 |
reply posted on 21-2-2006 @ 03:00 PM by devilwasp
|
 Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Or, much more recently, the "Troubles" in Northern Ireland? 
As I remember the "troubles" had very little to no ammount of people claiming they where doing "the lords bidding" , they fought to get thier
country back or so they thought.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
 |
reply posted on 21-2-2006 @ 03:12 PM by Astronomer68
|
I can only reiterate what I posted earlier. I really think this cartoon issue is being artifically kept alive by someone(s) for their own purposes.
If it continues to go on like this it may well get completely out of hand and result in significant backlashes by non muslims. The question is, who
(or what group) would benefit fromworld-wide religious unrest & violence?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-2-2006 @ 03:21 PM by Nakash
|
There were quite a few hard feelings between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, but the IRA itself was a secular organization last time I
checked. I don't think they made a point of targetting civilians either (last time I checked the overwhelming majority of it's targets were British
embassies, military bases, and politicians, no bus bombings or planes in buildings).
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-2-2006 @ 03:24 PM by koji_K
|
Originally posted by Nakash
There were quite a few hard feelings between Catholics and Protestants in Northern Ireland, but the IRA itself was a secular organization last time I
checked. I don't think they made a point of targetting civilians either (last time I checked the overwhelming majority of it's targets were British
embassies, military bases, and politicians, no bus bombings or planes in buildings).
Sorry, I know this is going off on a tangent, but as someone who has been caught up in more than 1 IRA attack, in the residential areas of London, I
beg to differ. Not to take sides, I'm sure the Unionists were just as bad in the places they operated in. On at least one occasion, I can remember
the IRA placing a bomb in one part of a shopping mall, or maybe just calling in a scare, with a bomb placed outside in the 'emergency gathering
area' timed to go off 10 minutes later, with the purpose of killing as many civilians as possible.
Wikipedia states the following:
According to the CAIN research project at the University of Ulster, the Provisional IRA was responsible for the deaths of 1,706 people during the
Troubles up to 2001. This figure represents 48.4 percent of the total fatalities in the conflict. 497 of these casualties were civilians, 638 of the
casualties were from the British Army (183 from the Ulster Defence Regiment- a part time local British Army reserve unit) and 455 from other
regiments). Another 271 of the casualties were members of the Royal Ulster Constabulary. Of its victims, 340 were Northern Irish Catholics, 794 were
Northern Irish Protestants and 572 were not from Northern Ireland. According to the CAIN statistics, the Provisionals killed 35 loyalist
paramilitaries.
Another very detailed study, Lost Lives (2004. Ed's David McKitrick, Seamus Kelters, Brian Feeney, Chris Thornton, David McVea) gives the following
figures for people killed by the Provisional IRA up to 2004: 644 civilians, 456 British military (including British Army, RAF, Royal Navy, and
Territorial Army), 273 Royal Ulster Constabulary (including RUC reserve), 182 Ulster Defence Regiment, 163 Republican paramilitary members (including
from the IRA), 28 loyalist paramilitary members, 23 Northern Ireland Prison Officers, 7 Gardai or Irish Army, and 5 British Police (Lost Lives page
1536). Lost Lives therefore concludes that the Provisonal IRA was responsable for a total of 1781 deaths to date. It has also been estimated that the
IRA injured 6000 British Army, UDR and RUC and up to 14,000 civilians, during the Troubles (O'Brien p135).
American statistics however quote a larger IRA death toll. According these official statistics (provided by groups such as Jane's Intelligence, and
the US. Sate Dept. "Patterns Of Global Terrorisim", 1999).The IRA was responsible for 1,824 deaths between 1969 to 2001. This represents 52.3% of
the total deaths during the "Troubles". The official breakdown according to the US State Dept. is, 800 British Military. 210 Police (RUC) 222 UDR
(Ulster Defence Regiment) 90 Loyalist Paramilitary members. 5 members of British Special Forces (SAS). 497 civillians. (Sources. Jane's Intelligence,
US State Dept. "patterns Of Global Terrorisim", 1999
[edit on 21-2-2006 by koji_K]
[edit on 21-2-2006 by koji_K]
[edit on 21-2-2006 by koji_K]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-2-2006 @ 03:57 PM by Nakash
|
Still it was all about the Union, not religion, can we agree on that?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-2-2006 @ 04:00 PM by intrepid
|
Let's agree to get back on topic.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-2-2006 @ 07:53 PM by Freedom_for_sum
|
Originally posted by koji_K
Hrm.. Christians on the rampage now.. whaddya know...
news.yahoo.com...'n-word'ia_sectarian_violence
WWWHHat!! Read your own article!!
In the mainly Muslim northern city of Bauchi, violent protests by Muslims targeting Christians claimed the lives of 18 people, the Nigerian Red Cross
said.
Violence in the southern city of Onitsha appeared to have been sparked by Saturday's killings in the mainly Muslim northern city of Maiduguri, where
thousands of Muslims protesting caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad attacked Christians and burned churches.
Police say at least 18 people, most of them Christians, died then, and 30 churches were burned down. The Christian Association of Nigeria said at
least 50 people were killed in the violence.
And the ONLY reference to "Christian violence" in that article are these statements:
In Onitsha on Tuesday, residents and witnesses said Christian mobs burned two mosques and beat at least six Muslims with origins in the north to
death.
Christian protesters in Onitsha also attacked Muslim northerners and their properties.
Admittedly; this is very un-Christian-like behavior. But what the hell are they to do? They gotta stick up for themselves at some point!! I wouldn't
call them "Christians on the rampage" 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-2-2006 @ 07:55 PM by Freedom_for_sum
|
Regarding the IRA attacks: Show me ANYWHERE where the IRA committed their acts of violence in the name of their God or religion!! Their motivation was
based on political/social issues--NOT RELIGIOUS!! I'm sick of seeing this comparison 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 21-2-2006 @ 09:44 PM by koji_K
|
I was commenting on my prior posts, where I mentioned being uncertain as to any examples of Christians rioting. My exclamation was more surprise at
the timeliness of the article, not any kind of comment about Christians in particular.
But on a different note, sure, they have to defend themselves, but is burning down mosques going to help? Or is it just going to fan the flames? What
we're seeing from Muslims and Christians here is mob behaviour, and it obeys little reason and can be exhibited by Muslims, Christians, or whoever.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 22-2-2006 @ 07:22 AM by skippytjc
|
Muslim Against Muslim
Finally, some prominent Muslims get on the program:
New York Times
AMMAN, Jordan, Feb. 21 — In a direct challenge to the international uproar over cartoons lampooning the Prophet Muhammad, the Jordanian journalist
Jihad Momani wrote: "What brings more prejudice against Islam, these caricatures or pictures of a hostage-taker slashing the throat of his victim in
front of the cameras, or a suicide bomber who blows himself up during a wedding ceremony?"
And
In Yemen, an editorial by Muhammad al-Assadi condemned the cartoons but also lamented the way many Muslims reacted. "Muslims had an opportunity to
educate the world about the merits of the Prophet Muhammad and the peacefulness of the religion he had come with," Mr. Assadi wrote. He added,
"Muslims know how to lose, better than how to use, opportunities."
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 22-2-2006 @ 09:58 AM by Souljah
|
Inflamed
May I just add this Important Question - which nobody asking themselves anyway, for everybody is just too busy with point fingers at Muslims:
Cartoon Awakening
But what is effectively lacking in the Arab and Muslim debate is the most fundamental issue of all: how can they respond as a collective to
growing anti-Muslim sentiment, touted through the media and further inflamed through belligerent right-wing political forces in the West, and, dare I
say, belligerent and self-defeating Arab and Muslim voices whose obnoxious and inconsistent response is playing well into the hands of their
adversaries?
Indeed.
Makes you Think, doesn't it?
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 22-2-2006 @ 12:48 PM by Freedom_for_sum
|
Originally posted by Souljah
Indeed.
Makes you Think, doesn't it?
Yes. WHO are their adversaries and WHY are they their adversaries?
Let's see. Great Brittain. France, Denmark. Norway. America. Israel. Australia. It seems, from their perception, everyone is against them. Sounds to
me like a bad case of paranoia!! Of course; it's not paranoia if everyone is against them!!
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 22-2-2006 @ 05:11 PM by HowlrunnerIV
|
Ah, so UVF killing "Micks" in revenge attacks and IRA killings of "Prods" has nothing to do with religion...
Before anybody points out that it was not IN the name of God, but that denomination just happened to separate the different parties, I am aware that
the co-belligerants in NI were not religous zealots, but religion (or rather, denomination) played a large part, if only because of history.
Either way, denomination separated the the parties and was the basis of more than one attack.
Just as many thousands of Muslims marching in protest are not religous zealots burning foreign legations. But the media only cares about showing drama
and there is no drama in genuinely aggreived people peacefully protesting at the back of a march, only in the handful of extremists hijacking the
protests.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 22-2-2006 @ 11:31 PM by Beachcoma
|
Originally posted by Freedom_for_sum
[...] WHY are they their adversaries?
The answer was in Souljah's quote:
[...] and, dare I say, belligerent and self-defeating Arab and Muslim voices whose obnoxious and inconsistent response is playing well into the
hands of their adversaries?[...]
There we have the answer. Clear as day. I'll make it clearer for you -- Stupid and obnoxious Arab leaders. They're making life for the rest of us
muslims more difficult. They're as much to blame as some of the "belligerent right-wing political forces in the West".
Both these belligerent forces continue to demonize each other at the expense of the masses. The difference is on the western side they're playing it
smarter, whereas I've only one word for the Arab side -- fools.
I'm pissed. No doubt about it. As a child I've always wanted to travel abroad, to Europe and the US. Now I've got the ability to do so but I'm
sort of afraid to go there. People say I look Arab, even though I'm Malay. I've heard so many stories of people wrongfully thrown into the CIA
prisons I've decided not to go visit the west, and that makes me sad.
Uhh, whatever. I'm done with my rant. Carry on.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 23-2-2006 @ 08:11 AM by devilwasp
|
Originally posted by HowlrunnerIV
Ah, so UVF killing "Micks" in revenge attacks and IRA killings of "Prods" has nothing to do with religion...
No UVF terrorists killing IRA terrorists had something to do with religion but it was not a religious war.
Just as many thousands of Muslims marching in protest are not religous zealots burning foreign legations. But the media only cares about showing drama
and there is no drama in genuinely aggreived people peacefully protesting at the back of a march, only in the handful of extremists hijacking the
protests.
So did the IRA declare a religios war on the UVF?
I didnt see the vatican or the pope say anything about the IRA conflict.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 24-2-2006 @ 08:24 AM by skippytjc
|
And for your enjoyment, the most recent cartoon causing Muslim riots (really, no joke):
New Straits Times
MichellemMalkin
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 24-2-2006 @ 09:25 AM by Beachcoma
|
Originally posted by skippytjc
And for your enjoyment, the most recent cartoon causing Muslim riots (really, no joke)[...]
Yeah there were a bunch of humorless idiots who were unhappy about it. They wrote letters. Some protested in front of NST's headquarters.
But there was definitely no riots, skippy. Stop sensationalizing. That's the second time you've misreported what goes on in MY country.
[edit - missed the protest bit]
[edit on 24-2-2006 by Beachcoma]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 24-2-2006 @ 10:30 AM by skippytjc
|
Ahh crap....(pun very much intended)
Looks like somebody is very much intent on fueling the furor over these cartoons. But still, no matter how dissagreeable, it is their right to do
this:
Ebay Auction
How long before Ebay nukes this? I cant imagine it will last long.
[edit on 24-2-2006 by skippytjc]
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 24-2-2006 @ 11:46 AM by Freedom_for_sum
|
Originally posted by skippytjc
How long before Ebay nukes this? I cant imagine it will last long.
It's a seven-day listing with only nine hours left. Apparently, it's got the Ebay blessing 
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
reply posted on 24-2-2006 @ 12:28 PM by 27jd
|
Man, that would be much more offensive to them than any cartoon, a bit over the top I'd say. Rationally I'd say they can't blame any country in
particular for that art, unless somebody puts it in a newspaper I guess. But we're not talking about rational people, so I guess if they were to see
that, they'd go nuts. I hope they don't.
|
reply to this post:
copyright & usage
|
|
