GameBanshee Forums

Originally posted by KidD01:
<STRONG>One thing came accross my mind is the "Sleeper Agents" How we gonna counter this agents of terrorist ? THis is terrible indeed since I've heard there are statements involving attacks on US companies around the globe </STRONG>

That crossed my mind, too. It's going to be hard to counter this without setting off round #2 of McCarthyism. It extends beyond the sleeper agents, though. We have people, in our country right now, raising funds to support these terrorist organizations (and I'm including groups like the IRA), either under the misguided notion they're supporting "freedom" or as part of an organised crime network. The first group must come to understand that their misguided ideology may in fact be paying for a terrorist attack on our soil.

[ 09-15-2001: Message edited by: Sojourner ]

Hmm. I also condemn things that involve lost of inocent life.

But I think that when you call the "fanatic" word, this expression have a bit of etnocentrical view. It is hard to understand diferent type of culture, especialy after a attack like that(WTC).

I think the understand stage can lead to a more effective policy of prevention.

And I am not mad about your feeling of vingance. Probably, if my family dies in some violent act like that I will instanctly go after the guilty ones and make vingance too. But I know that the best part of me will say stop and think peacefully.

In a big context I really don't like this international retaliation Bush call for. If the army goes on a ground attack several people of all the sides will die.

It is dificult to every body to think peacefully {especially for me- personal troubles}. But I have so greater admiration to people like Gandhi who thinks ever peacefull. I try. I wish I was so great as he was. It is dificult.

Update on the victims :
Missing : At least 4972 persons
Confirmed dead : 152 persons

Also the rescue teams are facing dusts problems, now why don't they try to do something about this matter too ? I know that the dust can cause breathing problems - and this definately slow down the rescue process

Originally posted by Ivan Cavallazzi:
<STRONG>But I think that when you call the "fanatic" word, this expression have a bit of etnocentrical view. It is hard to understand diferent type of culture, especialy after a attack like that(WTC).

</STRONG>

You are certainly right that the word "fanatic" is often used to describe cultural differences and also differences in religious believes. My reason for calling the Taliban's fanatic, is that the mainstream muslim world do not support their interpretations of Allah's word - as far as I know the vast majority of the worlds muslims think the Taliban's are blasphemers of islam.

<STRONG>It is dificult to every body to think peacefully {especially for me- personal troubles}. But I have so greater admiration to people like Gandhi who thinks ever peacefull. I try. I wish I was so great as he was. It is dificult.</STRONG>

Sorry to hear you have personal troubles I agree with you that Gandhi was a great man, and I personally admire his ahimsa-philosophy as I also admire pacifists like English philosopher Bertrand Russell.

Martin Luther King - another great man

Originally posted by Sojourner:
<STRONG>Martin Luther King - another great man</STRONG>

Certainly - and like Ghandi, brutally murdered

Why is everyone so afraid to offend people by calling the Taliban fanatics?? I'm not afraid to say it: the Taliban and their adherents are fanatics. Let's stop p.u.s.s.y.footing around for the sake of political correctness. People have been murdered, for God's sake.

You know what I think they should do? Arm the women of Afghanistan. Just put guns in the hands of all the women there. First they'll take out the husbands who have oppressed and abused them for years. Then they'll take out the government that sanctions such abuse. And I for one will rise and cheer when that happens.

I don't want a war, I've said it before and I mean it. But come on, what are we supposed to do -- waltz up to these reprehensible mass-murderers, evil personified, and offer them bouquets of flowers??

Some people have mentioned Gandhi. I admire Gandhi greatly. But during WWII when the Jews of one particular ghetto rose up against their Nazi oppressors, Gandhi said they should have just let themselves be slaughtered. Uh-huh. Whatever. I for one do not believe in lying back and taking it.

[ 09-15-2001: Message edited by: loner72 ]

Originally posted by loner72:
<STRONG>Why is everyone so afraid to offend people by calling the Taliban fanatics?? I'm not afraid to say it: the Taliban and their adherents are fanatics. Let's stop p.u.s.s.y.footing around for the sake of political correctness. People have been murdered, for God's sake.
</STRONG>

That people have been murdered, is in my opinion, no reason use derrogative language or insult others who are not at all connected to the organizations that planned and executed the killings.

The reason why I personally clearly state that calling the Taliban's "fanatic" is a PO, and that I hope not to offend anyone, is that for what I know, there might be members of this board who are supporting some of the Taliban's views of acts even if they don't support their protection of Bin Laden.

People's personal religious beliefs are a sensitive issue, as you know. Just think of your own reactions when you feel people are disrespecting christianity or catholisism. Some christians are very offended when I call the crusaders and inquisitors fanatics (even if they don't themselves support the horrible acts committed by the crusaders and inquisitors). So, I simply take the same precausions.

This has nothing to do with the Taliban's professed religious affiliation. They are oppressors and violators of human rights, plain and simple. They have outright stated that they will not extradict bin Laden, even after this horrific act of mass murder, which, according to ever-mounting evidence, he very likely orchestrated. They are sheltering a mass murderer and saying that they will go to war aginst anyone who attempts to bring him to justice. Excuse me, I don't care what religion they are or claim to be. Again -- are we going to just sit back and take whatever acts of war and hatred are dished out to us, for the sake of political correctness? CE, you siad it yourself in another thread -- "the people of Afghanistan are living under a totalitarian terror."

Today the Taliban told the people of Afghanistan to prepare for a "holy war". Now as far as I remember from my undergrad days -- and please anyone correct me if I'm mistaken here -- this kind of war, according to the tenets of Islam, is NOT a true "holy war". These men are twisting a beautiful faith into something violent, ugly, filled with power-lust. I don't care if they claim to follow Islam. Anyone who knows anything about Islam will know that they are not actually following it. They are full of their own hatred and self-glorification and nothing else. Any American Muslim will tell you that the violence of terrorism and the subjection of women, for example, are in no way supported by the legitimate teachings of Islam. Just like a group calling themselves "Concerned Christians", which plotted to blow up about five buildings in Jerusalem a couple years back. Just like another so-called "Christian" group which came to Rhode Island about two years ago carrying signs saying, basically, that homosexuals deserve to get AIDS. Such gruesome hatred, especially in the guise of a religion that is founded on love, makes me physically ill. I don't care what such people do with their Sunday mornings; I don't care what they call themselves. They are not Christians and their "teachings" need to be challenged. Period.

It might come as a surprise that I also see the Crusaders and the Inquisition, especially of the Spanish variety, as groups of fanatics.

I believe in defending my home and my nation. And if the enemies of my home and my nation will not hear diplomacy, if they will not come to peaceful terms, if they only wish to violently destroy us -- I say we stand and fight them. Now, it has become desperately obvious that someone is out to destroy my home and my nation. And as much as I wish that wasn't true, that is the reality. As much as I wish and hope and pray that there is no war -- at the risk of sounding childish -- they started it. Like I said, we can't just lie back. What should we do -- sit around being "tolerant" while the enemy breaks down the gates?

[ 09-15-2001: Message edited by: loner72 ]

I hope I will be safe... I'm in a very bad spot...

Originally posted by loner72:
<STRONG>Why is everyone so afraid to offend people by calling the Taliban fanatics?? I'm not afraid to say it: the Taliban and their adherents are fanatics.
[ 09-15-2001: Message edited by: loner72 ]

</STRONG>

In my post, when I say that is wrong to call then as fanatic, I don't say it because I think it was agressive, I say it because it is a poor and view. The Fanatic is obvius a patological state. Call a totally diferent culture member as fanatic is a etnocentrical position. It is like someone in a native society call the americans fanatic about money, capitalism, and futile fashion. You see, it is etnocentrical. The americans are fanatic in the native one point of view, because the valors and the concepts beetween the societies( American and Natives) were very very diferent.

Originally posted by loner72:
<STRONG>You know what I think they should do? Arm the women of Afghanistan. Just put guns in the hands of all the women there. First they'll take out the husbands who have oppressed and abused them for years. Then they'll take out the government that sanctions such abuse. And I for one will rise and cheer when that happens.

</STRONG>

You see how you put your valors in other culture. Totaly etnocentrical. What people in Afeganistão do to their own people in their own country have nothing to do with you, me, the americans, and the rest of the world. All we can do to things that we don't agree in other country is offer asylum to the people who don't want to keep in their own country or disagree with their country policy. Any other act that interfer in other country or culture is an offence.
For example: Some other day I saw in the television an old documentary, it show a conference of the KKK when there was a fence and lots of cops protecting the KKK members from the afro-americans(out of the fence). In some sort of way the KKK members were protect by the liberty of expression law. For me that was an outrage. Now imagine if some president of a more powerfull empire interfere in the USA law and culture, justifying the interference in the fact that in his personal point of view that law isn't nice.

Originally posted by Ivan Cavallazzi:
<STRONG>Totaly etnocentrical. What people in Afeganistão do to their own people in their own country have nothing to do with you, me, the americans, and the rest of the world. All we can do to things that we don't agree in other country is offer asylum to the people who don't want to keep in their own country or disagree with their country policy.</STRONG>

Part of the reason that the U.S. is driven to take an active role in world affairs is the massive influx of those seeking asylum and the pressure they exert (right or wrong) on our political process. Our relationship with Cuba and the recent events involving a certain custody dispute and its affects on US elections is a case in point.

unfortunately, the death count that is released is only counting the whole bodies that have been recovered.

I've just heard the news that there's possibility that there's survivors on the underground section of WTC. But it's took time to get into that part of the building