Send 'Em To Paradise

All of the Martyrs Brigade, all the Hamas military wing, and all Islamic Jihad.


First of all, they WANT to die as martyrs so they can go to Paradise. Nobody's going to convince them of anything else at this late date.


So why should Israel let them stick around until they get the opportunity to drag some unwilling schoolchildren with them as they depart for the gates of Paradise (or the gates of Hell)? Why not speed them on their way as quickly as possible, before they have the chance to drag some unwilling innocents along?


Theirs is a sad, twisted and tragic path, but they are committed to it. Better they should depart this world WITHOUT taking more innocent college kids or families with them.

Isn't it amazing that 2+2 has let Islamic Fundamnetalist Radicals post open racism without any objection.


I think your point is well taken. Unfortunately, if we help them go to Paradise, then they will be playing internet poker illegally, and will be contributing to international money laundering.


I suggest that we force Saudi Arabia to pay for their stay in Guantanamo,Cuba. Why should the US taxpayers have to foot the bill for psychotic zealots.

The 9/11 attackers were indirectly produced, at least in significant part, by the Wahhabist fundamentalist teachings of Saudi Arabia. Wahhabism is a backwards form of Islam that endorses active jihad and teaches hatred of the West and especially of the U.S. Wahhabism comprises 1/3 of the standard school curriculum in Saudi Arabia. I would guess that this widespread state-sponsored religion was at least 1/3 responsible for the damages in the 9/11 attack. Therefore the Saudis should pay us perhaps one-third, or even half, of the cost of all damages related to 9/11.


The Saudis should be put on notice that they will be held financially responsible for any further attacks by al-Qaeda, since the Saudi government still allows wealthy Saudis to support this terrorist organization financially. While the Saudi government has been cooperative in certain aspects of the war on al-Qaeda, they have dug in their heels regarding cooperation on cutting off financial support to terrorists. Of course this is because their state religion breeds anti-U.S. hatred and terrorists. We need to tell them that they will be held financially responsible for certain things, and that they need to throw Wahhabism out of the schools and mosques. They also need to be warned that future damages from attacks resulting from their Wahhabist teachings will have to be paid and if they do not pay in currency they will have to pay in oil.

If I were you I'd be somewhat reticent in my calls for more killing regardless of how justified it might turn out to be.


Below, I pointed out how an IDF bulldozer driver admitted his "joy" in deliberately trying to bury Palestinians their homes before they had a chance to flee, and how some Palestinian children, elderly and disabled suffered exactly that fate. You replied that such incidents “might be” wrong, but that it was different than Palestinian terrorism. This was so because although “some individual soldiers may sometimes do very bad things, . . . Sharon didn't send those soldiers to Nablus with the express directive of slaughtering as many innocents as possible.” (“Still a Difference, Chris”).


It’s a good example of how you apply standards to this conflict.


You condemn "Palestinians" for terror when the PA does not prevent it. You fail to even criticize the government of Israel for terror by those under its direct command if there is no "express directive of slaughtering as many innocents as possible."


You condemn 4 million "Palestinians" for terror by a few of them. You fail to even criticize the government of Israel for terror committed by "some individual soldiers" under it's command.


You judge Palestinians by the very darkest hearts of their community (those that murder and celebrate murder) and dismiss the conciliatory statements of their intellectuals and leaders (as you said, judging by acts, not by words). You judge Israel by the loftiest, most self-serving statements of its politicians (e.g., claims of self-defense and "fighting terror" and "regret" over the killing of innocents), thereby judging by words, not by acts.


You constantly denounce and demand the destruction of Palestinian rejectionists like Hamas, while ignoring the most hateful and racist Israeli groups that have already done what Hamas would only like to do (i.e., wreck the national homeland of their opponents), such as those that engaged in last week's murderous settler pogrom in Hebron, even when such groups are subsidized by your own country.


Most generally, you would deny national rights from “Palestinians” until their feeble government ends all terrorism from whatever source. You not only support full political rights to but would lavish lethal aid on an infinitely more powerful government regardless of a human rights record that includes more civilian deaths and injuries from official acts, to say nothing of infintely greater political oppression.


Plainly, you are refusing to apply standards in a fashion consistent with anything other than racist ideology. (Perhaps you are intimidated by the comical claims that the absence of hypocrisy is “anti-semitic” and "pro-terrorist?") As far as I can tell, your only attempt to mask these contradictions has been to rhetorically inflate the difference between deliberate and reckless homicide. But this kind of hair-splitting hardly mitigates the far greater numbers of killed and injured by the Israeli military (assuming mere “recklessness,” and despite the many well-documented instances of cold-blooded murder) and your greatly disproportionate responsibility for them compared to your complete lack of power over the homicide bombers.


If we refuse to be even-handed or accept responsibility for our own actions, then our support for violence becomes arbitrary and random. Being so makes us no better, in fact slightly worse IMO, than the most inexcusable advocate of terrorism who can point to grievance that distinguishes him from people who killing for sheer "joy." Accordingly, it is difficult to tell, in your many demands for violence and war, whether you are motivated by principle or a barely disguised craving for slaughter that has characterized so many advocates of similar endeavors before.

Fine, I'm not going to argue every point, although you are twisting my words somewhat in several instances.


Let me put it more plainly: ALL terrorist groups in the world should be WIPED OUT by military and police actions--whether they are Middle Eastern, Irish, South American, Philipino, or from the planet Mars. That means concerted military/police action should be taken to systematically arrest or kill them ALL.

I think anyone that's familiar with your posts will find my descriptions accurate. Even though you accuse me of "false claims," I note that you failed to identify a single one.

Jeez, Chris, I'm about to go to sleep after a long night of poker. Why must you put SO MUCH stuff in every post? Nobody, well at least not me, has the desire to address every one of your usual dozen points or so. It's too much work to respond to ALL your myriad points, as a rule. Try cutting the number in half sometimes...just a thought, OK?


Off the top of my head, and without going back to reread your points, it is untrue that I view everything Israel does in the best light and everything the Palestinians do in the worst light. Now good night.

Don't say we. You are not a law abiding American citizen. You have no right to make your positions based on the assumption that you represent the United States.


You don't represent the Palestinians either.

You openly advocate violence over non-violence.

You do not legally participate in the American society. All you've truly accomplished on these forums is to draw attention to yourself, and belittle the legitimate claims of the Palestinian people.

CA: "Plainly, you are refusing to apply standards in a fashion consistent with anything other than racist ideology."


No, I am differentiating between pure terrorist attacks/organizations, and actions which are not purely terrorist.


This is the worst and falsest accusation you have made against me. Again, I'm sorry you can't seem to see that I am differentiating between a purely evil doctrine and practice and one which at times may be too heavy-handed (or even worse). Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that certain Israeli actions have indeed been truly evil at times. That STILL would not be as evil as a doctrine and practice which has at its core the targeting for murder the most innocent members of society.


CA: "As far as I can tell, your only attempt to mask these contradictions has been to rhetorically inflate the difference between deliberate and reckless homicide. But this kind of hair-splitting..."


It's not hair-splitting, it's differentiating between a purely evil doctrine and one which is less so. By the way, in my book, deliberate homicide is indeed more evil than reckless or accidental homicide. Sorry if this moral distinction somehow escapes you.


CA: "You judge Palestinians by the very darkest hearts of their community (those that murder and celebrate murder) and dismiss the conciliatory statements of their intellectuals and leaders (as you said, judging by acts, not by words). You judge Israel by the loftiest, most self-serving statements of its politicians (e.g., claims of self-defense and "fighting terror" and "regret" over the killing of innocents), thereby judging by words, not by acts."


Not at all. I merely condemn deliberate terror targeted primarily at innocents more than I condemn anything else.


CA: "Accordingly, it is difficult to tell, in your many demands for violence and war, whether you are motivated by principle or a barely disguised craving for slaughter that has characterized so many advocates of similar endeavors before."


I don't demand violence and war; I call for stopping by any means necessary those who are attacking civilized societies around the world and who are targeting innocents for murder. I call for DEFENSE against this barbaric and unconscionable doctrine and practice. And the ONLY defense against those who are irrevocably committed to attacking and killing you, is to fight them. And that is why I believe NATO should systematically wipe out all terrorist groups around the globe.

"No, I am differentiating between pure terrorist attacks/organizations, and actions which are not purely terrorist."


But you make this distinction in two untenable ways: (1) along racial/national lines: Palestinian terror is "purely" terroristic and merit the most vehement condemnation, but Israeli actions are by definition less so, regardless of the facts; (2) by refusing to condemn any lesser evil fomented by the U.S. or Israel that falls outside your defintion of "pure" terrorism, even when the consequences are equally or even more tragic and destructive.


"Let's suppose, for the sake of argument, that certain Israeli actions have indeed been truly evil at times. That STILL would not be as evil as ..."


This is exactly what I mean: only "certain" Israeli actions are wrong, and only "at times." Yet you routinely tag "Palestinians" as responsible for "a doctrine and practice which has at its core the targeting for murder the most innocent members of society," ignoring that only a minority of Palestinians are in any way responsible for terror which is condemned by their leaders, while Israel's civilian-killing actions are directed by its government and widely supported by its people, the people of the U.S., the U.S. government and you.


"in my book, deliberate homicide is indeed more evil than reckless or accidental homicide"


Nice try on throwing "accidental" in there, as if the killings I've documented were like fender benders. Indiscriminate firing into civilian areas, dropping 1,000-pound bombs on civilian-inhabited apartments, bulldozing homes from which people haven't had a chance to flee, shooting nurses in cold blood, shooting ambulances, all just "accidents," maybe reckless, but by definition never deliberate simply because Israel says so. When the gunmen are Palestinian, it's an abominable crime for which the whole society should pay; when Israeli, it must be some sort of mistake, an abberation it is guilty of only "at times" that falls into the morally neutral category of error.


"I merely condemn deliberate terror targeted primarily at innocents more than I condemn anything else."


No, you tend to condemn Palestinian/Arab/Muslim terror "more than anything else," and you specifically blame Islamic religion and culture for terrorism. You not only failed to condemn but have outright denied the existence of Israeli/U.S. terror even when it's "targeted at innocents," such as the tanks that shoot unarmed civilians working in fields or families trying to shop in violation of IDF-imposed curfews of which they were unaware.

Wahhabism IS specifically to blame for much of Islamic terror. And most terrorist organizations in the world ARE Islamic--more organizations than all non-Islamic terrorist organizations put together--as Cyrus found out when he researched it. And Islamic fundamentalism IS backwards (so too is Christian fundamentalism, but fundamentalist Islam is much more widely believed and practiced).


The reason I don't make a point of condemning instances of what you call "terror" by the US or by Israelis is because many of these are highly debatable instances, and because I don't care to do a great deal of research on a debatable subject merely to find out which may be which--it's a moot point--yes there are likely some condemnable instances. However a lot of them are debatable and even factually uncertain. What is NOT debatable is the certainty of the evil of a doctrine which at its core targets primarily innocents for murder (and celebrates it to boot).


So I'm saying, as I have all along, that the US and Israel are neither perfect nor blameless, but that terrorist organizations and their practices are WORSE--and that they must be stopped. Likewise when discussing the US vs. the former USSR, I said pretty much the same thing. We were at times bad, but the USSR was much worse.


And the doctrine and practice of terrorism is the worst of all.

Let me rephrase the first sentence.


Wahhabism is to blame (in part indirectly) for much of the Islamic terror movement outside of the Israeli/Palestinian arena.