Australian embassy bombing

[Adam]

Anyone seen this on the news yet? A rather powerful bomb exploded in front of Australia's embassy in Jakarta.

http://www.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,4057,10721281%255E401,00.html
http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/650E5331-8CBA-4930-B7F0-1817D17F95B3.htm
http://www.dfat.gov.au/

[Stanley_Smith]

Yeah, I read it on the news.

What do you have to say about this Adam, since you live in Australia ?

[Adam]

What do you have to say about this Adam, since you live in Australia ?

Well...

If I gave a damn about national identity and such, I'd be really miffed on a personal level. But the fact is I don't even like the idea of nations. Stupid idea, they are. So there's no real patriotic anger in me.

However, it was an attack against people. I would rather people did not attack people. But as I have said on many occasions, I wish all those terrorist nutters out there, and the state-backed young idiots with guns and bombs, would restrict themselves to attacking only government and military targets. That's what these people did. Whatever their grievance against Australia, they at least stuck to attacking the government and military structure, and did not go for a hotel full of innocent civilians, as those other guys in Indonesia did.

Does that mean I approve? Not at all. War is for idiots. Whatever their reasons, the result is dead and injured people. Most likely the majority of people killed and injured never did them any harm, and never intended them any harm.

Another factor is that they used a bomb, which is nearly always a problem for people other than the intended targets. Being a former wizard with a rifle, I'm of the opinion that if you're going to do it, then be sure of your target and hit only that target. Bombs are stupid, messy things. There was a civilian shopping centre across the road. There was the potential for many civilian deaths. Stupid. For this, I consider them complete nuffers who should be strung up in the street and beaten with sticks by the locals.

[Clausius2]

My most sincere sadness about this criminal event. I think Australian people could being targeted now by this assassines. I tell you this from Spain, you know, we suffered the Madrid terrorist attack (193 victims).

If you want an advice, do not change your poll because of being threatened by these insects. If your president has supported the Irak war, do not think that acts are consequence of such behaviour. If so, France wouldn't have two men kidnapped there.

Such error was produced here where unaware people went to poll and they thought president Aznar had the blame of the terrorist act for supporting USA. Because of that, now we have a complete dull guy presiding the nation.

[chroot]

I used to think terrorism was only directed at the US, or supporters of the US. Now I'm frankly not so sure. I really have no idea why these bombers do what they do, and from what I can tell the world media gives us no indication of direct motive either. Why are these people doing this stuff? Suicide bombers in hotels??

- Warren

[Adam]

I used to think terrorism was only directed at the US, or supporters of the US.

That's just weird.

The Basques are against Spain. The IRA are against England. The cannibals in the Congo are against the Congo government. Half the world has nutter groups attacking whoever is in power. Half the world (often overlapping the countries making up the half previously mentioned) has governments rolling tanks over their civilians.

The USA is a child in terms of history, only a few centuries old. Whackos have been killing people for ever.


Now I'm frankly not so sure. I really have no idea why these bombers do what they do, and from what I can tell the world media gives us no indication of direct motive either. Why are these people doing this stuff? Suicide bombers in hotels??

The same reason everyone else makes war. A desire to gratify their own desires at the expense of the lives of other people. Those desires are generally for power, control (wealth and resources being merely means of control). Control over the future, control to make the world the way they want it, control just to make sure they have more control in the future, and won't lose that control.

http://bad-sports.com/~archive/revolution/goals.html

[Gokul43201]

The US is actually a fairly new target for terrorist activity. Israel, UK and India (to name a few) have seen continous terrorist activity for tens of years now.

[Adam]

I often think that if we learn a million new things every day, until the end of the universe, about ourselves and the natural realm around us, it won't be the academics who teach us what it all means. It'll be the poets.


Brothers In Arms
By Dire Straits

--------------

These mist covered mountains
Are a home now for me
But my home is the lowlands
And always will be
Some day you'll return to
Your valleys and your farms
And you'll no longer burn
To be brothers in arms

Through these fields of destruction
Baptisms of fire
I've witnessed your suffering
As the battles raged higher
And though they did hurt me so bad
In the fear and alarm
You did not desert me
My brothers in arms

There's so many different worlds
So many differents suns
And we have just one world
But we live in different ones

Now the sun's gone to hell
And the moon's riding high
Let me bid you farewell
Every man has to die
But it's written in the starlight
And every line on your palm
We're fools to make war
On our brothers in arms

[JohnDubYa]

I often think that if we learn a million new things every day, until the end of the universe, about ourselves and the natural realm around us, it won't be the academics who teach us what it all means. It'll be the poets.

That was beautiful, man. Like, right on! Peace, brother!!!

[phatmonky]

The US is actually a fairly new target for terrorist activity. Israel, UK and India (to name a few) have seen continous terrorist activity for tens of years now.

oh really?
http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/terrorism/101/timeline.html

[maps]

I used to think terrorism was only directed at the US, or supporters of the US. Now I'm frankly not so sure. I really have no idea why these bombers do what they do, and from what I can tell the world media gives us no indication of direct motive either. Why are these people doing this stuff? Suicide bombers in hotels??
- Warren

Simple! They do it for POWER!!! There is no other reason. They say they are serving their religious causes. WRONG!! Islam is a peaceful religion which preaches tolerance. The terrorists mindlessly kill and maim innocent women and children because they want the power to control people, religions (of their making), and entire countries. If they, and other religious and nationalist fanatics everywhere (including the U.S.), are not able to win people over to their way of thinking using conventional means of negotiation, they resort to mindless, horrible, insane violence. How stupid!

("Let's blow them up so they will see the light".)

Now I have a simple question. If every so-called Islamic martyr goes to Islamic heaven, they are supposedly rewarded in a land flowing with milk and honey with seventy two (72) virgins. Just where the hell are they getting all of these virgins anyway? :confused:
Cheers all - MAPS

[The Green Giant]

What about Russia? They have had more serious attacks than the states or most others. Like the two plane crashes a while back. Russia has been a serious Terrorist target for years now.

[chroot]

True, and the Russians are not powerful in any sense. But the Chechen rebels are not quite in the same boat with Al-Quaeda, are they?

- Warren

[Adam]

Depends how you look at it. If people deliberately target civilians, I put them in the exact same boat. Whether they are a state-controlled bunch of guys with guns, not controlled by a state, or individuals.

[kat]

Hmmm really Adam, despite their cause being fighting occupation and oppression?

[JohnDubYa]

I tend to agree (gulp) with Adam. A fighter loses all credibility regarding cause as soon as he intentionally targets civilians.

[Adam]

Hmmm really Adam, despite their cause being fighting occupation and oppression?

I wonder how many times I've said as much...

[Clausius2]

I used to think terrorism was only directed at the US, or supporters of the US. Now I'm frankly not so sure.

- Warren


:rofl: Sure not. Terrorism was invented a lot of years ago before the attacks of 11th September. There have been two typical nations that has suffered the TRUE terrorism, that true terrorism is which kills people periodically, each week, each month. This has happened for a lot of years in England (IRA) and Spain (ETA). Here we have near 1000 dead man, children and women, since 1963. We know very well what is terrorism, better than other people that has found terrorism as a threatening last decade.

I'm not critizising you and US people, but please, when you talk about terrorism take into account there are foreign people (like spanish people) who have a "Ph.D" in terrorism problems, and have lived a lot of near attacks. It would be excellent all of us would be reported enough and we wouldn't think we are the first in the world suffering this ****. And european people have that impression of US people sometimes, I assure it to you.

[yogiwp]

Hi,

I actually live in Jakarta, Indonesia where they bombed J.W. Marriott hotel last year and the Australian embassy yesterday. Very very sad :(
Most of casualities are local (Indonesian) people. However Australian gov. have been very generous providing us help with investigations and such.

I just want to say that most of us here in Indonesia are nice, peaceful people. It just happens that we have some plain evil fundamentalists here :( I don't know what else to say.

[maps]

True, and the Russians are not powerful in any sense. But the Chechen rebels are not quite in the same boat with Al-Quaeda, are they?
- Warren

First, never ever underestimate the Russians. They are a determined and still powerful nation we would do well to keep an eye on in the future. Remember the Cold War of 1946 to 1990, 54 years when we were terrified they would start a nuclear holocaust.

Second, Chechnia is, and has been a Russian province for almost 100 years. There are a militant few trying to secede and set up there own Country. Chechnia just recently had an democratic style election and over 67% of the electorate voted to remain a Russian province. Ergo, since the militant few didn't get their way, they have resorted to terrorism killing innocent civilian men, women and children. So, as I said earlier, they are fighting for POWER. Nothing else, just pure raw power. Actually the attacks by the Chechin terrorists, which also included a number of foreign Arab fighters, were aided by Al-Qaeda in their quest for dominance.

Yes, Chechnia is predominantly Muslim and again they have had their Religion hi-jacked by those who would use it to further their own ends.

Suppose that the terrorists succeed. Who would they install to run Chechnia? Why themselves, of course. So again it is nothing but power that they seek.

Just as an aside, I notice that those who are advocating the overthrow of the duly elected Government are not those that are fighting or blowing themselves up.

[Adam]

Hi,

I actually live in Jakarta, Indonesia where they bombed J.W. Marriott hotel last year and the Australian embassy yesterday. Very very sad :(
Most of casualities are local (Indonesian) people. However Australian gov. have been very generous providing us help with investigations and such.

I just want to say that most of us here in Indonesia are nice, peaceful people. It just happens that we have some plain evil fundamentalists here :( I don't know what else to say.

Yes, I'm aware of this. Most killed in the hotel bomb were Indonesians. I think most killed in this bomb, too, were locals. I have a very good friend over there, and hope to go back there some day to visit.

[studentx]

Islam is the problem, two thirds of the worlds conflicts involve Islam, and today it almost has a monopoly when it comes to terrorism.
Also the terror that we face today is apocalyptic, so its kinda diffrent than what the IRA did.

[Adam]

Islam is the problem, two thirds of the worlds conflicts involve Islam, and today it almost has a monopoly when it comes to terrorism.

Thank you, studentx, for finally coming out of the closet and showing your true colours. Given this little gem from you, it should allow readers to view your other posts in an appropriate light.

[JohnDubYa]

"appropriate light" = ad hominem.

studentx' reasoning should stand on its own.

[Adam]

Replace the word "reasoning" with an antonym, and maybe.

Is it an ad hominem to thank someone for clarifying their position?

[JohnDubYa]

Nope. But you did more than that.

[GENIERE]

First, never ever underestimate the Russians…
The last rational Canadian?

Islam is the problem, two thirds of the worlds conflicts involve Islam, and today it almost has a monopoly when it comes to terrorism…

Tsk,tsk, truth is not a substitute for being politically correct. Please edit your post by substituting “Christianity” for “Islam”. If you insist on using “Islam” you must replace “terrorism” with “freedom fighter”. Or… you could be a coward like me and refer to Arab sources:

http://www.hallindseyoracle.com/articles.asp?ArticleID=8115
Al-Rashed wrote in his daily column for the pan-Arab Asharq Al-Awsat newspaper:
Most perpetrators of suicide operations in buses, schools and residential buildings around the world for the past 10 years have been Muslims. Muslims will be unable to cleanse their image unless "we admit the scandalous facts," rather than offer condemnations or justifications.
Egypt's top cleric, Grand Sheik Mohammed Sayed Tantawi also spoke out against this latest outrage: "You are taking Islam as a cover and it is a deceptive cover; those who carry out the kidnappings are criminals, not Muslims."


--

[Adam]

What was the death toll in Rwanda? Three-quarters of a million civilians stabbed, hacked, clubbed, shot, raped, and in general screwed over? And you know how many people there are Muslims? One per cent.

Yeah, let's all stand in line for the Five Minute Hate session.

[JohnDubYa]

Try 14%. But I agree that Islam had nothing to do with the genocide. How that fact is relevant I am not sure.

[Adam]

Wasn't it terrorism? Surely the numbers make that a far larger example of terrorism than all the bus bombings combined?

SBS World Guide says 1%.
CIA says 4.6%: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/rw.html#People

[studentx]

Thank you, studentx, for finally coming out of the closet and showing your true colours. Given this little gem from you, it should allow readers to view your other posts in an appropriate light.

I always knew you had a problem interpreting the truth

[studentx]

Wasn't it terrorism? Surely the numbers make that a far larger example of terrorism than all the bus bombings combined?

SBS World Guide says 1%.
CIA says 4.6%: http://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/rw.html#People

God, you like to twist the truth dont you? If Rwanda is terrorism, then its not just the carbombs which add up to Islamic terrorism is it? Like i said, 2/3 of the worlds conflicts involve Islam, has it occurred to you that Rwanda is perhaps part of the other third?

[Adam]

Like i said, 2/3 of the worlds conflicts involve Islam,

No, they don't.

[studentx]

At least open your closet Adam, your no good blind.

[Adam]

Like i said, 2/3 of the worlds conflicts involve Islam,

Support the assertion.

[studentx]

What was the death toll in Rwanda? Three-quarters of a million civilians stabbed, hacked, clubbed, shot, raped, and in general screwed over? And you know how many people there are Muslims? One per cent.

Yeah, let's all stand in line for the Five Minute Hate session.

How is this relevant? Start a new thread about it if you have to, but stop derailing the topic.

[Hurkyl]

At least open your closet Adam, your no good blind.

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. I would have prompted you for a reference if Adam hadn't.

[Gokul43201]

oh really?
http://www.armscontrolcenter.org/terrorism/101/timeline.html

Ha ! That link proves my point. Before the 80s it lists a total of about 20 terrorist attacks against the US (starting from the 40s).

You have roughly that many attacks in Kashmir in one summer.

[studentx]

http://members.aol.com/CSPmgm/current.htm
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0904550.html
http://www.ndcf.org/Conflict_List/World2002/2002Conflictlist.htm
http://faculty.ncwc.edu/toconnor/areas/worldconflicts.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/curr_war.htm
http://www.cdi.org/dm/2003/dm1-2003.pdf

[Hurkyl]

I haven't had time to really dig into your links, but if your basing your statement that "2/3 of the worlds conflicts involve Islam" on a worldview like that in http://www.religioustolerance.org/curr_war.htm , then it's almost tautological. In particular, it doesn't suggest that Islam is a particularly violent religion.

Drastically oversimplifying to demonstrate the idea, if there are three bodies that participate in wars, then there are three possible ways they can conflict: A vs B, A vs C, and B vs C. If you further assume that all conflicts are really between these three bodies, then you expect each of the bodies to be a participant in 2/3 of all conflicts. More, if you mix in A vs B vs C. (less if you permot A vs A type wars)

[Adam]

Ah, studentx, did you actually read those links? They don't support your assertion. In fact they support an opposing view.

[Smurf]

Aye, The impression I got was that christians are real bastards.

[Gokul43201]

Smurf, I'm sure we shouldn't go about making such blatantly provocative statements in a discussion forum.

If the intent of that post is truly non-inflammatory, would you care to back up the need for such a gross generalization ? Else, tone down the language a few notches.

[Adam]

Just check out the religions involved in the wars listed on the sites studentx provided. A lot of alleged christians running around killing people. I suspect they have some sort of global brotherhood mindset, and one of them should apologise and announce a new, peaceful direction for the whole.

PS: There is a little sarcasm involved here.

[phatmonky]

Ha ! That link proves my point. Before the 80s it lists a total of about 20 terrorist attacks against the US (starting from the 40s).

You have roughly that many attacks in Kashmir in one summer.

Well I guess you did make your statement in a very subject way. Fairly recent could be 80's forward I guess

[studentx]

Just check out the religions involved in the wars listed on the sites studentx provided. A lot of alleged christians running around killing people. I suspect they have some sort of global brotherhood mindset, and one of them should apologise and announce a new, peaceful direction for the whole.


Whens the last time a christian, hindu or buddist blew himself up, carbombed buildings and schoolbuses, beheaded foreigners, flew planes into buildings, blew up passenger filled jets, slaughtered entire schools, while praising god, IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES?

How do you explain the superstring of terror attacks carried out by almost exclusively muslims, Adam?

[Adam]

A couple of years ago an American christian anti-abortion nutter flew to Australia and shot people in a medical clinic.

[studentx]

evading my questions again.

[russ_watters]

A couple of years ago an American christian anti-abortion nutter flew to Australia and shot people in a medical clinic. So, you're saying you agree that its pretty rare compared to Islamic terrorism?

[GENIERE]

Russ_Waters – Methinks your going to be attacked by 50 irrelevant links.

[JohnDubYa]

Geniere really goes out on a limb. Nostradamus lives!!

[Gokul43201]

I looked through all those links and still can't find where it says that Islamic terrorists are a minority among the terror community.

[Adam]

I coulen't be bothered searching for numbers now. However, I recall a while ago I searched for numbers on christian whackos killing their kids in "exorcisms" in the USA, and it happens on average about once per fortnight.

Anyone got any numbers handy regarding christian pro-life nutters murdering doctors?

[studentx]

I coulen't be bothered searching for numbers now. However, I recall a while ago I searched for numbers on christian whackos killing their kids in "exorcisms" in the USA, and it happens on average about once per fortnight.

Anyone got any numbers handy regarding christian pro-life nutters murdering doctors?

Adam, its time to embrace the truth, this is getting us nowhere. We all know it has been mostly, almost exclusively extremist muslims comitting international terror attacks with the purpose of collapsing the non muslim world and the increase in attacks the last few years are NOT not a problem. You dont like the truth, neither do i, but lying to muslims and telling them evrything is fine is not how you should treat your equals.

[Adam]

Now, I'll be careful to avoid an ad hominem here. I won't say anything about a person. However, some of the assertions and ridiculous statements around here make me think that we really do need a lifeguard or two around the gene pool. The sheer stupidity involved in some of the posts I read here is so monomentally ludicrous that I'm left questioning how the authors can possibly even type on a computer. Actually, I'm surprised they can feed themselves and survive long enough to find a computer.

Now, to the links I did not supply earlier, as I was waiting for my dinner to finish cooking...

http://www.campusprogram.com/reference/en/wikipedia/e/ex/exorcism.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/20/national/main594278.shtml
http://www.holysmoke.org/cos/death-exorcism.htm
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3179789.stm
http://www.jcnot4me.com/Items/cults/victims_of_religion.htm
http://www.google.com.au/search?q=exorcism+child+killed&btnG=Search&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&safe=off

I'll go through here (http://www.ncjrs.org/statwww.html) later for more.

[Hurkyl]

We all know

I don't; I haven't seen figures that support this.

[Gokul43201]

From the US State Dept. : http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/news/2004/05/sec-040521-usia01.htm

Terrorist Exclusion List Designees (alphabetical listing)

-- Afghan Support Committee (a.k.a. Ahya ul Turas)

-- Al Taqwa Trade, Property and Industry Company Ltd. (f.k.a. Himmat Establishment)

-- Al-Hamati Sweets Bakeries

-- Al-Ittihad al-Islami (AIAI)

-- Al-Ma unah

-- Al-Nur Honey Center

-- Al-Rashid Trust

-- Al-Shifa Honey Press for Industry and Commerce

-- Al-Wafa al-Igatha al-Islamia

-- Alex Boncayao Brigade (ABB)

-- Anarchist Faction for Overthrow

-- Army for the Liberation of Rwanda (ALIR)

-- Asbat al-Ansar

-- Babbar Khalsa International

-- Bank Al Taqwa Ltd.

-- Black Star

-- Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)

-- Continuity Irish Republican Army (CIRA) (a.k.a. Continuity Army Council)

-- Darkazanli Company

-- Dhamat Houmet Daawa Salafia

-- Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement

-- First of October Antifascist Resistance Group (GRAPO)

-- Harakat ul Jihad i Islami (HUJI)

-- International Sikh Youth Federation

-- Islamic Army of Aden

-- Islamic Renewal and Reform Organization

-- Jamiat al-Ta awun al-Islamiyya

-- Jamiat ul-Mujahideen (JUM)

-- Japanese Red Army (JRA)

-- Jaysh-e-Mohammed

-- Jayshullah

-- Jerusalem Warriors

-- Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LET) (a.k.a. Army of the Righteous)

-- Libyan Islamic Fighting Group

-- Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF)

-- Makhtab al-Khidmat

-- Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group

-- Nada Management Organization (f.k.a. Al Taqwa Management Organization SA)

-- New People's Army (NPA)

-- Orange Volunteers (OV)

-- People Against Gangsterism and Drugs (PAGAD)

-- Red Brigades-Combatant Communist Party (BR-PCC)

-- Red Hand Defenders (RHD)

-- Revival of Islamic Heritage Society (Pakistan and Afghanistan offices -- Kuwait office not designated)

-- Revolutionary Proletarian Nucleus

-- Revolutionary United Front (RUF)

-- Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC)

-- The Allied Democratic Forces (ADF)

-- The Islamic International Brigade

-- The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA)

-- The Pentagon Gang

-- The Riyadus-Salikhin Reconnaissance and Sabotage Battalion of Chechen Martyrs

-- The Special Purpose Islamic Regiment

-- Tunisian Combat Group (a.k.a. Jama a Combattante Tunisien)

-- Turkish Hizballah

-- Ulster Defense Association (a.k.a. Ulster Freedom Fighters)

-- Ummah Tameer E-Nau (UTN)

-- Youssef M. Nada & Co. Gesellschaft M.B.H.

Summary : A little more than 60% are Islamic groups. Whenever the name was not suggestive of religious orientation, I've assumed non-Islamic.

[studentx]

Have you seen the news lately? Beslan , two passenger jets, subway suicidebomber, Jakarta carbomb. And thats just the past few weeks, and just russia.

[Hurkyl]

Have you seen the news lately? Beslan , two passenger jets, subway suicidebomber, Jakarta carbomb. And thats just the past few weeks, and just russia.

Have you heard about selective reporting, selective memory, and forgetfulness?

If your assertion was so obvious, it should be easy to drum up figures.

[Adam]

1) Define the period of time over which you are asserting that Islam is behind the greater mount of wars and terrorism and such.

2) Add up the numbers.

3) Show us.

Hint: For your own benefit, start after about 1950.

[Gokul43201]

wars and terrorism and such.

Too much fudge factor there. I thought this was strictly about terrorism. Whether war is justified or not is debatable.

[studentx]

From the US State Dept. : http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/library/news/2004/05/sec-040521-usia01.htm

Terrorist Exclusion List Designees (alphabetical listing)

-- Afghan Support Committee (a.k.a. Ahya ul Turas)

-- Al Taqwa Trade, Property and Industry Company Ltd. (f.k.a. Himmat Establishment)

-- Al-Hamati Sweets Bakeries

-- Al-Ittihad al-Islami (AIAI)

-- Al-Ma unah

-- Al-Nur Honey Center

-- Al-Rashid Trust

-- Al-Shifa Honey Press for Industry and Commerce

-- Al-Wafa al-Igatha al-Islamia

-- Alex Boncayao Brigade (ABB)

-- Anarchist Faction for Overthrow

-- Army for the Liberation of Rwanda (ALIR)

-- Asbat al-Ansar

-- Babbar Khalsa International

-- Bank Al Taqwa Ltd.

-- Black Star

-- Communist Party of Nepal (Maoist)

-- Continuity Irish Republican Army (CIRA) (a.k.a. Continuity Army Council)

-- Darkazanli Company

-- Dhamat Houmet Daawa Salafia

-- Eastern Turkistan Islamic Movement

-- First of October Antifascist Resistance Group (GRAPO)

-- Harakat ul Jihad i Islami (HUJI)

-- International Sikh Youth Federation

-- Islamic Army of Aden

-- Islamic Renewal and Reform Organization

-- Jamiat al-Ta awun al-Islamiyya

-- Jamiat ul-Mujahideen (JUM)

-- Japanese Red Army (JRA)

-- Jaysh-e-Mohammed

-- Jayshullah

-- Jerusalem Warriors

-- Lashkar-e-Tayyiba (LET) (a.k.a. Army of the Righteous)

-- Libyan Islamic Fighting Group

-- Loyalist Volunteer Force (LVF)

-- Makhtab al-Khidmat

-- Moroccan Islamic Combatant Group

-- Nada Management Organization (f.k.a. Al Taqwa Management Organization SA)

-- New People's Army (NPA)

-- Orange Volunteers (OV)

-- People Against Gangsterism and Drugs (PAGAD)

-- Red Brigades-Combatant Communist Party (BR-PCC)

-- Red Hand Defenders (RHD)

-- Revival of Islamic Heritage Society (Pakistan and Afghanistan offices -- Kuwait office not designated)

-- Revolutionary Proletarian Nucleus

-- Revolutionary United Front (RUF)

-- Salafist Group for Call and Combat (GSPC)

-- The Allied Democratic Forces (ADF)

-- The Islamic International Brigade

-- The Lord's Resistance Army (LRA)

-- The Pentagon Gang

-- The Riyadus-Salikhin Reconnaissance and Sabotage Battalion of Chechen Martyrs

-- The Special Purpose Islamic Regiment

-- Tunisian Combat Group (a.k.a. Jama a Combattante Tunisien)

-- Turkish Hizballah

-- Ulster Defense Association (a.k.a. Ulster Freedom Fighters)

-- Ummah Tameer E-Nau (UTN)

-- Youssef M. Nada & Co. Gesellschaft M.B.H.

Summary : A little more than 60% are Islamic groups. Whenever the name was not suggestive of religious orientation, I've assumed non-Islamic.

Did you miss this?

[Adam]

You mean The Pentagon Gang?

[Gokul43201]

You mean The Pentagon Gang?

Pentagon Gang - a Filipino terrorist group that broke away from the Moro Islamic Liberation Front in 2001 in order to continue terrorism and kidnapping and extortion.

[Hurkyl]

Did you miss this?

First off, I don't suppose you could, y'know, sort them into Islamic terrorist groups and non-Islamic terrorist groups?


Secondly, why is it reasonable to think this is a complete list?


Thirdly, I thought your claim was "2/3 of the worlds conflicts involve Islam", not "2/3 of terrorist groups are Islamic".


Fourthly, what bearing does "2/3 of the worlds conflicts involve Islam" on "Islam is the problem"?

[Adam]

The other Pentagon Gang. :P

[Gokul43201]

First off, I don't suppose you could, y'know, sort them into Islamic terrorist groups and non-Islamic terrorist groups?

Probably not. But this surely is suggestive.


Secondly, why is it reasonable to think this is a complete list?

Maybe not, but it doesn't seem unreasonable that the distribution is representative of any 'complete list'.


Thirdly, I thought your claim was "2/3 of the worlds conflicts involve Islam", not "2/3 of terrorist groups are Islamic".

I guess that was the original claim. But it is also one that is a little hard to provide quantitative proof of. The provided list supports that claim, but does not prove it. Anyway, I think the fraction "that involved Islam" would be close to the fraction "that are Islamic". The ideology of most Islamic groups is based on (their interpretation of) Islam.

On the other hand, training and recruiting infrastructure has been established so well by Islamic groups that many other groups use/borrow from this infrastructure. So there is greater influence than just incidents that involve Islam.


Fourthly, what bearing does "2/3 of the worlds conflicts involve Islam" on "Islam is the problem"?

When two things have a large correlation coefficient, that is cause to suspect that one has a bearing on the other.

(I'm not claiming that Islam is the problem. But surely, it is being interpreted/twisted in a manner that lends to terror recruitment. And it presumably doesn't have strong enough things to say against terror, or more religious groups would be publicly denouncing these acts.)

[Hurkyl]

Probably not. But this surely is suggestive.

I asked becuase, presumably, studentx thinks there are a good number of them (60%) for which it is obvious that they are Islamic. Since I don't share his alledged ability to pick out Islamic terrorist groups by their name, I was hoping he could do it for me.


Maybe not, but it doesn't seem unreasonable that the distribution is representative of any 'complete list'.

There are various reasons to think it may not be representative. This list would presumably exclude any local terrorist group, and be less likely to include groups based in more friendly nations. Presumably, the list would also be heavily biased to contain organizations likely to carry out attacks against the USA. The list would also be more likely to include groups that are openly terrorist.


Anyway, I think the fraction "that involved Islam" would be close to the fraction "that are Islamic".

I don't think there's a strong corrolation; I would expect some terrorist groups to be far more active than other groups, and since we're working with a fairly small sample space, there isn't a strong probability that the proportion of Islamic terrorist activities would be near equal to the proportion of Islamic terrorist groups.


When two things have a large correlation coefficient, that is cause to suspect that one has a bearing on the other.

I mentioned in a previous post how, even if correct, that this 2/3 figure should actually be interpreted as a normal value as opposed to an extreme. If 2/3 of conflicts involve Islam, then I would expect 1/3 of aggression to be Islamic. With one quarter of the world's population being Islamic, and the relative impreciseness of this entire analysis, I don't find the number to be significant at all.

[Gokul43201]

I asked becuase, presumably, studentx thinks there are a good number of them (60%) for which it is obvious that they are Islamic. Since I don't share his alledged ability to pick out Islamic terrorist groups by their name, I was hoping he could do it for me.

Actually, I made that claim, not Studentx. So here's my explanation.

If the name includes 'Islamic' or 'Islam' or 'Islamiyah', then I consider the group Islamic. Likewise for words like 'Mujahideen', 'Mujahid" , 'Jaysh', 'Jihad', etc. I also know that LeT, al-Ansar, Salafiyah, Hizballah and the Chechen Martyrs are all Islamic groups. These make up about 50%. The remaining 13% or so are Arabic names that I guessed had a high likelyhood of being Islamic. There are a couple (Darkazanli and Pentagon Gang, maybe more) of groups that are Islamic, but do not have Arabic names, and I did not count these in my estimate.

[studentx]

You forgot ''ummah" (the muslim world). It misses Al Quaeda tho.
Now, can anyone name a terrorist attack in this year, from atheists, christians, hindus, buddists or perhaps shaolin monks?

[Gokul43201]

Hmmm, I (incorrectly, it seems) guessed that Ummah was some form of the Arabic word umm meaning 'mother'. I know this because Saddam Hussein supposedly refered to the first Gulf War as umm al maarek, "the mother of all battles".

[Adam]

You forgot ''ummah" (the muslim world). It misses Al Quaeda tho.
Now, can anyone name a terrorist attack in this year, from atheists, christians, hindus, buddists or perhaps shaolin monks?

Basque separatists in Spain. Christians in Sudan. Christians in the USA. Drug monkeys all over Central America and South America. Two idiots in Sydney who painted the Opera House.

Really, a detailed list is going to take a very long time.

[studentx]

Basque separatists in Spain. Christians in Sudan. Christians in the USA. Drug monkeys all over Central America and South America. Two idiots in Sydney who painted the Opera House.

Really, a detailed list is going to take a very long time.

Even tho you didnt answer my question, ill continue. Lets suppose for one second, that all these non-muslim terrorists share one common denominator; They are all drug users, and they all chant "drugs are great" when comitting their terrorist attacks.
Isnt it stupendously foolish to turn a blind eye to this common denominator?

[Adam]

The problem you're missing is this: there isn't such a common factor. They are not all, as you suggest, Muslims.

[studentx]

The problem you're missing is this: there isn't such a common factor. They are not all, as you suggest, Muslims.

I wasnt suggesting all terrorists are muslims. I suggest you reread my last question

[Adam]

Let me quote you:

Islam is the problem, two thirds of the worlds conflicts involve Islam, and today it almost has a monopoly when it comes to terrorism.

[russ_watters]

I coulen't be bothered searching for numbers now. However, I recall a while ago I searched for numbers on christian whackos killing their kids in "exorcisms" in the USA, and it happens on average about once per fortnight. edit: the goggle with one from this year was the first I'd ever heard of. In any case, thats not terrorism. Its not relevant to this discussion.Anyone got any numbers handy regarding christian pro-life nutters murdering doctors? AFAIK, its been several years since the last one.

Also, these are individuals, not organizations and. The closest thing we have to terrorist organizations in the US is a few radical environmentalist groups. Also, they are domestic only. Prior to 9/11, the worst domestic terrorist act (caveat: McVeigh would say he was fighting against the government) was the Oaklahoma City Federal Building bombing - politicaly motivated and having nothing to do with religion.

So then, we are still in agreement that its pretty rare?

[Adam]

How is it not terrorism, when people murder other people like that? And all of them are members of organisations which preach the stuff those people used as their justifications.

[russ_watters]

How is it not terrorism, when people murder other people like that? And all of them are members of organisations which preach the stuff those people used as their justifications. :confused: :confused: Are you saying you consider all murder terrorism? You seem confused about just what "terrorism" is. Or is an excorsim terrorism because its an attempt to intimidate Satan? :rofl:

[Adam]

What do you consider terrorism?

[russ_watters]

What do you consider terrorism? You posted the definition in a new thread and I agree with it. Killing your own children accidentally in an exorcism certainly does not qualify.

So what do you consider terrorism.

[Adam]

n : the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear

Sure it qualifies.

[russ_watters]

Sure it qualifies. Uh, where is the violence (and calculation) if the parents didn't intend to injure or kill the kid? Who are they trying to intimidate? What is the political/religous goal of the intimidation? No, Adam, you're mis-applying the definition pretty blatantly. You can't just chop out the parts of the definition that don't fit in order to apply it selectively - you change the whole meaning of the word.

[Adam]

Did you not read those things about the exorcisms? They beat, drown, strangle, stab, and do other things to the kids. How is that not violence?

The religious/idealogical goal is to rid the kid of demons, by death if necessary.

[studentx]

Let me quote you:

Well, where is the quote of me saying all terrorists are muslims?

[studentx]

Did you not read those things about the exorcisms? They beat, drown, strangle, stab, and do other things to the kids. How is that not violence?

The religious/idealogical goal is to rid the kid of demons, by death if necessary.

According to your definition of terrorism, the sharia law dictates that muslims need to terrorize adulterers and women that dont wear hijabs and countless others.
Which religion is behind the 10 largest terror attacks in recent history? I could probably ask you which one is behind the 50 largest attacks, and the answer would remain the same.

[Adam]

According to your definition of terrorism, the sharia law dictates that muslims need to terrorize adulterers and women that dont wear hijabs and countless others.

Shariah law is f***ing insane, and needs to be crushed.


Which religion is behind the 10 largest terror attacks in recent history? I could probably ask you which one is behind the 50 largest attacks, and the answer would remain the same.
Name your expanse of time for which you're asking.

[studentx]

Shariah law is f***ing insane, and needs to be crushed.

Sharia law is part of Islam.

Name your expanse of time for which you're asking.

How about the last 10yrs.

[Adam]

Sharia law is part of Islam.

That's like saying the death penalty in the USA is part of christianity.

Shariah is not part of the legal system in every predominantly Muslim country, nor is it the same in every such country.


How about the last 10yrs.

Last ten years:
Twin Towers in New York, 2001: nearly 3,000 dead. Perpetrators: Muslims.
Invasion of Iraq, 2003: 10,000 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Christians.
Rwanda: 800,000 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Christians.
Breakup of Yugoslavia: 300,000 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Christians.
Oklahoma city bombing: 168 dead. Perpetrators: Christians.
Various US embassies in Africa: 224 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Muslims. (Note that this is actually several events.)
Indonesian crisis, 1999: 200,000 displaced, unknown dead. Perpetrators: mostly Muslims.
Bali nightclub bombing: 200 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Muslims.
Sudan: 30,000 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Muslims, although conflict is based more on tribal affiliation than religion.
Russian school, 2004: 326 dead. Perpetrators: Responsibility claimed by Chechen separatists.

Looks like Muslims are behind half, in this count. Perhaps you can find another list of people targeting civilians and come up with a different count.

Now, if you go by numbers of people killed, however, Christians are far in the lead for bodycount.

[Adam]

Don't you just love how certain users have turned this thread, too, into a "Muslims are bad, mmkay" thread?

[russ_watters]

Last ten years:[numbers added]
1. Twin Towers in New York, 2001: nearly 3,000 dead. Perpetrators: Muslims.
2. Invasion of Iraq, 2003: 10,000 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Christians.
3. Rwanda: 800,000 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Christians.
4. Breakup of Yugoslavia: 300,000 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Christians.
5. Oklahoma city bombing: 168 dead. Perpetrators: Christians.
6. Various US embassies in Africa: 224 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Muslims. (Note that this is actually several events.)
7. Indonesian crisis, 1999: 200,000 displaced, unknown dead. Perpetrators: mostly Muslims.
8. Bali nightclub bombing: 200 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Muslims.
9. Sudan: 30,000 dead. Perpetrators: mostly Muslims, although conflict is based more on tribal affiliation than religion.
10. Russian school, 2004: 326 dead. Perpetrators: Responsibility claimed by Chechen separatists.

Looks like Muslims are behind half, in this count. Perhaps you can find another list of people targeting civilians and come up with a different count.
Well, if you fix the factual errors in your list, it tells a different story:

#2 was a war, not terrorism.
#3 is genocide, not terrorism, and its tribal/ethnicly motivated - Christianity has no role.
#4 This is/was ethnicly based, not religious based, also not terrorism.
#5 This was political, not religious terrorism.
#7 Not terrorism, but there are plenty of islamic terrorists operating there - I'll throw you a bone on that one.
#9 Correct - not terrorism
#10 Chechen terrorists are muslim and religiously motivated.

So, from your list, thats 4 muslim terrorist acts, one domestic political terrorist act, and zero christian terrorist acts.Don't you just love how certain users have turned this thread, too, into a "Muslims are bad, mmkay" thread? That's not what we're saying at all.

[Adam]

Russ, when you attack civilians for some political, religious, or idealogical goal, that's terrorism.

[JohnDubYa]

Terrorism implies that the killing of civilians is used to extort political gains. The Genocide, for example, was not terrorism, because Hitler was not using the threat of killing Jews to extort political gains from his enemies. That doesn't lessen the evilness of his actions, but it does alter the categorization.

Civilians die in just about every war. Using your definition, every battle would be terrorist activity.

[Adam]

This is why I supplied definitions, once again.

http://physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=42966

[JohnDubYa]

Hmmm.............

The unlawful use or threatened use of force or violence by a person or an organized group against people or property with the intention of intimidating or coercing societies or governments, often for ideological or political reasons.

n : the calculated use of violence (or threat of violence) against civilians in order to attain goals that are political or religious or ideological in nature; this is done through intimindation or coercion or instilling fear

[russ_watters]

Russ, when you attack civilians for some political, religious, or idealogical goal, that's terrorism. That's correct. I fixed your list accordingly. I knew you wouldn't mind. :tongue2:

[studentx]

That's like saying the death penalty in the USA is part of christianity.

Shariah is not part of the legal system in every predominantly Muslim country, nor is it the same in every such country.

Sharia IS part of Islam.

Don't you just love how certain users have turned this thread, too, into a "Muslims are bad, mmkay" thread?

Umm, youre the one saying that part of the Islamic religion needs to be crushed.

[The Green Giant]

Well if war and these terorists are so horrible, why do we not blame cars for anything. More people died in 2002 car accidents in the US than the number of people who died in Vietnam, both US and Other. Not to mention 17 million who were injured, and the 10 or so million seriously so.

So is a drunk driver a terrorist, because he kills, or atleast terrorizes people right?

[JohnDubYa]

No, for obvious reasons. Think about it.

[russ_watters]

So is a drunk driver a terrorist, because he kills, or atleast terrorizes people right? A drunk driver (who kills somene) is a murderer, not a terrorist. Again, not all murder is terrorism.

[maps]

A drunk driver (who kills somene) is a murderer, not a terrorist. Again, not all murder is terrorism.
But all terrorism is murder. So, by inference, all terrorists are murderers. Quid pro quo?

[studentx]

But all terrorism is murder. So, by inference, all terrorists are murderers. Quid pro quo?

Sure terrorists are murderers. But its the ppl that survive who suffer from the terrorism, and i just dont go around the hood scared ****less of drunk drivers or cars.

[russ_watters]

But all terrorism is murder. So, by inference, all terrorists are murderers. Quid pro quo? Quid pro quo isn't the right phrase there. You're looking for something that says if all terrorists are murderers, all murderers are terrorists. Sorry, but it just ain't so any more than saying all football players are athletes means all athletes are football players.

[Smurf]

Don't you just love how certain users have turned this thread, too, into a "Muslims are bad, mmkay" thread?

Love the way they're doing that on all these threads.