream Republican Party elites pushed Manafort on Trump for less then a month before Trump fired him and hired KA Conway
On the campaign 3/29-8/19. Made chairman 5/19 though in operational control since 4/7 according to Lewandowski.
Not a lifetime certainly, but definitely not less than a month.
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
My family is protestant and originally from the UK. Although I was in Canada at the time, many close members of my family went through the IRA era of terrorism. Not once did I hate Catholics or Irish people. I'm not arguing some sort of left/right political position or echoing left-wing talking points. I'm taking the same position on the current crop of Islamic terrorists as I took on Catholic terrorists years ago. I'm not 'afraid' to admit anything, I'm being logically consistent.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
You're comparing the IRA, a group of people essentially rebelling against the UK, to Islamic fundamentalists who think killing infidels gets them to their heaven. False equivalency.
I'm comparing one group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism with another group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism.
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
My family is protestant and originally from the UK. Although I was in Canada at the time, many close members of my family went through the IRA era of terrorism. Not once did I hate Catholics or Irish people. I'm not arguing some sort of left/right political position or echoing left-wing talking points. I'm taking the same position on the current crop of Islamic terrorists as I took on Catholic terrorists years ago. I'm not 'afraid' to admit anything, I'm being logically consistent.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
You're comparing the IRA, a group of people essentially rebelling against the UK, to Islamic fundamentalists who think killing infidels gets them to their heaven. False equivalency.
I'm comparing one group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism with another group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism.
So the IRA was attacking British troops and bombing Americans because Catholicism told them too? Were they making people convert or die?
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
Excuse me, very leftwing person here who is also extremely anti-religion. Regardless of may-or-may-not-be terrorism links, the major religions treat women abominably, and Islam is one of the worst. Christianity gets no passes either.
There is a definite group of the left who will speak out about Islam, but they also tend to be the hardcore feminists, and who gives a shit what they’ve got to say.
You keep saying 15 years... But i must point out that the World Trade Center was attacked in 1993 by Islamic fundamentalists as well. It just wasn't very "successful" so people forget about it.
Right, I hadn't forgotten about that at all - but that didn't serve as a turning point in America's relationship with parts of the Islamic world (or maybe it did, and America didn't realize it until 9/11). Either way, shift the date back 8 years and it doesn't change my point. Both America and Islam have been around for a very long time, but a problem has only existed "recently" (in historical terms). The two peacefully coexisted for (around) 200 years. The religion hasn't changed. If they were hellbent on killing infidels, why did it take them so long? Why did the sign a treaty with George Washington, and why did he sign one with them?
It might sound like I'm trying to blame America here, I'm definitely not. And obviously many other Western countries have been attacked too. I'm only pointing out that the problem with Islamic terrorism is - historically speaking - recent, and these countries and that religion have existed for over 1000 years (200 years in America's case). If the religion itself was the problem, we'd surely have been problems before recent times, wouldn't we?
Again, NO QUESTION that there is a religious angle to what's happening (I've repeatedly referred to them as "Islamic terrorists") but it defies reason to say that it's "about religion".
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
My family is protestant and originally from the UK. Although I was in Canada at the time, many close members of my family went through the IRA era of terrorism. Not once did I hate Catholics or Irish people. I'm not arguing some sort of left/right political position or echoing left-wing talking points. I'm taking the same position on the current crop of Islamic terrorists as I took on Catholic terrorists years ago. I'm not 'afraid' to admit anything, I'm being logically consistent.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
You're comparing the IRA, a group of people essentially rebelling against the UK, to Islamic fundamentalists who think killing infidels gets them to their heaven. False equivalency.
I'm comparing one group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism with another group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism.
You have a more charitable view of them than I do. I know that religion can be manipulative, but I also see it as an instrument of power that is used an excuse for bad behavior or even a weapon against others.
We're actually in complete agreement. My only point is that if that 'instrument of power' was removed, another would be used in its place. The instrument of power isn't the reason for terrorism, it's the excuse and the means of weaponizing others.
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
My family is protestant and originally from the UK. Although I was in Canada at the time, many close members of my family went through the IRA era of terrorism. Not once did I hate Catholics or Irish people. I'm not arguing some sort of left/right political position or echoing left-wing talking points. I'm taking the same position on the current crop of Islamic terrorists as I took on Catholic terrorists years ago. I'm not 'afraid' to admit anything, I'm being logically consistent.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
You're comparing the IRA, a group of people essentially rebelling against the UK, to Islamic fundamentalists who think killing infidels gets them to their heaven. False equivalency.
I'm comparing one group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism with another group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism.
Whoa hold on there! You're saying what? Dumb paddy Catholics were exploited to bomb the poor innocent Anglican Unionists? That was not an issue of religious exploitation, that was a political conflict whose roots had been growing for centuries, starting with the British banning Catholics from land ownership on the Island and moving in Scots to settle there on Ulster Plantation in the 18th century, religion was merely another dividing line culturally between the two camps, but God was not the reason for the Troubles
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
My family is protestant and originally from the UK. Although I was in Canada at the time, many close members of my family went through the IRA era of terrorism. Not once did I hate Catholics or Irish people. I'm not arguing some sort of left/right political position or echoing left-wing talking points. I'm taking the same position on the current crop of Islamic terrorists as I took on Catholic terrorists years ago. I'm not 'afraid' to admit anything, I'm being logically consistent.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
You're comparing the IRA, a group of people essentially rebelling against the UK, to Islamic fundamentalists who think killing infidels gets them to their heaven. False equivalency.
I'm comparing one group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism with another group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism.
So the IRA was attacking British troops and bombing Americans because Catholicism told them too? Were they making people convert or die?
Yes, that's exactly what I'm saying. Their motive wasn't conversion, but Catholic Priests literally stood in front of their congregations and praised the "brave martyrs" who died fighting for "the cause" while Sunday schools taught kids songs about killing British people.
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
My family is protestant and originally from the UK. Although I was in Canada at the time, many close members of my family went through the IRA era of terrorism. Not once did I hate Catholics or Irish people. I'm not arguing some sort of left/right political position or echoing left-wing talking points. I'm taking the same position on the current crop of Islamic terrorists as I took on Catholic terrorists years ago. I'm not 'afraid' to admit anything, I'm being logically consistent.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
You're comparing the IRA, a group of people essentially rebelling against the UK, to Islamic fundamentalists who think killing infidels gets them to their heaven. False equivalency.
I'm comparing one group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism with another group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism.
Whoa hold on there! You're saying what? Dumb paddy Catholics were exploited to bomb the poor innocent Anglican Unionists? That was not an issue of religious exploitation, that was a political conflict whose roots had been growing for centuries, starting with the British banning Catholics from land ownership on the Island and moving in Scots to settle there on Ulster Plantation in the 18th century, religion was merely another dividing line culturally between the two camps, but God was not the reason for the Troubles
Exactly my point!!! I don't blame Catholics for the IRA because I know that it was about underlying issues and not about religion (even though religion was used to excuse and weaponize some Catholics), which is exactly my point about Islamic terrorists today - it's not about Islam, it's about the underlying issues.
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
My family is protestant and originally from the UK. Although I was in Canada at the time, many close members of my family went through the IRA era of terrorism. Not once did I hate Catholics or Irish people. I'm not arguing some sort of left/right political position or echoing left-wing talking points. I'm taking the same position on the current crop of Islamic terrorists as I took on Catholic terrorists years ago. I'm not 'afraid' to admit anything, I'm being logically consistent.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
You're comparing the IRA, a group of people essentially rebelling against the UK, to Islamic fundamentalists who think killing infidels gets them to their heaven. False equivalency.
I'm comparing one group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism with another group of people who were exploited by their religious faith to commit acts of terrorism.
Whoa hold on there! You're saying what? Dumb paddy Catholics were exploited to bomb the poor innocent Anglican Unionists? That was not an issue of religious exploitation, that was a political conflict whose roots had been growing for centuries, starting with the British banning Catholics from land ownership on the Island and moving in Scots to settle there on Ulster Plantation in the 18th century, religion was merely another dividing line culturally between the two camps, but God was not the reason for the Troubles
Exactly my point!!! I don't blame Catholics for the IRA because I know that it was about underlying issues and not about religion (even though religion was used to excuse and weaponize some Catholics), which is exactly my point about Islamic terrorists today - it's not about Islam, it's about the underlying issues.
I blame the UVF, listen if we had a case in the US where Catholics (Im a Catholic) were being Shot while walking home from work and the police didn't have a handle on it for no reason, you're damn right I'd join a paramilitary and the UVF certainly began the escalation of the troubles if not the troubles themselves.
Now or as far as Islam, what underlying cause is there? Bin Laden was a Saudi, have Saudis had the short end of the stick from the US? Somalia was never a US problem, and we've done nothing but help them since Soviet departure, Iraq was nominally a US Partner until the Kuwait invasion, like what problems politically and historically have they suffered that's a non religious cause for anti US conflict
So did Anglican God tell Gusty Spence to form a unionist paramilitary to suppress Irish Civil Rights?
I'm not interested in debating what happened over there. I brought it up as a reference point to show that terrorism is an expression of desperate and powerless people and not an expression of religion.
If you can understand the point that you made about Catholics terrorists - and I've never, ever agreed with you more, then you and others should be able to apply the exact same line of thinking to Muslims terrorists. Religion is a clear apart of it (a 'dividing line' was your term, and I agree) but it's not about the religion, it's about the underlying issues. Irish Catholics didn't wake up one day and suddenly decide to start blowing up pubs and post offices in England...there were underlying problems, grievances etc that the UK was able to not address because they had all of the power. What we're seeing now is that exact same thing, just with different players. I didn't blame Catholicism then, I'm not blaming Islam now.
@emnofseattle Now or as far as Islam, what underlying cause is there? Bin Laden was a
Saudi, have Saudis had the short end of the stick from the US? Somalia
was never a US problem, and we've done nothing but help them since
Soviet departure, Iraq was nominally a US Partner until the Kuwait
invasion, like what problems politically and historically have they
suffered that's a non religious cause for anti US conflict
I don't want to be put into a position where I'm defending people who I profoundly disagree with, but Bin Laden laid out his reasons very plainly - he was upset about American's role in supporting Isreal's occupation of Palestine, upset about the sanctions against Iraq and upset about the presence of US military bases in Saudi Arabia.
More recently, ISIS has been pretty open too - they're upset about civilian casualties, drone strikes, what they call oil theft etc. Again, I don't want to make their argument for them because I hate everything about them.
Yeah, I mean in some ways their movement is a populist movement writ global. Unfortunately, populist movements can tend to go hand in hand with fundamentalism, nationalism and other forms of provincialism and they're taking it to extremes.
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
Islam, or any other religion/ideology, is just a signifier. Individuals and religious sects can interpret a particular religious text or a prophet's words in a million different ways. My kind and loving aunt, the KKK, Pope Francis, and the Lord Resistance Army all call themselves Christians, and act as they believe true Christians should act, but that means very different things to each of them. History is rife with violent strains of every religion. It is specific historical circumstances that lead to violence. While there are specific religious figures who identify as Muslim who peddle violent ideologies, it is not accurate to refer to a singular "Islam."
It is very much about religion. Go to the Middle East and see how Islam plays a role. I have conversed with Iraqis, Afghanis, Pakistanis, Iranians, and a few Saudis...it is about Islam. When your religious text tells you to kill apostates and make people convert to Islam or kill them, don't you think that is a little inciting? False equivalencies like saying a white christian killing people is no different than a Islamic person killing people are completely false. The Charleston killer didn't do it in the name of the bible or Jesus.
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
Islam, or any other religion/ideology, is just a signifier. Individuals and religious sects can interpret a particular religious text or a prophet's words in a million different ways. My kind and loving aunt, the KKK, Pope Francis, and the Lord Resistance Army all call themselves Christians, and act as they believe true Christians should act, but that means very different things to each of them. History is rife with violent strains of every religion. It is specific historical circumstances that lead to violence. While there are specific religious figures who identify as Muslim who peddle violent ideologies, it is not accurate to refer to a singular "Islam."
That last sentence is probably the MOST important one. Generalizing what extremists do to an entire group of people is no better than what many of them do to radicalize their followers.
It’s always been my estimation that people who go around calling other people easily triggered snowflakes are actually themselves easily triggered snowflakes, but hey that’s just my opinion as an expression of free speech.
The ironic thing is if you go to the right-wing quasi-news sites, the articles are written specifically to generate outrage...issues are framed a certain way, certain details are omitted or misrepresented etc all designed to piss off the readers and make them think that there's some kind of extremism out there leaving them with a false sense of reality. They feed themselves all day long with "news" meant to trigger them, get triggered and blow off steam complaining about triggered snowflakes who can't handle the real world. It would be funny if millions of people weren't falling for it.
This is so true.
A couple of years back, I attended a boilerplate, 15-minute diversity training session at my university. The gist of the message was: "treat everyone with respect." Days later, I discovered that same session had become a huge cause celebre on the right-wing blogosphere. Apparently, the diversity session was violently "anti-white." The right-wing press innacurately presented something that was completely unremarkable in my daily life as a "symptom of the poisonous atmosphere on college campuses." haha.
Comments
When people are literally screaming Allah Akbar as they slaughter infidels, you don't think that is about Islam? Islam has a major problem, everyone knows it, but the left is too afraid to admit it.
You're missing my point. Yes, there's a religious angle to the current crop of terrorist attacks, no question. My point is that religion is just the tool used to leverage people into action. If that tool didn't exists, others would. When the UK and Ireland worked out its differences, the terrorism stopped - yet the Irish didn't stop being Catholic and the religion that prompted them to attack the UK didn't change any. Social/political conditions changed. Islam has been around for 1500 (or so) years, America has been around for 200+ years but we can only point to 15 years of conflict between the two. If it's "about religion" why did hasn't it been a problem for the 200+ years of America's existence and only became a problem more recently? The Islamic faith hasn't changes, its religious texts of today are the same as they've always been.
Not a lifetime certainly, but definitely not less than a month.
There is a definite group of the left who will speak out about Islam, but they also tend to be the hardcore feminists, and who gives a shit what they’ve got to say.
It might sound like I'm trying to blame America here, I'm definitely not. And obviously many other Western countries have been attacked too. I'm only pointing out that the problem with Islamic terrorism is - historically speaking - recent, and these countries and that religion have existed for over 1000 years (200 years in America's case). If the religion itself was the problem, we'd surely have been problems before recent times, wouldn't we?
Again, NO QUESTION that there is a religious angle to what's happening (I've repeatedly referred to them as "Islamic terrorists") but it defies reason to say that it's "about religion".
Now or as far as Islam, what underlying cause is there? Bin Laden was a Saudi, have Saudis had the short end of the stick from the US? Somalia was never a US problem, and we've done nothing but help them since Soviet departure, Iraq was nominally a US Partner until the Kuwait invasion, like what problems politically and historically have they suffered that's a non religious cause for anti US conflict
If you can understand the point that you made about Catholics terrorists - and I've never, ever agreed with you more, then you and others should be able to apply the exact same line of thinking to Muslims terrorists. Religion is a clear apart of it (a 'dividing line' was your term, and I agree) but it's not about the religion, it's about the underlying issues. Irish Catholics didn't wake up one day and suddenly decide to start blowing up pubs and post offices in England...there were underlying problems, grievances etc that the UK was able to not address because they had all of the power. What we're seeing now is that exact same thing, just with different players. I didn't blame Catholicism then, I'm not blaming Islam now.
Now or as far as Islam, what underlying cause is there? Bin Laden was a Saudi, have Saudis had the short end of the stick from the US? Somalia was never a US problem, and we've done nothing but help them since Soviet departure, Iraq was nominally a US Partner until the Kuwait invasion, like what problems politically and historically have they suffered that's a non religious cause for anti US conflict
I don't want to be put into a position where I'm defending people who I profoundly disagree with, but Bin Laden laid out his reasons very plainly - he was upset about American's role in supporting Isreal's occupation of Palestine, upset about the sanctions against Iraq and upset about the presence of US military bases in Saudi Arabia.
More recently, ISIS has been pretty open too - they're upset about civilian casualties, drone strikes, what they call oil theft etc. Again, I don't want to make their argument for them because I hate everything about them.
A couple of years back, I attended a boilerplate, 15-minute diversity training session at my university. The gist of the message was: "treat everyone with respect." Days later, I discovered that same session had become a huge cause celebre on the right-wing blogosphere. Apparently, the diversity session was violently "anti-white." The right-wing press innacurately presented something that was completely unremarkable in my daily life as a "symptom of the poisonous atmosphere on college campuses." haha.