Sex with boys: The root of Islamic Terror.

Actually I believe both articles in question did a wonderful job at taking small elements of truth and warping it into a story that sells papers and maligns groups the "news" entity doesn't like.

The difference is, I have the guts to call both of them a spade, whereas some of my esteemed friends on here only see it when one side does it. That's tragic. A tabloid is a tabloid is a tabloid friends... it's not less of a tabloid when you like it.

Those who fanatically follow ideologies are those who are the most dangerous....many would have you believe its either this way or that...black or white ....right or wrong.....two sides.....it is theese people who are not only socially irresponsible but they are spiritually irresponsible.....there are universal laws ......ancient verities....they never veer from there outcome and all are bound to there rule whether you believe in free will or not......

There is no past ....no future.....only the eternal now

Originally posted by skippytjc

Originally posted by sanctum
skippy, your link appears somewhat biased to me.
frontpagemag.com

Sanc'.

Can you document that? Prove this isnt true if you think the source is biased or questionable.

That's easy. Just go look at the guy's other work, the site's other writing and right-wing stuff they sell on that site.

I guess we better don't believe anything that the left wing news sources say either then...

I would take them with a grain of salt too, yes.
Frontpagenews and Commondreams are both Op/Ed sites that report news with an unabashed slant, and both ought to be read with a critical eye.

Originally posted by EastCoastKid

That's easy. Just go look at the guy's other work, the site's other writing and right-wing stuff they sell on that site.

The point I am trying to make, is that we ALL post stuff from sources others don’t see as credible. Its relative. You think I personally believe anything at all that comes from Al Jazeera or heavens forbid Jihad Unspun? Nope. And I don’t necessarily believe this article, but I have no reason to disbelieve it either. And agree with its contents or not, its well written.

Sooo…

Here we have an article written by a source that some people may think is biased. But how is that different than any article on these boards? Its not.


[edit on 9-5-2005 by skippytjc]

I agree that middle eastern men do not free access to female erogenous zones, without sticking their neck out, and like men that go to prison for long periods of time and succum to the advances of male sex, and come out of it feeling their masculinity is intact, so too do I think there is an overwhelming degree of older male, younger male sex. And no, I don't have this experience--just what I've read.

Originally posted by skippytjcHere we have an article written by a source that some people may think is biased. But how is that different than any article on these boards? Its not.

Whatever skippy, but i still think your thread title is very biased.

Sanc'.

Originally posted by sanctum

Originally posted by skippytjcHere we have an article written by a source that some people may think is biased. But how is that different than any article on these boards? Its not.

Whatever skippy, but i still think your thread title is very biased.

Sanc'.

You are alowed to think the article is biased. And others are alowed to think its not.

[edit on 9-5-2005 by skippytjc]

Originally posted by xmotex
Frontpagemag is another right wing "news" site like WND and NewsMax.

I'd take anything they say with several grains of salt - not that pederasty isn't tolerated in some Islamic cultures, it is (in some), but they are hardly unique in this regard.

Yeah, you have to rely on the unbiased, legitimate sources like NPR and MoveOn.org to get the real facts. Any conservative bias = fake source. No bias, like MoveOn.org, means you get a balanced, unbiased article which doesn't omit any information

First of all it's an op/ed, not a "news" item.

Second of all I made clear that I think sites like the ones you listed should be taken with a grain of salt too. Well, Moveon.org anyway, NPR is pretty legit IMHO.

[edit on 5/9/05 by xmotex]

Originally posted by Jamuhn
Muadibb, have you read the Old Testament? The Muslim ancestors are not the only ones who have done such things. In fact, the world during that time was chaotic by today's standards.

There is much more to Islamic terror than the lives of their prophets. As we see, many Jewish prophets have done similar acts, and by extension, Christian prophets. Yet, we do not see the same level of terror in these two religions, therefore, violence in religious history does not necessitate violence among those religions today.

Simply because the main prophet for the Christians, Jesus, did not pick up a sword and went raiding caravans, or beheaded people, or took people as slaves and children as wives. This is one of the reasons why most Christians would not even consider this.

There are extremists in every religion, that is true. But how many of the main prophets of those religions, and how many religions profess that they must go to the world and conquer it, and if those who don't believe do not accept this religion, then you can kill them? Did the Christian prophet Jesus do this?

[edit on 9-5-2005 by Muaddib]

Well did y'all think the LA Times or NYT's would cover this story? It takes a right-wing operation like Frontpagemag to expose this crap and drag it out for all to see.

Ive heard of this stuff going on between Muslim guys, but I never studied it and I can't comment on something I know little of. I guess its a like a taboo thing in their society thats not discussed.


Maximu§

That's easy. Just go look at the guy's other work, the site's other writing and right-wing stuff they sell on that site.

And the Daily Mail qualifies as a balanced and unbiased legitimate News source? Come on now...

Like I said before... Can't call one a spade without calling the other one a spade as well.

We can't rely on these "sources" to be balanced but we can attempt to be balanced ourselves. I find it odd to lend more credence to a 1 year old article from the Mail than this one, when in fact both of them are equally good at misrepresenting things to acheive a goal.

It surprises me that more people don't see this.

Interesting conjecture. One could easily say look what's happened with a just a relatively small group - Catholic priests - when un-natural celibacy was and is imposed upon them, we end up with the child molestation problem that has rocked the Catholic church. Now try an imagine if the same thing was done to entire populations of people.

Yes, I can see how there could be unforeseen consquences, like what is stated in the article. Isn't a lot of crime in the U.S. blamed on what happened to poor and/or abused children? Don't a lot (most???) of the children in these middle eastern countries fall into the same poor and/or abused category? Hmmm. Might be onto something here.

[edit on 5/9/2005 by centurion1211]

To summarize the article however, it basically states that a major drive in Islamic Terrorism is due to sexual tension and humiliation from homosexual abuse by other men. Again, it’s best to just read the article. I am sure we will all have some “interesting” comments once you guys have read it.

If you replace "Islam" with "Christianity" it sounds eerily similar. The sexual repression (Janet Jackson's partially exposed booby! oh noes111). The supression of women voices in the church and leadership posistions. The hatred of gays. Which in turn, promotes violence and outrage when christians feel and act on their homosexual urges (since thier religion forbids them sex with a woman before marriage). All lead to christian's violent behavior and need to change the US government into a theocracy. The only reason they are not crashing planes into buildings in the US is because they are already so firmly entrenched in US government and US public policy. If they were the minority, with no control in governemnt, we'd have christian suicide attacks all over the US. Christians soldiers, marching onto war.

Sound like a sweeping generalization based on ignorance? No more than that article.

Originally posted by centurion1211
Interesting conjecture. One could easily say look what's happened with a just a relatively small group - Catholic priests - when un-natural celibacy was and is imposed upon them, we end up with the child molestation problem that has rocked the Catholic church. Now try an imagine if the same thing was done to entire populations of people.

Yes, I can see how there could be unforeseen consquences, like what is stated in the article. Isn't a lot of crime in the U.S. blamed on what happened to poor and/or abused children? Don't a lot (most???) of the children in these middle eastern countries fall into the same poor and/or abused category? Hmmm. Might be onto something here.

[edit on 5/9/2005 by centurion1211]

"You have voted centurion1211 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month."

Your anology is superb.

Originally posted by curme
If you replace "Islam" with "Christianity" it sounds eerily similar.

The beginning of your post is true in a historical sense. Beginning with the late Roman Empire up until the middle ages, there were Christian 'theocracies'. The problem is that modern islam seems in a lot of ways to be stuck in that same dark ages mentality that christians once were (when it was the dark ages).

You have voted centurion1211 for the Way Above Top Secret award. You have two more votes this month.


Well said centurian1211


Maximu§

Do any of you really believe terrorism derives from being molested as a child?

*shakes head*

So how about that story about the US marine who had sex with an underage Iraqi soldier and then shot him dead? Let me guess, it was because he thought the child would become a terrorist after he molested him.

So the IRA were all molested, eh? There were no political motivations behind them, they were just molested.

Some of you guys are Un-Bloody-believable.

[edit on 9-5-2005 by Kriz_4]

Originally posted by Kriz_4
Do any of you really believe terrorism derives from being molested as a child?

*shakes head*

So how about that story about the US marine who had sex with an underage Iraqi soldier and then shot him dead? Let me guess, it was because he thought the child would become a terrorist after he molested him.

So the IRA were all molested, eh? There were no political motivations behind them, they were just molested.

Some of you guys are Un-Bloody-believable.

[edit on 9-5-2005 by Kriz_4]

I dont mean this as an insult, because its going to sound that way:

Kriz you are a short thinker. You arent seeing the big picture here. If you dont get it, you will never get it.