Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

Israeli Diplomat: All Terrorists are Muslim.

page: 3
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join

posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 07:53 PM
link   
I think he meant to say all Muslims are terrorists




posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Parmenides
The Irgun was not a terrorist organization. They were a gurilla group and targeted only military targets. And before you bring up the King David hotel bombing, note that it was a military HQ, and they called ahead to warn then and told them to get out of the building.

The Sabra and Shatila massacres were done by christians. If "the worst Jewish atrocities in living memory" in NOT taking part in a massacar, that's prety good.
Need I say Shamir didn't colaborate with the Nazis? When you'll claim he did, bring a link.



OMG you absolutely have Baghdad Bob beat hands down on this one. Thats like saying Terrorist groups were actually the first to come up with the idea of "War On Terror" and the Palestinians formed a Dept of homeland security.






[edit on 18-7-2006 by ThePieMaN]



posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ThePieMaN

Timmy McVeigh a.k.a Abdul Ibn LahmAjun, a.k.a : Mohammad "Babba Ghannouj" Tarbosh a.k.a. Jimmy "The Fez" Jabara. He used the same doctor that Michael jackson does to lighten his skin.




Hmmm.......you might be on to something...............isn't Michael Jackson a CIA experiment gone horribly wrong?




posted on Jul, 18 2006 @ 09:03 PM
link   
Senator Tom Daschle was the target of Assasination using Anthrax.

the Anthrax was manufactured at an advanced weapons laboratory, research performed by the US Army. The anthrax weas traceable because of the techniques used to mill the Anthrax Spores.
so, the US military was involved in a Terrorist plot to assasinate a Sitting US Senator, and as such are Muslim..?

Defending the statement of that paranoid bigot is ridiculous.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 03:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Parmenides
The Irgun was not a terrorist organization. They were a gurilla group and targeted only military targets.



In 1937, the Irgun launched a terror campaign against Palestinian civilians, setting off bombs in markets and attacking buses. In one attack on the Haifa fruit market 74 Arabs were killed and 129 wounded. In 1946, the Irgun set off a bomb in the King David Hotel in Jerusalem killing about 100 Arab, British and Jewish victims.
www.greens.org...

Claims that the Irgun only attacked military targets and that included the King David Hotel will sound about as hollow as IRA claims to only attack "legitimate targets" to those who lived through many London bombings. The IRA used to leave messages as well, misleading and poorly timed ones.


Irgun and Lehi massacred scores of inhabitants of the village of Deir Yassin near Jerusalem on 9 April. Word of the massacre spread terror among Palestinians and hundreds of thousands fled to Lebanon, Egypt and the area now known as the West Bank
news.bbc.co.uk...

On April 9, 1948, the Irgun and the Stern gang attacked the village of Deir Yasseen and massacred 120 villagers. To ensure that the massacre had maximum effect in forcing Palestinians to flee, the terrorist forces raped women and girls, butchered infants and cut open the womb of a nine-months pregnant woman.
www.greens.org...

Well, they certainly sound like terrorists to me.


Originally posted by Parmenides
The Sabra and Shatila massacres were done by christians. If "the worst Jewish atrocities in living memory" in NOT taking part in a massacar, that's prety good.

The Christian militias were backed and supported by the Israeli forces in Southern Lebanon, in particular, by Defence Minister Sharon.

From 16 to 18 September, the Phalangists - who were allied to Israel - killed hundreds of Palestinians in the Sabra and Shatila refugee camps as they were encircled by Israeli troops in one of the worst atrocities of nearly a century of conflict in the Middle East. Mr Sharon resigned from his post as defence minister after a 1983 Israeli inquiry concluded that he had failed to act to prevent the massacre.
news.bbc.co.uk...

While Sharon had no personal involvement and no Israelis participated, the investigation found that Sharon was personally responsible due to negligence and complacency
en.wikipedia.org...



Originally posted by Parmenides
Need I say Shamir didn't colaborate with the Nazis? When you'll claim he did, bring a link.

You can say whatever you like...

In 1940 and 1941, Lehi proposed intervening in the Second World War on the side of Nazi Germany to attain their help in expelling Britain from Mandate Palestine and to offer their assistance in "evacuating" the Jews of Europe

Lehi representative Naftali Lubenchik was sent to Beirut where he met the German official Werner Otto von Hentig and delivered a letter from Lehi offering to "actively take part in the war on Germany's side" in return for German support for "the establishment of the historic Jewish state on a national and totalitarian basis, bound by a treaty with the German Reich"
experts.about.com...(group).htm

"Lehi" is otherwise known as the "Stern Gang", founded by Avraham Stern after a split with the Irgun - Shamir left the Irgun with Stern to found the new group and went on to effectively lead the group after Sterns death.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 04:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Souljah


Yet another proof, that a certain "diplomat" can get away with saying such Racist and Genocidal things, and the corporate media ignores that.

Makes me wanna
!



It just shows the xenophobic hatred Israel has towards Muslims, that is overlooked because of the hatred towards Israel is has spawned.

For all their suits and ties, Israel can't hide it, rather like the BNP over here.

Israeli officials may well get all high and mighty concerning Hamas and Hezbollah, but let us not forget Israeli's ill-disciplined military are also known for their indiscriminate killings and bombings and assassinations and kidnappings of political figures, their bulldozing of Palestinian homes.

Let us also not forget, the bombing by Israeli militants of the Royal Star Of David Hotel in the 40's, or of cases of Israeli militants sneaking into the tents of British soldiers before 1947, and slitting the throats of UK soldiers as they slept.

Ahh! Israelis and supporters shall say, we were fighting for our homeland, our state!

That is exactly what the Palestinians are doing. That is exactly what Hezbollah are doing fighting continuing Israeli occupation of Lebanese territory, and for the release of their own prisoners.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 05:21 AM
link   
I agree with this diplomat to some extent. I believe that muslims make up 98% of all terrorist attacks world-wide. So he is mostly right. Bless him.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 05:52 AM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
I agree with this diplomat to some extent. I believe that muslims make up 98% of all terrorist attacks world-wide. So he is mostly right. Bless him.
He makes a racist comment, IMO, and you "bless him"?

Sorry- this is funny.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 07:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by intrepid

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
Thats like saying "Well I wanted to call you an XXXXXX but I changed my mind and Ill just call you XYXYXY instead"
he actually said what was really on his mind without breaking the rules.

#1- 1). Posting: You will not post any material that is knowingly false, misleading, or inaccurate.


While I’m not taking a stance one way or another on what this guy said and how true or false it is, his rhetorical tactics are engineered for a specific purpose.

The trick of language that involves mentioning something by pretending to ignore it is called
en.wikipedia.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">Apophasis. It is a classical rhetorical device. It is saying, “I won’t even talk about the claims that my opponent is a useless drunk, a wife beater, a thief, and a liar, because personal issues should not be a factor in this debate.” This is a classic example of saying exactly what you want to say, of tainting the audience, of getting your message to them, while at the same time distancing yourself from the ideas you’ve purposely put forth.

That is precisely what this diplomat did in this case. He wanted to say that all Muslims are terrorists, because that is what he believes. He can’t just say it, though, because as he noted, that would be politically incorrect, particularly for a “diplomat.” So, he uses Apophasis to say exactly what he means, while distancing himself from his own statement.

Now, I’m not going to say that this is the only thing PieMaN has ever been correct about…


Originally posted by looking4truth
You are arguing the semantics not the substance of what was said.


Not really, he is arguing rhetorical devices, which have been in defined use since Plato, Aristotle, et al. The fact is this diplomat said exactly what he wanted to. Make no mistake, many of these people, particularly those who deal with the press, have their rhetoric tools well polished and finely honed. In this case, the “semantics” is the “substance.”

And, putting it in its “context” would still not be an acceptable way to get around his statement, as it has clearly been shown in this very forum that in the early 20th century, there were plenty of Jewish terrorists. Surely an Israeli diplomat knows that?

I’m not going to say you should reconsider your argument here, because I don’t really care about this debate (other than for its rhetorical value); but, I will say…

Apophasis. Gotta love it.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 10:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by laiguana
I agree with this diplomat to some extent. I believe that muslims make up 98% of all terrorist attacks world-wide. So he is mostly right. Bless him.


Ok now i believe that Nydgan was right in saying that not all terroists are muslim, as their are plenty of terroists of different religions and nationalities. The terroists attacks reported on main stream media are attacks made by fanatical muslims agaisnt western countries. But this does not mean the all terroists are muslim, also the view that muslims are terroists has only existed the past 4-5 years. What has happend int he past 4-5 years? Firstly 9/11 then in retaliation the invasion of Afganistan and Iraq, and have they found the person responsible no. American foriegn policy has created a whole new wave of islamic terroism.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 10:49 AM
link   
Are all JEWS Zionists then?

Or are all Zionists JEWS?



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 01:13 PM
link   
There's a larger problem here than what the diplomat said. It's that so many people will AGREE with what was said. Does that make all the people who think this way bigotted against muslims or rascist against Arabs? Some yes, but certainly not all.

The real problem here is that any atempt at finding out why people think this way and what responsibility the Islamic community world wide has for allowing this to become their "label", is blocked. What this diplomat said is not as important as why it was said and why it wasn't challenged. I don't think you can just blame rascism and bigottry. There's a lot more than ignorance here.

Any attempt to look at this, and certainly any attempt to point out that SO MANY muslim and arab groups are involved in terrorism and at the very least complicit in it, is met with stonewalling tactics.

Why should Muslims consider every attempt to discuss the big image problems they face with the west as attacks? Why not welcome the discussion and show people that they are tired of the militants? Is this a false assumption? Are all muslims supportive of terrorism? It's hard to find out for sure because the debate get's drowned out by simply calling critics liars, biggots and rascists.

Look at this thread for example, it's gone in several directions including silly arguments over sentence structure and a lecture over political rhetoric, no one will address the fact that for so many people around the world ISLAM = FEAR, INTIMIDATION, TERRORISM, AND HATE. It'd be nice for once if a thread like this could examine that.

I'm not at all saying that people's ignorances about muslims and Arab muslims in particular are justified, I don't believe that all muslims are terrorists or that all terrorists are muslims. I do however belive that there is SOMETHING going on in muslim society that is not challenged in a critical and public way. And for a westerner or non-muslim to bring it up is met with a sort of "counter-attack", not a discussion.

If I'm wrong, point me right. But I believe that untill muslims can admit that their society is ridlled with hate and bigottry than they can't expect other societies to do the same. Why should westerners admit that hold ill-thought beliefs about Islamic people if every time there is a terrorist attack on the west or Israel you see celebrations in the street and our flags burned? With Hezbollah and Lebenon under attack, find a city in America or Great Briton where people are celebrating in the streets or burning Lebanon's flag. There are some real issues and unfortunately no one is looking at them



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 02:29 PM
link   
This diplomat isn't racist he is mostly accurate. If you actually take a look at statistical reports of terrorist acts committed world wide you will see that the majority are a result of islamists. I will not use the word -extremist- because I see this cult to be extremist by default.

You should try googling something like: terrorism in the world



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 05:19 PM
link   
"All terrorists are Muslim" eh?

Could've sworn the IRA were Catholics.

The UDF were Protestants

ETA are Catholics

I wouldn't be quite sure how to classify the Baader-Meinhoff group, although the German Ultra Left Wing Europeans they purported to represent certainly weren't Muslim

Similarly with the Red Brigade

Or Black September come to think of it.

I really don't think the Tamil Tigers would take very nicely to being called Muslims either, seeing as how they've spent an awful lot of time slaughtering a large amount of them

Of course, this wonderful pearl of wisdom was broadcast on Fox, and by an Israeli politician. Surely everyone in the US though knows about these other
TERRORIST organisations though....don't they?



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 07:17 PM
link   
Any Gang in America is considered a terrorist group as witnessed in California and Chicago. Latinos and African Americans as well as Asians. Its spin and its spin intended to play on the average american that Muslim=Bad. Notice how in almost every press release made lately they all mention Iran ,Syria and Muslims. Its a constant barrage of Iran, Syria and Muslims, yet nothing concrete has been shown to prove they ever did or are acting on their orders. No taped conversations, no secret meetings, no proof of Iranians actually captured in lebanon. Its all a bunch of crap intended to draw the Americans in and do their dirty work for them. Be smart. Israeli soldiers were kidnapped in all this mess, it wasn't the bombing of a major city.



posted on Jul, 19 2006 @ 09:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe

Originally posted by laiguana
I agree with this diplomat to some extent. I believe that muslims make up 98% of all terrorist attacks world-wide. So he is mostly right. Bless him.
He makes a racist comment, IMO, and you "bless him"?

Sorry- this is funny.


God in heaven bless this man for speaking the truth and showing the world Isreal's resolve. Isreal is a sovern democracy that has been attacked. And when freedom is attacked then freedom must be defended.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 06:25 PM
link   
This thread came to the Major's attention while being referenced by the author in another thread. A modicum of research into the actual quote proved it to be rather suspect.

The Major is a little disappointed that no one took the time to verify a simple quote supposedly broadcast to almost half the world.

Dismissed.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 07:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by Major Discrepancy
This thread came to the Major's attention while being referenced by the author in another thread. A modicum of research into the actual quote proved it to be rather suspect.

The Major is a little disappointed that no one took the time to verify a simple quote supposedly broadcast to almost half the world.

Dismissed.

Seeing as you cross referenced your rebuttal to Souljah's post in this thread I will post my rebuttal to your post here too.

Dan Gillerman did infact go on the O'Reilly Factor and he said:


“While it is politically incorrect to say that all Muslims are terrorists, unfortunately, it’s true that nearly all terrorists are Muslim,”


The video of the interview can be seen here



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 08:31 PM
link   
In the interest of discussing Dan Gillerman's statement that "nearly all terrorists are muslim", I thought I would see if that is even remotely accurate.

I took the US State Department's list of international terrorist organisations. It comprises a list of 42 international terrorist groups.


US State Department

Current List of Designated Foreign Terrorist Organizations

1. Abu Nidal Organization (ANO)
2. Abu Sayyaf Group
3. Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade
4. Ansar al-Islam
5. Armed Islamic Group (GIA)
6. Asbat al-Ansar
7. Aum Shinrikyo
8. Basque Fatherland and Liberty (ETA)
9. Communist Party of the Philippines/New People's Army (CPP/NPA)
10. Continuity Irish Republican Army
11. Gama’a al-Islamiyya (Islamic Group)
12. HAMAS (Islamic Resistance Movement)
13. Harakat ul-Mujahidin (HUM)
14. Hizballah (Party of God)
15. Islamic Jihad Group
16. Islamic Movement of Uzbekistan (IMU)
17. Jaish-e-Mohammed (JEM) (Army of Mohammed)
18. Jemaah Islamiya organization (JI)
19. al-Jihad (Egyptian Islamic Jihad)
20. Kahane Chai (Kach)
21. Kongra-Gel (KGK, formerly Kurdistan Workers' Party, PKK, KADEK)
22. Lashkar-e Tayyiba (LT) (Army of the Righteous)
23. Lashkar i Jhangvi
24. Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE)
25. Libyan Islamic Fighting Group (LIFG)
26. Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group (GICM)
27. Mujahedin-e Khalq Organization (MEK)
28. National Liberation Army (ELN)
29. Palestine Liberation Front (PLF)
30. Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ)
31. Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLF)
32. PFLP-General Command (PFLP-GC)
33. al-Qa’ida
34. Real IRA
35. Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC)
36. Revolutionary Nuclei (formerly ELA)
37. Revolutionary Organization 17 November

38. Revolutionary People’s Liberation Party/Front (DHKP/C)
39. Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC)
40. Shining Path (Sendero Luminoso, SL)
41. Tanzim Qa'idat al-Jihad fi Bilad al-Rafidayn (QJBR) (al-Qaida in Iraq) (formerly Jama'at al-Tawhid wa'al-Jihad, JTJ, al-Zarqawi Network)
42. United Self-Defense Forces of Colombia (AUC)

I took the liberty of bolding the terrorist organisations that are not Islamic. I even lumped the terrorist organisations who are not Islamic in nature but arose from Islamic countries as being Islamic.

As you can see, 13 out of the 42 international terrorist groups as outlined by the US State Department are not Islamic or muslim at all. That equates to 30% that are non-Islamic in nature.

For Dan Gillerman to state that "nearly all terrorists are muslim" is not very accurate given that a third of the terrorist organistaions as outlined by the US State Department are not Islamic at all.



posted on Aug, 4 2006 @ 08:47 PM
link   
subz

Thanks for bringing this up, It was a thread a while back in which this same topic about how many terrorist organizations are worldwide was discussed.

The muslin terrorist phenomena has been given center stage in the last two decades but it wasn't until 9/11 and the war on terror that has been concentrated in the middle east and in specific countries.






top topics



 
0
<< 1  2    4 >>

log in

join