|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
Here's an interesting article that I just found. Essentially my argument, but better worded.
http://www.foreignaffairs.org/20060901facomment85501/john-mueller/is-there-still-a-terrorist-threat.html
| Quote: |
| If al Qaeda operatives are as determined and inventive as assumed, they should be here by now. If they are not yet here, they must not be trying very hard or must be far less dedicated, diabolical, and competent than the common image would suggest. |
| Quote: |
| Intelligence estimates in 2002 held that there were as many as 5,000 al Qaeda terrorists and supporters in the United States. However, a secret FBI report in 2005 wistfully noted that although the bureau had managed to arrest a few bad guys here and there after more than three years of intense and well-funded hunting, it had been unable to identify a single true al Qaeda sleeper cell anywhere in the country. |
The kickass conclusion:
| Quote: |
| Although it remains heretical to say so, the evidence so far suggests that fears of the omnipotent terrorist -- reminiscent of those inspired by images of the 20-foot-tall Japanese after Pearl Harbor or the 20-foot-tall Communists at various points in the Cold War (particularly after Sputnik) -- may have been overblown, the threat presented within the United States by al Qaeda greatly exaggerated. The massive and expensive homeland security apparatus erected since 9/11 may be persecuting some, spying on many, inconveniencing most, and taxing all to defend the United States against an enemy that scarcely exists. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
thepeel
Joined: 08 Aug 2004
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
Aren't you the only one who is talking about terrorism? Are you discussing terrorism with anybody, or just yourself?
Terrorism isn't the issue, but a symptom of the larger issue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007 Location: Nearly in NK
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 7:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
on the other hand, talks of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, how interesting.
A little history might help. First John D. Lee (the only one who paid) was the polygamous husband of some of the best friends of my great grandmother. I know that history well, both written and family tradition.
He quotes from an unkown source as follows:
"At the time, the Mormons were on a war-footing, and leaders like Brigham Young had instilled a culture of vengeance, fear and anger in their people."
The problem started with the President of the US. Buchanan sent an army of 5000 men to subdue the Mormons under Albert Sydney Johnson, later of Confederate fame, to do so. The Mormons defended themselves by non lethal guerrilla tactics and kept the army out of the valley until winter set in. The made a deal and allowed the army to come in. We fed the army and made them dependent on us. This was in 1857, the same year as the Massacre. The victims from the Fancher Train we mainly Missourians and Arkansans who the Mormons refused to sell supplies to. Nast comments were made and the battle was on. Most of those who did the massacre we Piaute Indians.
The Mormons had previously been driven from New York to Ohio, from Ohio to Missouri, from Missouri to Illinois and from Illinois right out of the US. When they arrived in Utah in 1847 it was part of Mexico. The too said: Never again. We were not pacifists.
We were there first and didn't have to supplicate to anyone but the Indians. They joined us becaue we treated them better than the US did. In the years since then those coming to Utah, SW Idaho, West Wyoming, parts or Arizona and Nevada have accomodated to us, not the other way around.
We eventually succumbed to the US in 1890 by giving up polygamy. This in itself is interesting Utah and Wyoming were the first areas in the US to grant women the vote. The US government disenfrachised the male Mormons over the polygamy issue and when they found that the women were voting "the Mormon party" disenfranchised them too.
Like many "converts" the Mormons are now the most Republican of all states.
huffdaddy:
Your positions are superficial at best and purile in substance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mithridates

Joined: 03 Mar 2003 Location: President's office, Korean Space Agency
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Videos don't work. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| contrarian wrote: |
on the other hand, talks of the Mountain Meadows Massacre, how interesting.
A little history might help. First John D. Lee (the only one who paid) was the polygamous husband of some of the best friends of my great grandmother. I know that history well, both written and family tradition.
He quotes from an unkown source as follows:
"At the time, the Mormons were on a war-footing, and leaders like Brigham Young had instilled a culture of vengeance, fear and anger in their people."
The problem started with the President of the US. Buchanan sent an army of 5000 men to subdue the Mormons under Albert Sydney Johnson, later of Confederate fame, to do so. The Mormons defended themselves by non lethal guerrilla tactics and kept the army out of the valley until winter set in. The made a deal and allowed the army to come in. We fed the army and made them dependent on us. This was in 1857, the same year as the Massacre. The victims from the Fancher Train we mainly Missourians and Arkansans who the Mormons refused to sell supplies to. Nast comments were made and the battle was on. Most of those who did the massacre we Piaute Indians.
The Mormons had previously been driven from New York to Ohio, from Ohio to Missouri, from Missouri to Illinois and from Illinois right out of the US. When they arrived in Utah in 1847 it was part of Mexico. The too said: Never again. We were not pacifists.
We were there first and didn't have to supplicate to anyone but the Indians. They joined us becaue we treated them better than the US did. In the years since then those coming to Utah, SW Idaho, West Wyoming, parts or Arizona and Nevada have accomodated to us, not the other way around.
We eventually succumbed to the US in 1890 by giving up polygamy. This in itself is interesting Utah and Wyoming were the first areas in the US to grant women the vote. The US government disenfrachised the male Mormons over the polygamy issue and when they found that the women were voting "the Mormon party" disenfranchised them too.
Like many "converts" the Mormons are now the most Republican of all states.
huffdaddy:
Your positions are superficial at best and purile in substance. |
that's the great thing about history isn't it? Everyone can put their own spin on things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007 Location: Nearly in NK
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:49 am Post subject: |
|
|
bucheon:
Does that make you a revisionist? I admiited the accusation and gave the background. Does that make me one? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| BJWD wrote: |
Aren't you the only one who is talking about terrorism? Are you discussing terrorism with anybody, or just yourself?
Terrorism isn't the issue, but a symptom of the larger issue. |
So what issue do you believe is unique to Muslims? Islam certainly doesn't have a monopoly on crazy religious fanatics. What are you worried about? That women will be walking around in burkas? That pork will be banned from the grocery stores? I see a lot of bark, but no bite. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 4:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| contrarian wrote: |
huffdaddy:
Your positions are superficial at best and purile in substance. |
| Quote: |
No results found for purile.
Did you mean pu rile (in dictionary) or Puriel (in encyclopedia)? |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
On the other hand
Joined: 19 Apr 2003 Location: I walk along the avenue
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 8:52 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| contrarian wrote: |
bucheon:
Does that make you a revisionist? I admiited the accusation and gave the background. Does that make me one? |
No, but your arguments are pretty much the same ones that apologists for Muslim terrorists make. "Look, I don't support what happened on 9/11 of course, but you have to understand the social and political context in which these events occur. With all this aggression by the USA, no wonder the victims resort to such extreme tactics." And so on and so forth. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Woland
Joined: 10 May 2006 Location: Seoul
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| On the other hand wrote: |
| No, but your arguments are pretty much the same ones that apologists for Muslim terrorists make. "Look, I don't support what happened on 9/11 of course, but you have to understand the social and political context in which these events occur. With all this aggression by the USA, no wonder the victims resort to such extreme tactics." And so on and so forth. |
Just a minor quibble, but I think we need to distinguish between those using the word 'understand' to mean 'acknowledge and excuse' and those who really mean 'understand'. I count myself in the latter group. Really understanding other people's motivations, including motivations to do horrific things, shouldn't mean we excuse them. Instead, that kind of knowledge can help us move towards preventing what they might intend to do in the future. Keeping ourselves in willful ignorance and lashing out without need for understanding would likely cause as many problems as we might have had otherwise. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007 Location: Nearly in NK
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ah yes! The social context of Islamic terror.
Lets see.
1. Late 1800's Jews start coming from eastern Europe and other places to the "promised land" They join a few thousand who have always been there.
2. In 1917 the Brits are about broke, they get loans and the Jews get the Balfour declaration. The Arabs and particularly Haj Amin al Huseeini, the Mufti of Jerusalem, are outraged.
3. AntI Jewish terror breaks out the are riots etc. under the direction of the Haj Amin. These continue until about 1936 or 7. The Brits throw Haj Amins out and he goes to Nazi Germany and becomes an advisor to Eichman and Himmler.
4. WWII starts and the Jews supply a Brigade to fight with the Brits. Haj Amin raises several SS divisions for the Nazis in Bosnia.
5. Germany loses the war an pro Zionist Churchill loses an election. Thing heat up in the Holy land. The Brit Labour government changes course and backs the Arabs.
6. The Soviets and the US start to back the Jews. 1948/49 there's a war. The Arabs lose even though they outnumber and outgun the Jews. The Brits had left military stockpiles for the Arabs but the Jews got there first and took most of them. This is still called the catastrophe in Islam. The "warrior" Arabs had had their butts well kicked by the bookish Jews.
7. This affront to Arab pride lead to several more wars. 1956, 1967, 1973, the first invasion of Lebanon and the second one.
8. This failure of courage and ability caused the Arabs to renew the use of terror tactics. They continue to try for an all or nothing redeeming victory. They wind up with less each time. They are the authors of the own misfortune.
There's the background. Now is Israel and the wes going to bend over and grab our heels because they fell bad!
I don't think so. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
postfundie

Joined: 28 May 2004
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Huffdaddy,
The next time a plane is bombed by terrorists you should make sure to tell the families, that the plane could easily have been lost in a storm or that people die due to mechanical error.....The reason that there have not been successful attacks to date is because the poohhlice and authorities have thwarted them.....You use illegitimate fear as an excuse to not have a true concern about terrorism.....remember when the WTC was attacked in 93...guess what they tried again and this time they were more successful...
You lived in a Muslim country good for you! Did you notice how free it was for women and homosexuals and how just anybody could practice their religion freely or how women were free to marry non muslims but muslim men had to marry only muslims....??? How can you be so blind to Islamic theology...OH I remember because you can just point to some Christian problem as an excuse...that must be convenient...or give the tired excuse that it's only the extremists....Just how many Zen bombings have you seen lately??? How many Buddists are into bombing or forced marriages... Can you see any big difference here between the Buddha and Muhammed????? Now please go and find one or two waaay out there cases of buddhist violence then act as if it's the same thing...DD can probably help you.. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
contrarian
Joined: 20 Jan 2007 Location: Nearly in NK
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
People like Huffdaddy, mind me to and the oh so nice liberal folks are frightened to death that their comfortable little worlds and faulty preconceptions will fall if they acknowledge that some people and some beliefs, secular or religious are just plain wrong. Others though they may be right for us are the "enemy" to our way of life.
There is a Clash of Civilizations going on. At the present it is pretty much between Islam and the rest of the world.
A culture that is stuck in the middle ages and hasn't had a new idea since they started using the decimal number system is getting is figurative knickers in a twist and is making demands of the world. The crazies amoung them are downright dangerous. I don't care to understand them, or to feel their pain. I want to stop them.
We talk about winning their hearts and minds, and get side tracked into doing nothing except whine. If you want their hearts and minds, grab them firmly by the *beep*, squeeze hard and lead on. I can assure you their hearts and minds will follow. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ddeubel

Joined: 20 Jul 2005
|
Posted: Mon Jan 22, 2007 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
There is a Clash of Civilizations going on. At the present it is pretty much between Islam and the rest of the world.
A culture that is stuck in the middle ages and hasn't had a new idea since they started using the decimal number system is getting is figurative knickers in a twist and is making demands of the world. The crazies amoung them are downright dangerous. I don't care to understand them, or to feel their pain. I want to stop them. |
I think he is BJWD's double or half brother at the very least........
Please keep checking under your bed. I'll be busy throwing my lady up in delight. Who is scared of who here????
DD |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
Posted: Tue Jan 23, 2007 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| postfundie wrote: |
Huffdaddy,
The next time a plane is bombed by terrorists you should make sure to tell the families, that the plane could easily have been lost in a storm or that people die due to mechanical error.... |
Nice straw boogey man. Why don't we ban all cars as well, since they're much more likely to kill people than Muslims are?
| Quote: |
| You lived in a Muslim country good for you! Did you notice how free it was for women and homosexuals and how just anybody could practice their religion freely or how women were free to marry non muslims but muslim men had to marry only muslims....??? |
More straw bogey men. Most of these problems can be found in all third world countries. Muslim or Christian. Why do you single out Muslims for their 3rd world attitutudes?
| Quote: |
| How can you be so blind to Islamic theology...OH I remember because you can just point to some Christian problem as an excuse...that must be convenient...or give the tired excuse that it's only the extremists.... |
Well, you got me there. Eliminate the facts that these problems aren't uniquely Muslim and that they aren't universally Muslim, what do I have left?
| Quote: |
| Just how many Zen bombings have you seen lately??? How many Buddists are into bombing or forced marriages... Can you see any big difference here between the Buddha and Muhammed????? Now please go and find one or two waaay out there cases of buddhist violence then act as if it's the same thing...DD can probably help you.. |
Here ya go:
http://www.aasianst.org/absts/2005abst/Southeast/se-44.htm
| Quote: |
| In Buddhist Southeast Asia, however, little attention has been paid to the historical connections between Buddhism, Buddhists and violence, and aside from Hue Tam Ho-Tai�s work on millenarian rebellions in southern Vietnam, little consideration has been given to the question of how these experiences connect with Southeast Asian Buddhist ethical understandings of harm and violence, or with prophetic histories that conceive of human moral degeneration and violence as part of the inevitable experience of temporal cycles known as kappa. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|