What's good for the Nazi works for a jihadi

[cnorman18]

Op-ed in today's Washington Times

What's good for the Nazi works for a jihadi

President Obama was right when he declared after convening the post mortem on the Detroit debacle that "we have to do better." The simple fact is that $42 billion later, Americans do not feel much safer getting on an airplane than they did eight years ago. Despite the post- Sept. 11 upgrades in security, despite the long lines, the inconveniences of removing shoes and belts and coming soon to an airport near you - full body scans - we are not reassured that the next disaster is not lurking just around the corner. People are concerned we aren't doing enough to fight the enemy and we're still not sure we've fully identified the enemy.

The administration and its Republican critics are still arguing whether Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan's Ft. Hood massacre constitutes an act of terrorism. That dispute is reflected in a larger debate of whether we are still in a "war against terror" and whether individuals like Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab should be treated as enemy combatants or read their Miranda Rights as common criminals.

But however that debate shakes out, there is an important move, that would cost little but could strike a blow against extremism and make our skies a little safer: The president admitted that the current watch list is inadequate. But America needs to immediately expand its terrorist watch list. Consider this fact: While the United States has a database of 500,000 individuals implicated in criminal activity, only 1,700 of those names are on the terrorist watch list banning entry into the United States. Compare that to the watch list developed by the U.S. Justice Department of suspected Nazi war criminals. Developed in the 1980s, 40,000 individuals were initially listed, but later the list expanded beyond 70,000 when the Office of Special Investigations on Nazi War Crimes (OSI) included the entire roster of the Nazi SS - and all others who belonged to groups that abetted genocide.

Most of those aging genociders are in their 80s or 90s today and the hunt for Nazi war criminals will soon reach its biological solution. But not so Islamist terrorism - only in its genesis - which is the scourge of all humanity at the dawn of the new decade. It is inconceivable that in fighting the existential threat of terrorism, that we can be operating with a list of only 1,700 people to bar from entering the United States. To better protect the flying public and to strike a blow against extremists who today regularly indescriminantly slaughter fellow Muslims, the Department of Homeland Security should take a page from the Nazi watch list and immediately add those who openly support and abet terrorism. In practical terms, it means immediately listing the many thousands of names of all known members and enablers of Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Indonesia's Jemmah Islamiyah and other terror groups listed by the State Department and the European Union.

And there are others who never fired a bullet, or strapped themselves to a ticking bomb, who nevertheless deserve to be publicly placed on America's terror watch list. They include Al Jazeera's Sheik Yusuf Qaradawi, whose online fatwa insists that Palestinian women have the right to attain martyrdom by blowing themselves up amidst Israelis. There is Omar Bakri Muhammad, who once claimed to be a recruiter for al Qaeda and organized the "Magnificent 19" (Sept. 11 bombers) in London. Jordan's Dr. Ibrahim Zayd Al-Kilani, who said this: "killing a transgressing American soldier" is an obligation and a kind of jihad. There are the followers of Indonesia's notorious Abu Bakar Bashir, Jamaica's Abdullah el-Faisel, and Libyan-born Abu Yaha al- Libi, who defends the "legitimacy" of violent jihad as a "religious obligation." And of course, Yemen's favorite American Anwar al-Awlaki who served as spiritual mentor and validator to Ft. Hood's Maj. Hasan and the Northwest Airlines terrorist.

We have no doubts that a simple e-mail to all U.S. embassies by Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton would flush out many more terror enablers. To be sure, errors will be made and anyone who stands accused of such activity must be given recourse to clear their names. It may also be true that not everyone who belongs to a terrorist group will become a suicide bomber, but let them suffer the consequences - why should Americans have to take that risk?

By compiling a true terror watch list, the United States and allies will reassure the shaken flying public that no one committed to terrorism against innocent civilians is aboard their flight. Such a policy will also help strengthen the hand of moderates across the Arab and Muslim world struggling against these extremists. And by providing the guardians of our borders with accurate and timely information about all those who promote and deploy terrorism against our nation, we can help co-opt the need to turn to blanket racial and ethnic profiling.

The time to act is now.

Rabbi Marvin Hier is the founder and dean of the Simon Wiesenthal Center. Rabbi Abraham Cooper is associate dean of the Center.

It's hard to see how anyone of any religion or any political persuasion could disagree with this.

[DeBunkem]

As I said, I won't descend into the silliness of Islamophobe paranoia. All terrorism is evil, whether you use suicide or not. The Japanese used it in WWII. In the US, when increasing numbers of white men go postal, they go on a shooting spree, killing fellow employees and even their own families, then turn the gun on themselves. These men feel anger at what they believe was done to them, and decided revenge was more important than life...likewise these suicide bombers. The effect is the same. What difference a suicide bomb or a homicide bomb, which is just as arbitrary in killing civilians in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Palestine? It is no secret that the USAF admits something like 5 or 6 civilian casualties for every partisan fighter killed. The Judean legendary hero Samson was a suicide terrorist. So were the band of Judean "Zealots" who bound themselves with a death curse if they didn't kill Paul, who was under Roman custody.
The Dept. of Homeland Security has identified White Supremacists as posing the most danger of terrorism in the US itself. They consider themselves "Holy warriors." As for the ME, all we need to do is get out of their countries and leave them alone. Works wonders.

JT READY: Any event which sparks this off"it could be during an election time, it could be the assassination of a prominent leader on either side"things could erupt. Now, within the white movement, we call it RaHoWa, racial holy war. And I do believe in a racial holy war, and I believe that we are already fighting that, except that our side hasnt even begun to fight back yet. So were trying to waken our people for survival.

[East of Eden]

As I said, I won't descend into the silliness of Islamophobe paranoia.

AKA, the facts.

All terrorism is evil, whether you use suicide or not. The Japanese used it in WWII. In the US, when increasing numbers of white men go postal, they go on a shooting spree, killing fellow employees and even their own families, then turn the gun on themselves. These men feel anger at what they believe was done to them, and decided revenge was more important than life...likewise these suicide bombers. The effect is the same. What difference a suicide bomb or a homicide bomb, which is just as arbitrary in killing civilians in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Palestine? It is no secret that the USAF admits something like 5 or 6 civilian casualties for every partisan fighter killed.

All wars involve collateral damage. The difference is we don't target civilians. Perhaps if the Islamofascists didn't hide among civilians it wouldn't be such an issue.

The Dept. of Homeland Security has identified White Supremacists as posing the most danger of terrorism in the US itself. They consider themselves "Holy warriors."

That is crazy on the face of it. Get back to me when you have a similar list as this one for White Supremacists. BTW, it doesn't count the Ft. Hood shooting or Christmas Day 'underwear bomber'.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Homela ... bg2085.cfm

As for the ME, all we need to do is get out of their countries and leave them alone. Works wonders.

9/11 happened because we left the Taliban alone.

[DeBunkem]

As I said, I won't descend into the silliness of Islamophobe paranoia.

AKA, the facts.

All terrorism is evil, whether you use suicide or not. The Japanese used it in WWII. In the US, when increasing numbers of white men go postal, they go on a shooting spree, killing fellow employees and even their own families, then turn the gun on themselves. These men feel anger at what they believe was done to them, and decided revenge was more important than life...likewise these suicide bombers. The effect is the same. What difference a suicide bomb or a homicide bomb, which is just as arbitrary in killing civilians in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Palestine? It is no secret that the USAF admits something like 5 or 6 civilian casualties for every partisan fighter killed.

All wars involve collateral damage. The difference is we don't target civilians. Perhaps if the Islamofascists didn't hide among civilians it wouldn't be such an issue.

The Dept. of Homeland Security has identified White Supremacists as posing the most danger of terrorism in the US itself. They consider themselves "Holy warriors."

That is crazy on the face of it. Get back to me when you have a similar list as this one for White Supremacists. BTW, it doesn't count the Ft. Hood shooting or Christmas Day 'underwear bomber'.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Homela ... bg2085.cfm

As for the ME, all we need to do is get out of their countries and leave them alone. Works wonders.

9/11 happened because we left the Taliban alone.

9/11 was planned and carried out by Saudis, not "Taliban", which is now the Oil Crusader's term for any armed resistance to their occupation. Why don't we invade the Wahabi tyrants of that country instead of watching Bush, Cheney, and Obama kowtow and kiss the hand of those who take our money and lives? Same as labeling S. Vietnamese partisans "Viet Cong," even though many had no interest in Communism, just getting foreign invaders out and punishing their puppet government. Just like now, the Homeland propaganda was that Commies would sweep Asia if we didn't keep bombing and killing people there. Now Vietnam is a peaceful trading partner.

The Occupation kills civilians and after much posturing and denial, cries crocodile tears and says oops. I don't buy it. There have been plenty of ME "My Lais." Which ME governments have the most access to plastic explosives? Governments like the illegitimate US stooge, Karzai and his warlord terrorists. Tribal frictions only grow under Occupation.

As for "hiding among civilians" where else would a man stay than with his family? He is not hiding, but rightfully dwelling with those he is protecting and fighting for, like partisans in the French Resistance. They went elsewhere to carry out operations against the Nazis and the Vichy French stooges. Of course, like Israel and the US, the Nazis punished the nearest community to the partisan attack..i.e...Fallujah, which most definitely was a deliberate massacre of civilians.

Finally I'm very curious why pro-Oil Crusades apologists are so outraged by suicide bombers. The perpetrator dies whether or not anyone else dies. Not so car bombs or Predator missile terrorism. Why do you worry about the bomber killing himself? It is messy, but so are marketplaces hit by USAF bombs. The suicide bombers always target military if they can, such as the CIA Predator drone center bombing.
In Israel, this practice has ceased, fortunately. (in case you try to claim I'm in favor of terrorists) But the IDF also "hides among their civilian population," so a bus bomber could have accurately assumed that on any given bus would be off-duty and reserve military, both male and female, as well as settler militia, jailers and torturers going to work, police, and any number of officials partially responsible for killing his or her family and friends. But the bomber always dies. So why are you so concerned about this method of terrorism?

[DeBunkem]

As I said, I won't descend into the silliness of Islamophobe paranoia.

AKA, the facts.

All terrorism is evil, whether you use suicide or not. The Japanese used it in WWII. In the US, when increasing numbers of white men go postal, they go on a shooting spree, killing fellow employees and even their own families, then turn the gun on themselves. These men feel anger at what they believe was done to them, and decided revenge was more important than life...likewise these suicide bombers. The effect is the same. What difference a suicide bomb or a homicide bomb, which is just as arbitrary in killing civilians in Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iraq, and Palestine? It is no secret that the USAF admits something like 5 or 6 civilian casualties for every partisan fighter killed.

All wars involve collateral damage. The difference is we don't target civilians. Perhaps if the Islamofascists didn't hide among civilians it wouldn't be such an issue.
The Dept. of Homeland Security has identified White Supremacists as posing the most danger of terrorism in the US itself. They consider themselves "Holy warriors."

That is crazy on the face of it. Get back to me when you have a similar list as this one for White Supremacists. BTW, it doesn't count the Ft. Hood shooting or Christmas Day 'underwear bomber'.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Homela ... bg2085.cfm

As for the ME, all we need to do is get out of their countries and leave them alone. Works wonders.

9/11 happened because we left the Taliban alone.

9/11 was planned and carried out by Saudis, not "Taliban", which is now the Oil Crusader's term for any armed resistance to their occupation. So when the West invades Iran for their oil, all Iranians fighting back will no doubt be labelled "Hezbollah". Same as labeling S. Vietnamese partisans "Viet Cong," even though many had no interest in Communism, just getting foreign invaders out and punishing their puppet government. Just like now, the Homeland propaganda was that Commies would sweep Asia if we didn't keep bombing and killing people there. Now Vietnam is a peaceful trading partner.

The Occupation kills civilians and after much posturing and denial, cries crocodile tears and says oops. I don't buy it. There have been plenty of ME "My Lais." Which ME governments have the most access to plastic explosives? Governments like the illegitimate US stooge, Karzai and his warlord terrorists. Tribal frictions only grow under Occupation.

As for "hiding among civilians" where else would a man stay than with his family? He is not hiding, but rightfully dwelling with those he is protecting and fighting for, like partisans in the French Resistance. They went elsewhere to carry out operations against the Nazis and the Vichy French stooges. Of course, like Israel and the US, the Nazis punished the nearest community to the partisan attack..i.e...Fallujah, which most definitely was a deliberate massacre of civilians.

Finally I'm very curious why pro-Oil Crusades apologists are so outraged by suicide bombers. The perpetrator dies whether or not anyone else dies. Not so car bombs or Predator missile terrorism. Why do you worry about the bomber killing himself? It is messy, but so are marketplaces hit by USAF bombs. The suicide bombers always target military if they can, such as the CIA Predator drone center bombing.
In Israel, this practice has ceased, fortunately. (in case you try to claim I'm in favor of terrorists) But the IDF also "hides among their civilian population," so a bus bomber could have accurately assumed that on any given bus would be off-duty and reserve military, both male and female, as well as settler militia, jailers and torturers going to work, police, and any number of officials partially responsible for killing his or her family and friends. But the bomber always dies. So why are you so concerned about this method of terrorism?

Again, the Bush-created Homeland Security, (not a corporate propaganda "think tank" like Heritage) says that White Supremacists pose the greatest danger of domestic terrorism. I would say that many criminals who claim to be Muslims were recruited in prisons by gangs such as the Black Muslims.
How many of your Muslim neighbors have tried to kill you or burn your church like the KKK regularly did until recently? Are you more or less likely to be shot by a "Jihadist" or a gun hugger who goes bat s**t?

[East of Eden]

9/11 was planned and carried out by Saudis, not "Taliban",

Aided by the Afghan Taliban. Where was Bin Laden on 9/11?

which is now the Oil Crusader's term for any armed resistance to their occupation.

What's with the 'Oil Crusader's'? We're in the Mid East because that's were the oil is, not because Jesus told us to go there.

So when the West invades Iran for their oil, all Iranians fighting back will no doubt be labelled "Hezbollah".

Wouldn't it be closer if we invaded Venezuela?

Same as labeling S. Vietnamese partisans "Viet Cong," even though many had no interest in Communism, just getting foreign invaders out and punishing their puppet government.

That was to some degree a civil war. I was for the side that didsn't support a totalitarian Communist dictatorship.

Just like now, the Homeland propaganda was that Commies would sweep Asia if we didn't keep bombing and killing people there.

The dominoes did fall in Laos and Cambodia. Genocide followed.

Now Vietnam is a peaceful trading partner.

Who oppresses its people.

The Occupation kills civilians and after much posturing and denial, cries crocodile tears and says oops. I don't buy it. There have been plenty of ME "My Lais."

Are you referring to the 600,000 Iraqis Saddam killed?

Which ME governments have the most access to plastic explosives? Governments like the illegitimate US stooge, Karzai and his warlord terrorists. Tribal frictions only grow under Occupation.

Apparently you prefer the Taliban.

As for "hiding among civilians" where else would a man stay than with his family? He is not hiding, but rightfully dwelling with those he is protecting and fighting for, like partisans in the French Resistance. They went elsewhere to carry out operations against the Nazis and the Vichy French stooges.

But not innocent civilians.

Of course, like Israel and the US, the Nazis punished the nearest community to the partisan attack..i.e...Fallujah, which most definitely was a deliberate massacre of civilians.

Baloney, it cleared out thousands of terrorists, many of them foreign. I was proud of what our military did there. If Hollywood wasn't so full of anti-American leftist, they'd make a movie about it.

Finally I'm very curious why pro-Oil Crusades apologists are so outraged by suicide bombers. The perpetrator dies whether or not anyone else dies. Not so car bombs or Predator missile terrorism. Why do you worry about the bomber killing himself? It is messy, but so are marketplaces hit by USAF bombs. The suicide bombers always target military if they can, such as the CIA Predator drone center bombing.
In Israel, this practice has ceased, fortunately. (in case you try to claim I'm in favor of terrorists) But the IDF also "hides among their civilian population," so a bus bomber could have accurately assumed that on any given bus would be off-duty and reserve military, both male and female, as well as settler militia, jailers and torturers going to work, police, and any number of officials partially responsible for killing his or her family and friends. But the bomber always dies. So why are you so concerned about this method of terrorism?

Again, the Bush-created Homeland Security, (not a corporate propaganda "think tank" like Heritage)

Nice ad hominen. Care to address the content?I'm still waiting for you to address my request for you to come up with a list of White Supremacist crimes equal to the Muslim crimes I posted.

says that White Supremacists pose the greatest danger of domestic terrorism.

That is idiotic no matter who said it.

I would say that many criminals who claim to be Muslims were recruited in prisons by gangs such as the Black Muslims.

Its a short trip from street thug to jihadist.

How many of your Muslim neighbors have tried to kill you or burn your church like the KKK regularly did until recently? Are you more or less likely to be shot by a "Jihadist" or a gun hugger who goes bat s**t?

Jihadist by far. BTW, we 'gun-huggers' are way less likely to made victims than the unarmed.

[JoeyKnothead]

From Post 25:

9/11 was planned and carried out by Saudis, not "Taliban",

Aided by the Afghan Taliban. Where was Bin Laden on 9/11?

Hiding under the protection of the Taliban.

which is now the Oil Crusader's term for any armed resistance to their occupation.

What's with the 'Oil Crusader's'? We're in the Mid East because that's were the oil is, not because Jesus told us to go there.

Given the nature of this site, I agree the term Crusader has the potential for confusion, as apt as it may be.

So when the West invades Iran for their oil, all Iranians fighting back will no doubt be labelled "Hezbollah".

Wouldn't it be closer if we invaded Venezuela?

I think there's a valid point. If Iran where to use Hezbollah fighters though, the term may well apply if only as slang.

Same as labeling S. Vietnamese partisans "Viet Cong," even though many had no interest in Communism, just getting foreign invaders out and punishing their puppet government.

That was to some degree a civil war. I was for the side that didsn't support a totalitarian Communist dictatorship.

I think both are accurate takes.

Just like now, the Homeland propaganda was that Commies would sweep Asia if we didn't keep bombing and killing people there.

The dominoes did fall in Laos and Cambodia. Genocide followed.

I gotta go with East of Eden here. I think it quite reasonable if resistence wasn't offered that the spread would've been greater.

Now Vietnam is a peaceful trading partner.

Who oppresses its people.

I'd need more data for the oppression angle, and consider there's perspectives involved.

The Occupation kills civilians and after much posturing and denial, cries crocodile tears and says oops. I don't buy it. There have been plenty of ME "My Lais."

Are you referring to the 600,000 Iraqis Saddam killed?

War is Hell. Innocents are killed in war, but understand such is likely to occur when folks are lobbing bombs and such. This is all the more reason to seek peaceful solutions. However, we must consider some folks would use such tactics simply for delaying treaties.

Which ME governments have the most access to plastic explosives? Governments like the illegitimate US stooge, Karzai and his warlord terrorists. Tribal frictions only grow under Occupation.

Apparently you prefer the Taliban.

It's not just plastic explosives involved. There are many ways to make bombs from readily found materials.

As for "hiding among civilians" where else would a man stay than with his family? He is not hiding, but rightfully dwelling with those he is protecting and fighting for, like partisans in the French Resistance. They went elsewhere to carry out operations against the Nazis and the Vichy French stooges.

But not innocent civilians.

I don't accept this line of reasoning at all, as it is quite common among some to hold munitions, explosives, and other war materiel amongst civilians.

If I'm at war, I have enough common sense to know I'm a target, and to stay the heck away from those I love during such times.

Of course, like Israel and the US, the Nazis punished the nearest community to the partisan attack..i.e...Fallujah, which most definitely was a deliberate massacre of civilians.

Baloney, it cleared out thousands of terrorists, many of them foreign. I was proud of what our military did there. If Hollywood wasn't so full of anti-American leftist, they'd make a movie about it.

Agreed, we've made the terrorists spend more time and effort protecting their own butts, and that is far better than having time to commit terror attacks against civilians. I disagree on the Hollywood deal, but danged if I can properly refute it without more effort than I'd like to expend.

Finally I'm very curious why pro-Oil Crusades apologists are so outraged by suicide bombers.

They target civilians.

The perpetrator dies whether or not anyone else dies.

I make no distinction between an attempt and its success or failure.

Not so car bombs or Predator missile terrorism.

When a legitimate target hides among civilians, I hold them responsible for such collateral damage.

Why do you worry about the bomber killing himself? It is messy, but so are marketplaces hit by USAF bombs. The suicide bombers always target military if they can, such as the CIA Predator drone center bombing.

I don't so much fret over the mess, but terrorists hiding among the very civilians they are so willing to destroy.

In Israel, this practice has ceased, fortunately. (in case you try to claim I'm in favor of terrorists) But the IDF also "hides among their civilian population," so a bus bomber could have accurately assumed that on any given bus would be off-duty and reserve military, both male and female, as well as settler militia, jailers and torturers going to work, police, and any number of officials partially responsible for killing his or her family and friends. But the bomber always dies. So why are you so concerned about this method of terrorism?

I somewhat agree. IMO it would be far better to announce one's presence, but tactical security often compromises this ideal. Here we gotta consider one's actions, and how much they seek to minimize potential civilian harms.

...I'm still waiting for you to address my request for you to come up with a list of White Supremacist crimes equal to the Muslim crimes I posted.

There's plenty blame for both sides there. We should wage war against all who seek to terrorize others through civilian attacks.

>snip<

I would say that many criminals who claim to be Muslims were recruited in prisons by gangs such as the Black Muslims.

Its a short trip from street thug to jihadist.

Who cares who does the recruiting? (other than as a means to get at the recruiters)

How many of your Muslim neighbors have tried to kill you or burn your church like the KKK regularly did until recently? Are you more or less likely to be shot by a "Jihadist" or a gun hugger who goes bat s**t?

Jihadist by far. BTW, we 'gun-huggers' are way less likely to made victims than the unarmed.

The KKK has a history of terrorism, and so are rightly feared, just like the warring jihadis (noting some to many to most Muslims consider jihad in different terms than blowing up innocent civilians)

[East of Eden]

From Post 25:

9/11 was planned and carried out by Saudis, not "Taliban",

Aided by the Afghan Taliban. Where was Bin Laden on 9/11?

Hiding under the protection of the Taliban.

which is now the Oil Crusader's term for any armed resistance to their occupation.

What's with the 'Oil Crusader's'? We're in the Mid East because that's were the oil is, not because Jesus told us to go there.

Given the nature of this site, I agree the term Crusader has the potential for confusion, as apt as it may be.

So when the West invades Iran for their oil, all Iranians fighting back will no doubt be labelled "Hezbollah".

Wouldn't it be closer if we invaded Venezuela?

I think there's a valid point. If Iran where to use Hezbollah fighters though, the term may well apply if only as slang.

Same as labeling S. Vietnamese partisans "Viet Cong," even though many had no interest in Communism, just getting foreign invaders out and punishing their puppet government.

That was to some degree a civil war. I was for the side that didsn't support a totalitarian Communist dictatorship.

I think both are accurate takes.

Just like now, the Homeland propaganda was that Commies would sweep Asia if we didn't keep bombing and killing people there.

The dominoes did fall in Laos and Cambodia. Genocide followed.

I gotta go with East of Eden here. I think it quite reasonable if resistence wasn't offered that the spread would've been greater.

Now Vietnam is a peaceful trading partner.

Who oppresses its people.

I'd need more data for the oppression angle, and consider there's perspectives involved.

The Occupation kills civilians and after much posturing and denial, cries crocodile tears and says oops. I don't buy it. There have been plenty of ME "My Lais."

Are you referring to the 600,000 Iraqis Saddam killed?

War is Hell. Innocents are killed in war, but understand such is likely to occur when folks are lobbing bombs and such. This is all the more reason to seek peaceful solutions. However, we must consider some folks would use such tactics simply for delaying treaties.

Which ME governments have the most access to plastic explosives? Governments like the illegitimate US stooge, Karzai and his warlord terrorists. Tribal frictions only grow under Occupation.

Apparently you prefer the Taliban.

It's not just plastic explosives involved. There are many ways to make bombs from readily found materials.

As for "hiding among civilians" where else would a man stay than with his family? He is not hiding, but rightfully dwelling with those he is protecting and fighting for, like partisans in the French Resistance. They went elsewhere to carry out operations against the Nazis and the Vichy French stooges.

But not innocent civilians.

I don't accept this line of reasoning at all, as it is quite common among some to hold munitions, explosives, and other war materiel amongst civilians.

If I'm at war, I have enough common sense to know I'm a target, and to stay the heck away from those I love during such times.

Of course, like Israel and the US, the Nazis punished the nearest community to the partisan attack..i.e...Fallujah, which most definitely was a deliberate massacre of civilians.

Baloney, it cleared out thousands of terrorists, many of them foreign. I was proud of what our military did there. If Hollywood wasn't so full of anti-American leftist, they'd make a movie about it.

Agreed, we've made the terrorists spend more time and effort protecting their own butts, and that is far better than having time to commit terror attacks against civilians. I disagree on the Hollywood deal, but danged if I can properly refute it without more effort than I'd like to expend.

Finally I'm very curious why pro-Oil Crusades apologists are so outraged by suicide bombers.

They target civilians.

The perpetrator dies whether or not anyone else dies.

I make no distinction between an attempt and its success or failure.

Not so car bombs or Predator missile terrorism.

When a legitimate target hides among civilians, I hold them responsible for such collateral damage.

Why do you worry about the bomber killing himself? It is messy, but so are marketplaces hit by USAF bombs. The suicide bombers always target military if they can, such as the CIA Predator drone center bombing.

I don't so much fret over the mess, but terrorists hiding among the very civilians they are so willing to destroy.

In Israel, this practice has ceased, fortunately. (in case you try to claim I'm in favor of terrorists) But the IDF also "hides among their civilian population," so a bus bomber could have accurately assumed that on any given bus would be off-duty and reserve military, both male and female, as well as settler militia, jailers and torturers going to work, police, and any number of officials partially responsible for killing his or her family and friends. But the bomber always dies. So why are you so concerned about this method of terrorism?

I somewhat agree. IMO it would be far better to announce one's presence, but tactical security often compromises this ideal. Here we gotta consider one's actions, and how much they seek to minimize potential civilian harms.

...I'm still waiting for you to address my request for you to come up with a list of White Supremacist crimes equal to the Muslim crimes I posted.

There's plenty blame for both sides there. We should wage war against all who seek to terrorize others through civilian attacks.

>snip<

I would say that many criminals who claim to be Muslims were recruited in prisons by gangs such as the Black Muslims.

Its a short trip from street thug to jihadist.

Who cares who does the recruiting? (other than as a means to get at the recruiters)

How many of your Muslim neighbors have tried to kill you or burn your church like the KKK regularly did until recently? Are you more or less likely to be shot by a "Jihadist" or a gun hugger who goes bat s**t?

Jihadist by far. BTW, we 'gun-huggers' are way less likely to made victims than the unarmed.

The KKK has a history of terrorism, and so are rightly feared, just like the warring jihadis (noting some to many to most Muslims consider jihad in different terms than blowing up innocent civilians)

Joey, the Voice of Reason.

[JoeyKnothead]

Joey, the Voice of Reason.

I literally laughed out loud.

It's good to see that as much as I hammer at you, we can share a laugh and admit agreement on at least some of the important issues.

[East of Eden]

Joey, the Voice of Reason.

I literally laughed out loud.

It's good to see that as much as I hammer at you, we can share a laugh and admit agreement on at least some of the important issues.

Radical Islam is a threat to all us infidels. It always amazes me when people won't admit that.

[East of Eden]

I'd need more data for the oppression angle, and consider there's perspectives involved.

From Wikipedia:

In its 2004 report on Human Rights Practices, the U.S. Department of State characterized Vietnams human rights record as poor and cited the continuation of serious abuses. According to the report, the government has imposed restrictions on freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, and freedom of association.

Citizens are denied the right to change their government. The government continues to hold political prisoners who have expressed views at odds with government policy. Prison conditions are generally harsh, but not unduly so given the country's level of economic development, according to the State Department assessment. Vietnam has no independent judiciary, and there is no right to a fair and speedy trial. Human rights organizations are not permitted to operate. Discrimination against women and ethnic minorities, child labor, and prostitution are serious problems. The government is attempting to address the child labor issue.

The government officially provides for freedom of religion and recognizes Buddhist, Roman Catholic, Protestant, Hoa Hao, Cao Dai, and Muslim denominations. However, non-sanctioned groups, including branches of even the recognized denominations, face harassment. Furthermore, the government insists on supervising the clergies of the sanctioned groups (by approving appointments, for example)[1] in the interest of national unity. In April 2004, 20,000 to 30,000 members of the Montagnard ethnic minority gathered to protest for the return of their ancestral lands in the Central Highlands and an end to religious repression. Human Rights Watch alleges that hundreds of demonstrators were wounded and at least 10 killed in a clash with Vietnamese officials and civilians[citation needed]. The Vietnamese government is concerned that the Montagnards are seeking an independent state.

As a result of the state oppression there has been an underground human-rights movement in Vietnam supported by the Unified Buddhist Church of Vietnam. Because of this the buddhist monk Thch Qung was awarded the Rafto Human Rights Prize on 21 September 2006 for his long time work for democracy in Vietnam. He has been in prison several times, a total of 25 years, because of his struggle for human-rights. Other well-known current and former political prisoners include Pham Hong Son, Nguyen Khac Toan, Nguyen Van Ly, Phan Van Ban, Nguyen Chi Thien and Nguyen Van Dai.