AmericanPapist Comments
If you did not see this coming from a mile away you are an ill-informed person on the history of islam. islam(not capitalized due to a lack of respect) is the heinous cult that will- if not delt with properly- drag society back down over a 1000 years in every aspect that measures a society in a positive light. Do the reseach-islam is not the "religion" of peace- it is the worst thing to happen to women, free thought , medicine and science in general that has ever happened on a large scale in the history of the Human Race. The sooner we are free of it's poisonous grasp the better for EVERYONE!!!
We need to PRAY FOR THE SOULS OF THE VICTIMS AND PRAY FOR THE CONVERSION OF ALL WHO COMMIT EVIL ACTS SUCH AS THESE. JUST A THOUGHT.
America wants to take a vacation from the real world but the bad guys never quit.
If American foreign policy didn't disturb Muslim peoples so much, I wonder if the USA would have to be so much on guard from these people.
I'd wager that, before 1948, Muslims didn't mind the USA too much.
Yeah, I mean let's think historically here. It's not like the Muslims took the holy land away from us.
... oh wait.
They didn't take it away from the USA.
By the way - In 1918, when Europeans finally took it back, what did they do?
They handed it right back to the Muslims, and to some Jews who were blowing things up.
So really, blame England and France for fumbling THAT ONE.
This terrorist attack follows on the heels of Muslims attacking Copts in Egypt:
http://www.aina.org/news/
2008112...81126035704.htm
"One thousand Christians were today trapped inside the Coptic Orthodox Church of the Virgin Mary in West Ain Shams,Cairo, after more than twenty thousand Muslims attacked them with stones and butane gas cylinders. The Church's priest Father Antonious said that the situation is extremely dangerous."
So really, when muslims attack innocent american and british civilians on indian soil ... the body at fault here is ...? That's right, the terrorists.
How difficult is this?
It's not difficult at all. The terrorists are immediately to blame.
However, only a fool wouldn't recognize that American foreign policy hasn't been helping matters over the past few decades.
To the Thomas who posted the first comment here - I don't think it is fair to blame all Muslims because of the fanatics. There are peace loving Muslims who believe in serving their God and don't hate others. I grew up in Northern Ireland and everytime the IRA bombed, maimed and killed people - it was perceived that those Irish Catholics were at it again. It was assumed that you were on the IRA's side because of ignorance. You sure could sense the mistrust of English people, not to mention the protestants who reside in the same province.
Oh, I see, let us do the old "when terrorists strike somewhere in the world it must be the fault of some type of American foreign policy." Give me a break!
I was just in Mumbai on Saturday, and I have an Irish friend in India due to return this weekend. Please keep India, and my friend, in your prayers.
Anonymous:
Let me get this straight: the 5-decades-long war (it actually spans 4 centuries really) in the South of the Philippines perpetrated by Islamic separatists is actually caused by American foreign policy?
Interesting...
This is truly saddening, and we must pray for all the victims.
However, whenever these kind of events happen, I am reminded of the massive amount of lives being lost at the same time through abortion.
Last I heard, 101 people were killed by these attacks. The number of children slaughtered by abortion during this same time period is likely in the thousands.
Please pray for an end to terrorism, especially terrorism in the womb.
So @anonymous,
when violent jihad in the person of Abdul Rahman Al Ghafiqi - and a few other "misinterpreters of the Koran" - arrived in the vicinity of Tours (Poitiers) only to be stopped by Charles Martel in 732 AD, would that then have been the result of the "islamophobic" foreign policy of medieval "France"?
When violent jihad reached the Gates of Vienna sept.11, 1683, would that have been the indirect result of sort of an invitation by Austrians behaving badly in "the House of Islam" (the other "House" being, as you may very well know, the "House of war", i.e. territory not yet subservient to the Law of Allah).
When Theo van Gogh was slaughtered in my city, would that have been in response to the horror of Dutch foreign policy? The onslaught at Bali the result of those terrible Aussies medling in foreign Islamic affairs?
When your society is gradually being Islamized, not by brute force but stealthily, with the aid of the political and cultural elites, under the guise of "human rights" and "freedom of religion". And when at last you realize that your basic freedoms are taken from you, in order to accommodate Islam, are you then going to reconsider your own foreign policy?
Muslims can be peaceful because they're human, simple as that.
Islamic doctrine was violent, is violent and will be violent and imperialistic to the core. The only difference being that today, Islamic states no longer are the (overt) agents of collective jihad against "unbelievers". That task has been delegated to private enterprise. The silent, non-violent jihad though is much more dangerous for the freedom most of us still enjoy. You can ignore the inconvenient truth about Islam to your own detriment of course.
Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.
Pray for the hostages.
Yeah, I mean let's think historically here. It's not like the Muslims took the holy land away from us.
Oh, for heck's sake. The Crusader era world was hardly one of peace, love and mung beans. The tit-for-tat in the Levant was an imperialistic game with plenty of moral transgression from both sides. Anyone "thinking historically" would recognise this.
Geopolitics and tribalism mixed with religion can be a horible concoction. And it's hardly as if religion - including the one sanctioned here - always provides a tempering force. Are you aware of the majority religion of Rwanda?
The main message is that in countries with a large degree of civil unrest, violence is almost an inevitability. Some will use religion as an excuse, some will ignore the tenets of their creed. Islam is not alone in this.
horible = horrible.
@CBLF,
Try to learn something about Islam before serving that PC drivel while Islam is making more victims. "Tit-for-tat"? Know anything about Islamic expansion since its "birth"? How long did it take for European Christians to finally respond?
Islam isn't used as an excuse, that would be a typically Western neo-marxist insult to Islam. It's the cause. You'd better take it seriously.
Sag.
Know anything about Islamic expansion since its "birth"?
Yes. Do you?
And more to the point, what on earth do you think the world was like in the 7th century? A time of love and harmony?
Well @Carbonhead,
let me see.. 7th century. Wasn't that the era of the infamous desertflower power rockband "Moh. and the ramblin' Mohtoons"? Conquering audiences all over Arabia felix with their number1 hit "Krijg toch Allahmaal de Kolere", i.e. "peace be upon you and your camel."
This idyllic harmony brutally disrupted when - out of nowhere - some savage Frankish brute cried: "See ya in 450 years or so, you #$%.. hippies!"
Kind regs from Amsterdam,
Sag.
"Let me get this straight: the 5-decades-long war (it actually spans 4 centuries really) in the South of the Philippines perpetrated by Islamic separatists is actually caused by American foreign policy?"
It was actually caused by George W. Bush. He also has caused global warming on Pluto. WE have to do something about this!
"If American foreign policy didn't disturb Muslim peoples so much, I wonder if the USA would have to be so much on guard from these people."
"I'd wager that, before 1948, Muslims didn't mind the USA too much."
You obviously aren't getting the big picture. If I were you I'd continue posting anonymously.
The Indians asked for it by invading Iraq.
The Indians asked for it by invading Iraq.
The Indian situation has nothing to do with Iraq.
There has been sectarian violence there for decades. And no one is particularly innocent.
Look up something called "partition".
The Indian situation has nothing to do with Iraq.
Actually, that's too simplistic.
Islamuc terrorists are currently using Iraq and Afghanistan inter alia as a rallying cry, but the backdrop in India is nothing to do with Iraq. As stated, the sectarian violence has been going on there for decades.
'Thomas J. Kiernan,' in his blatantly ignorant opinion, said that Islam has been the worst thing for 'free thought, medicine and science' and must be destroyed.
But most people know that Arabian scholars preserved vast amounts of Western literature by ancient Greeks, and many of these were medical and philosophical tracts. And these remained more advanced than the science available to the Medieval West.
Not to mention all the reasons that one can appreciate Islamic culture on its own accord and not just what it has done for the West.
But I think that both sides of the ensuing argument have truth to them: Western foreign policies have agitated the Islamic world (to be summary about a complex situation). Osama bin Laden has cited the flight of Moors from Spain, and the Treaty of Sevres as important points in his ideological opposition to the West.
But, also, they kill people. Innocent people. And we must, in our interest and in the interest of the Middle East and South Asia, unite and do our best to suppress and destroy these elements. But we should fight the temptation to see this as a war to end Islam.
The thing that shocked me the most is how much coverage this is getting in the press. Compare the coverage of these horrible events to what's been happening in Orissa.
I'm not saying that the media should ignore this. I'm just advocating that the media also mention Orissa.
I'm a Bombayite. I grew up there, in South Bombay, and watching my beloved city being torn apart by this madness has been heartbreaking.
Some context: while this latest attack is clearly one of the most heinous, and has grabbed the world's attention (it was the wealthy downtown district that was attacked, the places that the elite hang out, as well as tourists and foreign businessmen), there has been a spate of small terrorist attacks for several years now, with nearly 760 lives having been lost this year alone. Most of these have been the work of Islamic militants, and are tied to the insurgency in Kashmir, though some (carried out by the mysterious Indian Mujahideen) might indicate a more widespread radicalization of India's vast (~150million) Muslim community than one would like to think of. (Some involve Hindu extremists, such as the Malegaon blasts which were being forcefully investigated by the head of the Bombay ATS who was himself killed in the attack on Wednesday).
What seems to be different about this attack (apart from the guerilla/urban warfare-like tactics used) is the connection to the global jihadi movement: the targetting of Westerners and Jews. This is a disturbing development for India (which is woefully underprepared to deal with terror, despite decades of attacks), and for the world. (I suspect this is why Western media were giving this 24/7 coverage.)
Do go and read this piece written by an Indian Muslim in response to 26 November.
And for heaven's sake, I have no earthly idea how American foreign policy lead to the Kashmir problem, or to what happened in Bombay: of the nearly 200 people who were killed, the vast majority were Indians: Hindus, Christians and Muslims, all slaughtered mercilessly, often point-blank, face-to-face, by killers who had no shred of humanity.
Mark Steyn has a good piece at NRO: what is being fought here is an ideology whose goal is the extermination of the non-Muslim world, either by conquest or submission. I suspect the only change in "foreign policy" that might be remotely acceptable to this lot is surrender to this particular warped brand of Islam.
No freakin' way.
Commenting by HaloScan
