Brave Islamic warriors behead another American

Grey Area

Well I am not a Christian so you can defend it. I only know that these thugs as you call them are Muslims and they are advocating the murder of non-Muslims and quoting Islamic material. Now I don’t speak Arabic but I have read a little about Islam and many statements are made about Christians and Jews and others and the essential message is if you can’t convert them to Islam, then kill them. Many of the officials of Islam preach violence on a daily basis. Facts are facts.

I think you are a little out of date when you have to refer to the KKK. Surely you can do better than that and give us something more current.

Flood

Snapper may be a little fuzzy about Canadian versus U.S. geography. It seems to be common among some Brits and I think it’s the relative size of Canada versus the UK that puts them off stride. 😉 You on the other hand being expert all all thing would never mistake a Canadian for an American would you. :rolleyes:

Sauron

Thing is though they also advocate the murder of Muslims if they are deemed to be slightly friendly to non muslims or have had occasion to speak to non muslims. Put simply nobody is safe and ironically muslims are the least safe out of all of us because they are the ones stuck in the middle and threatened from all sides.

Correct, Geforce in the sense that there was no Church Army per se. As you rightly say, the Church could – and did – hire mercenaries to overthrow “heretical” leaders who refused to toe the “party” line. And they’re still around to this day in the form of the Swiss Guards who, in addition to their ceremonial duties, are a small but “serious” armed security force.

Since these forces were under the exclusive command of the Pope or his delegated authority it is reasonable to refer to them as an army, although I do accept your point that there was no standing army as such. I don’t suppose it made all that much difference to whoever was on the receiving end, though!

In 1527 the German/Spanish Emperor Charles V used his troops to occupy and destroy Rome (sacco di Roma) and I think that meant the end of the Pope’s military adventures. However, the pope could still influence the kings like during the spanish inquisition.

And it did matter. Even long after the middle ages, a blessing from the pope could mean a military victory or defeat. Luckily for us the pope backed the spanish back in 1585 otherwise my name would be Dutchie or Arthur and I would be walking around in Portugal dressed in that afwul colour :p

So far this thread about useless historical facts

Correct, Geforce in the sense that there was no Church Army per se. As you rightly say, the Church could – and did – hire mercenaries to overthrow “heretical” leaders who refused to toe the “party” line. And they’re still around to this day in the form of the Swiss Guards who, in addition to their ceremonial duties, are a small but “serious” armed security force.

Since these forces were under the exclusive command of the Pope or his delegated authority it is reasonable to refer to them as an army, although I do accept your point that there was no standing army as such. I don’t suppose it made all that much difference to whoever was on the receiving end, though!

One of the big differences between Christianity and Islam (and Judaism, for that matter) is the concept of an individual leadership figure and focus of authority.

While most Christian sects have an identifiable focus of leadership and guidance – eg, the Pope, the Archbishop of Canterbury, etc – Islam simply does not have this structure. This makes it particularly vulnerable to lunatics who wish to preach their own twisted interpretation of Koran and Shari’a – there’s no authoritative figure to “slap them down”, as it were.

Alas, there is no shortage of people, of whatever religion, who are willing to commit atrocities in the name of their God.

I wish I knew what it is you’re trying to say, Vortex………

Damm right . I guess these are the fundamentals of the problem.

Correct, Geforce in the sense that there was no Church Army per se. As you rightly say, the Church could – and did – hire mercenaries to overthrow “heretical” leaders who refused to toe the “party” line. And they’re still around to this day in the form of the Swiss Guards who, in addition to their ceremonial duties, are a small but “serious” armed security force.

Since these forces were under the exclusive command of the Pope or his delegated authority it is reasonable to refer to them as an army, although I do accept your point that there was no standing army as such. I don’t suppose it made all that much difference to whoever was on the receiving end, though!

I’m starting to get HIGHLY disgusted with the leaders of Islam for their lack of ffort

One of the big differences between Christianity and Islam (and Judaism, for that matter) is the concept of an individual leadership figure and focus of authority.

While most Christian sects have an identifiable focus of leadership and guidance – eg, the Pope, the Archbishop of Canterbury, etc – Islam simply does not have this structure. This makes it particularly vulnerable to lunatics who wish to preach their own twisted interpretation of Koran and Shari’a – there’s no authoritative figure to “slap them down”, as it were.

Alas, there is no shortage of people, of whatever religion, who are willing to commit atrocities in the name of their God.

I wish I knew what it is you’re trying to say, Vortex………

I know muslims–quite a few. I am very aware of the fact that the terrorists do not represent muslims in general. Most of the muslims I know are some of the nicest people on earth, and they make a point of showing that terrosists are not representative of their religion.

unfortuntaly, we all too often see muslims dancing in the streets after an attack. The Neighborhood in Paterson NJ, where several of the 9-11 hijackers lived prior to the attacks, erupted in celebratuion when the towers fell. Palestinians cheered ad danced with the news, Muslims all over rejoiced when this guy got his throat cut.

While >I< know they are not representing ALL muslims, they are sure as heck making it look like it.

I ask, where the HE** is a muslim representative, a significant leader in the muslim world? Why are they NOt speaking out against this? Why has a group of muslim leaders nOT come forth to reject terror and murder?

It seems the ONLY muslims who actually reject the killings of hostages are Iraqis, every time an Egyptian or Saudi, or Jordanian is interviewed, they justify it.

I want to see very prominent muslims, in groups, denounce these attacks.
I’m starting to get HIGHLY disgusted with the leaders of Islam for their lack of ffort.

Seriously, after the prision photos, the PRESIDENT denounced it. People are being murdered,a nd nobody rejects it?

I know enough to understand the most muslims are like most christians, but I cannot see how others can come to the same conclusion, when all they see is the negative, because the “majority of muslims” don’t reject the bad stuff…

[QUOTE=Grey Area
Excellent and perceptive posting, plawolf! As you rightly say, those who set out to demonise and/or dehumanise an opponent are always highly selective in what they quote.
QUOTE]

What irony :rolleyes: , surely you don’t know 😀 😀 😀

So Kfadrat, my old friend, you would criticise the whole of the US and UK for the actions of a few unsavoury characters in Abu Graib prison, but, think its vastly unfair if Sauron judges the whole Islamic faith on the behaviour of a worryingly-widespread, barbaric schism of Islam.

Smacks of double standards there perhaps?

NOPE, you got me wrong old friend, what I’m trying to say is that it is WRONG to generalize a certain feature on one nation if a few b@stards of that nation are infected with it.

I want Sauron to – finally – understand that each nation has it’s scum, INCLUDING Uncle Sam’s, he must wake up to the sad truth.

Still, at least Bliar (for all his faults) doesn’t move his priests out of town when the police start sniffing around.
Wasn’t there a problem in Chicago, not too long ago, with the police refused permission to interview priests accused of kiddie fiddling?

Flood.™

You won’t find the catholic church – for one – apologising for anything it was responsible for several centurys ago – it is bad enough trying to get it to own up to its paedophile priests of recent memory…

Flood.™

Well, if there’s a paedophile living in Britain I don’t see Tony Blair excusing do I? So why should the pope. These are individual cases, there might be a lot of them, but still, individual cases.

Ohh one last thing Grey Area, the pope didn’t actually have it’s own army. They were assigned to him by the German Emperor. However, at the time of the crusades, the Emperor was a weak and unimportant person compared to the pope. But there was no such thing as an organised army, mercenaries, and a whole lot of drunks, criminals … etc … I don’t think such thing as a national army existed before Louis XIV.

100% correct. But it would even be a mistake to blame everything on the church. As you said, anyone with enough ambition joined the crusades, even children. Apart from that, “the crusades” is not a war like WWII was. There were 8 large of them, with more than 200 years between. It was a time of mass-hysteria, where European rules battled against the Islam, but in the meanwhile kept fighting against eachother. So, very confusing if we have to remember each victim.

But even if “the gov’t” excused for these events, who can be helped? When the Belgian gov’t excused itself for the massacre in Ruanda (when we pulled back our troops) or the Dutch for Srebrenica, only some years ago, I keep asking the same question: “what does it matter?” Just politics, to shake hands, and we can get back to business?

You won’t find the catholic church – for one – apologising for anything it was responsible for several centurys ago – it is bad enough trying to get it to own up to its paedophile priests of recent memory…

Flood.™

Good point, Geforce. At the time of the Crusades, all European rulers were firmly subordinate to the Church which was, in effect, a kind of supra-national governing body that raised taxes and had it’s own army.. A very different proposition to the present-day Roman Catholic Church.

What the Church said, went – the threat of excommunication was real and serious since the crown and lands of an excommunicated ruler were up for grabs for anyone with ambition and enough mercenaries.

well im not sure about church organisations, but most western governments tend to hold the view that all that is in the past and has long been forgotten about. if there was a formal apology, i’ve never heard anything about it, maybe someone would care to fill me in if i have missed something.

Probably because most states have only been created 18/19th century, hundreds of years after the last crusade. By that time, states didn’t even exist, so why (and how) should “the gov’t” excuse. There’s a difference between the crusades and the nazi’s. Both were horrific, but for the latter the (then) German gov’t can be held responsable. But how on earth can France (or any other european country), which is since 2 centuries a secular state, be blaimed for these things. Maybe the EU could appologise, but even that would be historical bul**** since Lithuania (East-Prussia) has suffered as much from the Teutonian Knights as the ME.

The pope already excused for the crusades a couple of times during the 20th century.

I didn’t claims all Muslims are anything

There will be lots of joy throughout the Islamic world tonight.

We got two Saurons here?

BY767

I didn’t claims all Muslims are anything. Nor was I the one to bring the Nazis into the thread. Your post is not worth commenting on.

Regards

Sauron

Sauron,

Some people, especially those of Germany, may and I’m sure do find your postings on here offensive and somewhat racist to a point.

You appear to lack knowledge of many subjects you are talking about and quite frankly you ooze ignorence and don’t care about the feelings of others.

I’m quite surprised you have the cheek to post your views on here. Everyone has the right to say what they think and believe in but I think your views are so uneducated and stupid you shouldn’t bother even posting them on here. You seem just so easy to make generalisations of a country and nation, whether it’s Germans or people form Islamic places. You shouldn’t generelise anyone/thing.

Why don’t you just take a look back at some of your posts? Believe me, I’m not the sort of person to just call something racist for the sake of it!! I like in the UK where political corectness has gone completely OTT in my opinion so I’m just saying I don’t just call anyone racist for the sake of it like some ‘do-gooders’ do.

As for the KKK being so long ago it doesn’t matter, well just because it’s a long time ago doesn’t mean it’s not a valid point in the context.

So Kfadrat, my old friend, you would criticise the whole of the US and UK for the actions of a few unsavoury characters in Abu Graib prison, but, think its vastly unfair if Sauron judges the whole Islamic faith on the behaviour of a worryingly-widespread, barbaric schism of Islam.

Smacks of double standards there perhaps?

…Is it actually true that no European church organizations or governments have ever taken the initiative to express a formal apology for the atrocities committed during the Crusades? I’m simply speechless.

well im not sure about church organisations, but most western governments tend to hold the view that all that is in the past and has long been forgotten about. if there was a formal apology, i’ve never heard anything about it, maybe someone would care to fill me in if i have missed something.

I don’t understand what this Sauron figure is talking about!!! tell me dude … wheren’t you dancing the day all the attrocities in Abu Gareeb and guantanamo were uncovered??? say the truth once in your damned life, FYI SH|t happens, admit it, being an extreemist yourself all what you see is extreemism in everybody else, so if a few moslems out of 1500 million moslems committed a crime all moslems are killers and a crusade should be declared, right? well tell you something, your logic IS EXACTELLY THE SAME logic of Al Qaeda idiots … actually you’d make a very good one indeed, because they want all Americans dead for the crimes of a single Bush and Dumsfield … go figure it out.

Grey Area and Aries

Oh come on! David Duke! Most here were children when that idiot was taken seriously by anyone other than maybe his mother. You will have to do better than that.

As far as a the Nazi’s are concerned, were did the vast majority of Germans stand on the issue of extermination of the Jews not to mention others? They listened to Hitler and his madmen and what did they do about it? Nothing! They sat back and said nothing and have been making excuses for the last 60 yrs. So if you want to draw parallels between what happened then and the raving Islamic morons who preach hatred everyday in the M-E, then fine, but where do the majority of folks in the Islamic world stand? If they don’t support these idiots and the official bull-roar that is available for all to see from the M-E governments and the mullahs who spew out their weely hate, then let them speak. Let them show a little courage.

Calling others racist is to easy.

Sauron

:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Ohh yes, I bet you would also be couragious. Honestly, if your country has been bombed to pieces twice the past decade, do you really think these people in Iraq are so shocked about one American being decapitated. I was, for sure, but you have to see things in perspective. For the average Iraqi, after the horror of the last decades (sadam AND allies), this is not even worth mentioning.

On the german-nazi thing. Ever heard of the Milgram-experiment? Here’s a scientific explenation for what you describe as just sitting back. Never heard of the economic depression of the 30’s, the treaty of Versailles?

Also funny you’re talking about Islamic hatred, but, Islam and Christianity are very similar religions. It would be funny if GWB said “may Allah continue to bless America”.