Let\'s Kill All The Moslems Galloway on Lebanon
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=9071731896689197790&pr=goog-sl

Escalation of Hostilities in Middle East Who backs immediate ceasefire? http://www.independent.co.uk/multimedia/archive/00170/p1-210706_170715a.jpg
The Independent

Escalation of Hostilities in Middle East Re: # 43
Yes Arjun, that`s right. If you want to eliminate bank robbery, catching bank robbers will be a never-ending chase. Because no matter how many you round up, more will turn up as long there is poverty and injustice.

If the financial system of a country ensures that resources are equally distributed, bank robberies and other petty crimes will go down.

Compare the crime rate in a welfare state like the UK with that in the US.

Escalation of Hostilities in Middle East You cannot extinguish fire with more fire. If you want to wipe out a weed (terrorism) wipe out its roots (injustice).

Killing innocent civilians will only breed more militia, more bombers.

http://www.abouyounes.com/Lebanon18-07-2006.htm
Caution: graphic images.

Terrorism: Do you handle it as a crime or as a war or both? ++
Terrorism: Do you handle it as a crime or as a war or both?
++

The best way to handle fire is to remove the fuel. To handle terrorism address the injustices/grievances that turn a man into a terrorist.

Handling it as crime will not address the issue. Handling it as war will beget more terrorism.

Must Reads on the Middle East Personally, I would expect more logic and cool-headedness from a democratically elected parliament run by seasoned grey-haired politicians rather than a bunch of youth brought up on the street after having lost their family at the age of 11. Which party do you think is more prone to `brainwashing`?

Even if one of these fighters were to start thinking logically what political options do his occupiers give him? This applies to other occupied territories as well.

Must Reads on the Middle East #40 by mohar11
++
This should change.
++

Let me get this straight: you don`t like a Muslims calling thmselves an Ummah, you don`t want one sticking out for his brother.

But you have no problems when ``a palestinian is getting wrong end of the stick``?

Must Reads on the Middle East #39 by arjun_m

Thats exactly true: because anyone can be X you can fit anyone into the equation.

Answer a simple question:

Say a guy blows himself up killing many people at a resturant. Now which one of the following seems to be a logical and cool-headed step towards ensuring this never happens again:

A) Bull-dozing that guy`s house, killing his mother and daughter who couldnt move out in time and thus turning his son and brother into time-bombs.

B) Finding out what was bothering him so much that he chose to abandon his family and end his life, and solving that problem to make sure no one else takes this wrong and violent step again.

Don`t you think following (B) will ensure you a peaceful future?

`US, India and Israel`, being the innocent victims of senseless terrorism that they are, want their homes and businesses safe from the threat of terrorism. They should make sure the people who have turned violent get what is rightfully their`s.

++
you`ve just justified the clash of civilizations....
++

How can you still think the `clash` is yet to come?

#40 by mohar11
++
Why should muslims born and brought-up in UK fly a plane into buildings because a palestinian is getting wrong end of the stick?
++

Please read #38. And remember its not just Palestine; Bosnia, Chechnya, Afghanistan, Iraq, Guantanamo Bay, Gujrat, Kashmir and so on: I`d say that`s a lot of sticks and a lot of wrong ends.

++
Ummah is a fiction - it doesn`t exist.
++

Is it really? What`s all the hype about then?

++
Regarding your conclusion that muslilms behave like a group thats true, and is a good reason to keep them in check.
++
(Netizen, #34)

Must Reads on the Middle East #32 by Netizen
++
Hence unless and untill there is some level of trust and a committment to peace, its not going to stop.
++

Like I said before, you and I are thinking on the same lines. I also agree that no party is willing to step back from their current position. We both see the problem.

Where we differ is the solution: If we pat one party on the back and say `Go on son, you have every right to defend yourself` and handcuff the other and label hem as terrosrists and fanatics: how will that bring peace?

#34 by Netizen

++
These become a jihad only when the opponent is a non-muslim.
++

Let me give you a scenario, then I`ll come to the point you`ve put here.

Say you belonged to an ethnic/relgious group X and live in country C. Someone goes around killing/persecuting other members of X who live in countries A and B. I am sure you, in country C, will at some point think of the following, even if not in the same order:

* why are people being killed/persecuted in country A and B?
* why are these people members of group X only?
* so am I or my family next now in Country C?

You can fill in X with any proper name: not just Muslims, everyone will feel threatened if they are faced with the same circumstances.

Coming to your point: when a Muslim differs with a Muslim, the reasons are mainly political: they will choose the wrong path and fight and kill each other. Other (non-involved) Muslims don`t see this as a threat to their sovereignty as they know the issue is political and has nothing to do with their own ideology. What they will do is point out to each party their faults and tell them to stop fighting. However generally they will not get involved physically.

But when they see Non-Muslims (of different ethnic origins) attacking/terrorising Muslims at different points in time and space:they see a pattern; they do feel threatened. Hence the urge to step in and take action: legal and acceptable to the rest of the world or otherwise.


++
Because for them Allah matters more than motherland.
++
This always has been the case and it always will, I`m afraid.

Must Reads on the Middle East #28 by arjun_m

The Hutu and Tutsi conflict in Rwanda was a war between two nations. The Rwandans have no point to make if thery start blowing say the US citizens up in suicide attacks. The US did not do anything to suppress the right of any party.

The suicide bombers (that you do hear every other day) are `bothered` about how Muslims around the world are being dealt with: Afghanistan, Bosnia, Chechnya, Iraq, Kashmir, Palestine, and the list goes on. Muslims like to be recognised as a group wherever they live, despite the seemingly deep political divisions between them. You just cannot keep impaling one without hearing at least a moan from the other side.

++
Madrassahs in Pakistan funded by saudi arabia create the terrorists...time to shut them down..no indoctrination, no terrorists...
++

I don`t think anyone from Palestine is allowed to Pakistan or vice versa. Who`s sponsoring their desperate fight for justice? The IRA never had a local branch in Pakistan. They never recruited any Muslim teachers. Don`t believe the ETA was ever here either. Does that mean they can have `terrorists` off their list of attributes then?

And who trained the Mukti Bahini? (another example of terror breeded by injustice).

Rise and shine.

#29 by Netizen
++
There are excesses from both sides. Its a vicious cycle which will never end without firm commitment
++

Hear hear! Absolutely! I will never pat any suicide bomber on the back. Killing women and children (being done by both sides, mind you) is absolutely wrong.

But there is a basic flaw in trying to put fire out with more fire. Wouldn`t it be more logical to get rid of the fuel that ignites the hatred?

Must Reads on the Middle East #20 by arjun_m
I don`t think anyone believes the Saudis who were allegedly in the planes that brought the WTC down were protesting against anything happening in their owm country. Like you said:

++
a lot of these men were studying abroad.....
++

Could there be some international issues bothering them? Or is that too far from the sand for the learned head?

Killing the terrorist will only strengthen the resolve of others and make MORE terrorists. Address the route cause: solve the problems turning school children into suicide bombers. Give peace a chance.

#21 by Netizen
++
when you cannot win peace on your terms, it could lead to terrorism.
Also, when you cannot win conventionally, it could also cause terrorism.
++

Very true: when you cannot live on your terms in your own homeland, when you, a majority, are forced to live on the terms of a dictating minority: there is no way you can win peace on your own terms.

Convention just goes out of the window when your entire family goes to sleep one night and is bull-dozed or bombed into smitherines, unannounced.

Kind of unjust, don`t you think?

Must Reads on the Middle East #11 by arjun_m
+++
So poverty DOESN`T cause terrorism...It`s most Islamist indoctrination that creates terrorists....
+++

Here`s something you don`t know: Terrorism is born from the womb of INJUSTICE. If you dont like a tree, cutting its branches is not the solution; uproot it.

Regards.

Khamosh Pani Crosses the Border Noisily hear, hear! HP #97

Its amazing how selectively amnesic the world opinion is when it comes to Muslims being at the receiving end of `terrorism` especially in Secular democracies such as India. (I better go wash my mouth out with soap).

’NO’ to Ostentatious Displays and Wasteful Expenses I like the lines on which Salil Kader is thinking. The ordinance sets a good precedent for anyone to follow, either side of the border.

Must Reads on the Middle East +++
1. What Went Wrong: Western Impact and Middle East Response
2. Jihad vs McWorld: Terrorism`s Challenge to Democracy
3. Al-Qaeda, Casting a Shadow of Terror
4. Mullahs, Merchants and Militants: The Economic Collapse of the Arab World
+++

When I`m looking for an honest and unbiased views on the issue, these don`t exactly sound like the names I`ll be attracted to.

Would 30 January Elections Make or Break Iraq? well said hamidm2.

Mr Singh, I would rather have believed Saddam Hussain going for all out war against America because Musharraf likes dogs: your concocsion is a little harder to digest.

Sorry.