Musician Forum - Band Discussion Board - BandMix

I ask you where are the peaceful muslims STOPPING their fellow muslims from attacking our embassy's? What do you think would happen if americans stormed an islamic conutry's embassy here in the states? I think you know the answer to that, and that my friends would be how a PEACEFUL COUNTRY DEALS WITH IT'S OWN MILITANTS! Peaceful Muslims BULLSH!T!

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Prote ... 861603.php

J-HALEY wrote:I ask you where are the peaceful muslims STOPPING their fellow muslims from attacking our embassy's? What do you think would happen if americans stormed an islamic conutry's embassy here in the states? I think you know the answer to that, and that my friends would be how a PEACEFUL COUNTRY DEALS WITH IT'S OWN MILITANTS! Peaceful Muslims BULLSH!T!

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Prote ... 861603.php

Hey Jeff. I'm curious again.

When someone around here gets murdered and the killer goes to trial, one of the most prominent parts of the investigation is establishing motive. Regardless of how much physical evidence exists, they take really great care in establishing the exact motive and the circumstances surrounding it.

I see this as smart, of course, because by establishing the motive, they can determine whether the crime was pre-meditated, accidental, or more of a anger or passion-fueled blow up; and by establishing that, they can not only have a better idea of exactly how "evil" the person really is and can sentence the person appropriately, but also to inform the public as to how these things happen, so that the general populace can be informed and be better equipped to avoid such circumstances.

What always bothered me about "terrorists" - especially middle eastern terrorists, is that this part of the equation is always skipped. Even with the IRA terrorism of the 70's and 80's in Ireland and the UK, there was at least the establishment of motive. But in the middle east, all we ever hear is really unbelievable sh*t about they hate freedoms, infidels, etc..

Muslims make up 25% of the worlds religious population, and yet, this is a small fraction, less than 1% that actively engage in terrorist activities. Hell I will even give them 2%, but that means 98% of muslims are peaceful and not terrorists. I don't think I can say any other religion has any less percentage of fundamentalism, with exception to maybe buddhism and possibly hinduism.

So .. getting back to the point- If you were a detective charged with establishing motive for a criminal trial against a terrorist, how deep would you dig and how many questions would you try to find answers to? What if you found information to suggested that history plays a role- would you dig into it and really vet as much information as possible to make the best possible detailed report for the prosecutor?

Yeah it's looking more and more like there's some kind of organization going on, and the video was just an excuse. But shyte's about to go down; these protests will be stopped and those responsible will be killed. Notice I didn't say arrested.

Should YouTube take down the video? They already have restricted access to it in Libya and Egypt.

http://www.cnn.com/2012/09/12/tech/web/ ... ?hpt=hp_t2

My wife and I got into a heated discussion about this; she believes it should be taken down, either by YouTube or the government. I believe in free speech, and even though I disagree with the video, it should remain up everywhere. If some people want to riot and kill because they don't like it they will be put down Chicago style!

Even the liberal press said that the video has been on youtube for about a month. It received little attention until an activist Muslim reporter brought attention to it. After that the riots took place and the terrorists used to opportunity to take advantage of the situation and attacked. I personally believe that the reporter was in on it. Not likely that this was coincidence.

The video being out for that long and being ignored until the anniversary of 9/11? And the terrorist attack that was evidently planned and for some time just happening at the time of the protest....just coincidence? Yeah right.

Kramerguy wrote:

J-HALEY wrote:I ask you where are the peaceful muslims STOPPING their fellow muslims from attacking our embassy's? What do you think would happen if americans stormed an islamic conutry's embassy here in the states? I think you know the answer to that, and that my friends would be how a PEACEFUL COUNTRY DEALS WITH IT'S OWN MILITANTS! Peaceful Muslims BULLSH!T!

http://www.chron.com/news/article/Prote ... 861603.php

Hey Jeff. I'm curious again.

When someone around here gets murdered and the killer goes to trial, one of the most prominent parts of the investigation is establishing motive. Regardless of how much physical evidence exists, they take really great care in establishing the exact motive and the circumstances surrounding it.

I see this as smart, of course, because by establishing the motive, they can determine whether the crime was pre-meditated, accidental, or more of a anger or passion-fueled blow up; and by establishing that, they can not only have a better idea of exactly how "evil" the person really is and can sentence the person appropriately, but also to inform the public as to how these things happen, so that the general populace can be informed and be better equipped to avoid such circumstances.

What always bothered me about "terrorists" - especially middle eastern terrorists, is that this part of the equation is always skipped. Even with the IRA terrorism of the 70's and 80's in Ireland and the UK, there was at least the establishment of motive. But in the middle east, all we ever hear is really unbelievable sh*t about they hate freedoms, infidels, etc..

Muslims make up 25% of the worlds religious population, and yet, this is a small fraction, less than 1% that actively engage in terrorist activities. Hell I will even give them 2%, but that means 98% of muslims are peaceful and not terrorists. I don't think I can say any other religion has any less percentage of fundamentalism, with exception to maybe buddhism and possibly hinduism.

So .. getting back to the point- If you were a detective charged with establishing motive for a criminal trial against a terrorist, how deep would you dig and how many questions would you try to find answers to? What if you found information to suggested that history plays a role- would you dig into it and really vet as much information as possible to make the best possible detailed report for the prosecutor?

. We ALREADY KNOW the motive. ALL Muslims HATE Israel. Go into any mosque in Iran for example and in huge letters on the wall there's a sign that says "Death to Israel." Any country that supported the formation of Israel, and any country that continues to support Israel are ALL lumped together in their minds. How do the "2 or 3%" of terrorists travel with ease through Arab countries? Because they are supported by nearly ALL Muslims. We are not in a war with a tiny number of people, but with the ENTIRE Islamic world. We are now in the camp WITH Israel. Until there is a peaceful settlement between ALL Moslems and Israel we will have war. It's just that simple. Don't complicate the issue Keith. Don't try to psychoanalyze the terrorists. If a person in your neighborhood you absolutely knew was going to kill your family would you try to figure out why? I would kill them first. I'd much rather go to his funeral than he go to mine. This is the position we're in with the Moslem world. THEY have to get to the negotiating table, recognize Israel once and for all, and quit KILLING people. War is Hell Keith. Either they die or we die. No psychoanalyzing needed.

Good post Bob.

It is written that true Muslims must remove the infidel from this world. Now would you peace nicks please explain to us where the point of reason lies within this discussion? Go figure..

Bob, I think I'd like to know why that guy down the street wants to kill my family. Did I offend him? Did my son rape his daughter? Did my dog crap on his lawn?

Yeah.. if he left a death threat on my front door, I most definitely would look to defend myself, perhaps find a way to make it impossible for him to get to me.. but while pre-meditated pre-emptive killing might be allowed on the world stage, I'd most certainly be put in a federal pen for massacring this guys family just because they threatened me.

But that's really not the argument here- it's about muslims. So muslims in iran hate jews. We know this. Do muslims in china, canada, and peru also hate jews? Why aren't they moving back to the desert to be on the front lines then?

Theres a good possibility that most of the hate we see from iran is state-sponsored propaganda. Do you think any citizen in that country is going to complain that theres anti-jew slanders painted on the walls? Did you see Iraq when saddam was in charge? Propaganda everywhere.. you would have thought they all hated us. And at that time, they didn't all hate us.. but dissent was punished in horrific ways. Our actions there since the gulf war have pretty much changed that.. I'm guessing they all hate us now. Hell, I would too if I was a citizen on the receiving end of american-installed "democracy".

Just sayin.

I think more people NEED to be asking these questions. War isn't always the answer, and rarely solves the problem anyways.

I was reading an article about extremism in the right wing and they touched base a LOT on the current crisis, so here's an excerpt which I found enlightening:

Conservative Islamists in Libya and Egypt; Egyptian Right-Wing Media

A 13-minute trailer for a wildly provocative film called either The Innocence of Muslims or Mohammed, Prophet of the Muslims (but which could have been called The Chronicles of the Elders of Islam) was uploaded to YouTube in July and received little notice. According to the Daily Mail , the trouble started when someone translated the trailer into Arabic and uploaded it to YouTube. It was “since featured on Egyptian media reports for several days with ultraconservative clerics going on air to denounce it.”

While Muslims across the political spectrum were offended, according to multiple reports those who rioted in Cairo and Benghazi were “conservative Islamists,” whose thin skin and lack of tolerance led to the chaos.

It wasn't “Muslims,” writ large, who perpetrated the outrageous attacks. It was the Islamic religious right, which sees itself under siege from modern, secular society in much the same way our own Christian right sees itself as under constant siege by perfidious secular humanists.

On Wednesday, hundreds of residents of Benghazi took to the streets to condemn the attacks on the Embassy.

"Whomever's Behind That Stupid, Bigoted Film"

As the New York Times notes, the origins of the film are “shrouded in mystery.” Early reports suggested that the film was produced by an Israeli-American real estate developer named Sam Basile, but no such person could be tracked down. Some have suggested that “Sam Basile” is a pseudonym. But someone claiming to be Basile offered several interviews with media outlets, during which he “called Islam 'a cancer,' and said he had raised $5 million from about 100 Jewish donors” to fund the film.

Rumors of who was behind the film – all unconfirmed – abound. Some have suggested the usual suspects: Pam Geller or Robert Spencer or their fellow travelers. The one person who has publicly admitted to being involved with the film is a man named Steve Klein, whom Max Blumenthal describes as “a Hemet, California-based insurance salesman who claims to have led a 'hunter-killer team' in Vietnam.”

Klein is a right-wing extremist who emerged from the same axis of Islamophobia that produced Anders Behring Breivik and which takes inspiration from the writings of Robert Spencer, Pamela Geller, and Daniel Pipes.

It appears Klein (or someone who shares his name and views) is an enthusiastic commenter on Geller’s website, Atlas Shrugged, where he recently complained about Mitt Romney’s “support for a Muslim state in Israel’s Heartland.” In July 2011, Spencer’s website, Jihad Watch, promoted a rally Klein organized alongside the anti-Muslim Coptic extremist Joseph Nasrallah to demand the firing of LA County Sheriff Lee Baca, whom they painted as a dupe for Hamas.

The Atlantic's Jeffrey Goldberg interviewed Stein , who said of the 15 or so people behind the film, “They're from Syria, Turkey, Pakistan, they're some that are from Egypt. Some are Copts but the vast majority are Evangelical." Copts are an Egyptian Christian sect that has long faced persecution in its own long-standing conflict with the country's Muslim majority.

The film was designed to provoke a reaction, to push their right-wing religionist counterparts to acts of hatred and stupidity. On Wednesday, a lot of confused people suggested that the embassy's statement condemning this trash somehow conflicts with our First Amendment right to free speech, which might make some sense if anyone, anywhere, had suggested the filmmakers weren't within their constitutional rights in producing the film. Or if the First Amendment was a guarantee that you could say whatever you wanted and not be criticized. Of course, just because you have the right to do awful things that you know are likely to lead to bloodshed doesn't mean you should do awful things that are likely to lead to bloodshed. Make no mistake: they got what they wanted in sparking those riots.

http://www.alternet.org/belief/6-right- ... page=0%2C2

Good Post Bob,

I totally get the logic... What I want to know is why Israel doesn't flat out solve that problem once and for all. Answer: Because America keeps imposing on and looming over everything ISrael does...

Israel cant say much about it, since they receive copious amounts of money and weapons support from US Gov, year after year. This just illustrates that not only should people stop depending on everything to come from the governemnt, but Other Governments should also stop dependaing on everything to come from the government.

Dizzizz wrote:I sure am glad we have six different threads to talk about muslims right now. If you all love them so much, why don't you go marry one?

i don't love all members of any one religion or ethnicity.

neither do i hate all members of any one religion or ethnicity.

wash, rinse. repeat as necessary.

and thanks, i won't be marrying a muslim (or a sikh, hindu, christian, or atheist) because i practice monogamy.

Dizzizz wrote:EVERYTHING IS SERIOUS. NO JOKES ALLOWED.

my bad!

Dizzizz wrote:I sure am glad we have six different threads to talk about muslims right now. If you all love them so much, why don't you go marry one?

well it could be the smell

pick up your sword and follow me...