posted August 19, 2006 12:30 PM              

JNV Anti-War Briefing 85
1 August 2005
A shortened version of this briefing is available as a pdf here

Posted: 1 August 2005

DEMONISING ISLAM

A poll in the Daily Telegraph in the aftermath of the London suicide bombings found that 19 per cent of those polled felt that Islam itself ‘as distinct from Islamic fundamentalism’ posed ‘a major threat’ to Western liberal democracy. A further 27 per cent felt that Islam itself posed ‘some threat’.

In Oct. 2001, the corresponding figures were 10 and 22 per cent. Now, one in five people believes Islam as a religion poses a ‘major threat’, and nearly half the people of Britain believe that it is some kind of threat to liberal democracy. This is unjustified fear.

DEMONISING CHRISTIANITY

When nine young Muslim men carry out, or try to carry out, brutal atrocities, Islam is blamed. But when small groups of Christians carry out brutal atrocities, Christianity is not. Why this double standard?

Between 1993 and 1998, seven people (doctors, receptionists, police officers) were killed in shootings and bombings by Christian anti-abortion activists in the US. This was religiously-motivated terrorism, but no one blamed Christianity itself.

When Christian anti-abortionist James Kopp admitted shooting dead Dr Barnett Slepian in 1998, was there a cry for all Christians to condemn him?

When David Koresh’s heavily-armed Christian fundamentalist sect resisted the FBI siege at Waco in 1993, did non-Christians rush to the Bible to understand what could have motivated this kind of apocalyptic survivalism?

When 800 or so members of the Christian ‘Movement for the Restoration of the Ten Commandments of God’ group died of suicide or (mostly) murder in March 2000, did non-Christians refer to the Christian record of violence culminating in the development and use of the atomic bomb, as part of the cultural background to this tragedy?

When people see violence in, say, Democratic Republic of Congo, torn by savage civil war—and with 42m Christians making up 70% of the population—are they entitled to blame Christianity itself?

SCRIPTURE

Do non-Christians scour the New Testament to pull out the most violent and frightening verses, linking them with the “Christian terrorism” of James Kopp and his colleagues?

For example, do they endlessly repeat the words of Jesus when he criticised the Jews of his time for not putting to death children who spoke evil of their parents, as the Law commanded? [Mark 7:9-10. Check all references online]

Do they trumpet the passages when Jesus exults in the prospect of destruction? For example: ‘I came to bring fire on the earth, and how I wish it were already set ablaze!’ [Luke 12:49] Do they keep repeating that when he drove the moneychangers out of the temple, Jesus didn’t just overturn tables, he actually used a whip? [John 2:15] In one famous parable, Jesus does not seem to have any problem with the idea of owning, beating, or indeed killing slaves. [Luke 12:46-48]

What about Jesus’ call to his disciples to sell their possessions in order to buy swords? [Luke 22:35-36] And his ominous warning, ‘Don't assume that I came to bring peace on the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword.’ [Matthew 10:34]

Here are some frightening quotations: ‘You shall destroy all the peoples... showing them no pity.’ [7:16] ‘All the people present there shall serve you as forced labour.’ [20:12] ‘You shall put all its males to the sword. You may, however, take as your booty the women, the children, the livestock, and everything in the town—all its spoil—and enjoy the use of the spoil of your enemy which the LORD your God gives you.’ [20:14-15] ‘You shall not let a soul remain alive.’ [20:16]

This is from Deuteronomy in the Old Testament, the Jewish Torah, which both Jews and Christians consider sacred.

What if someone said these verses of Jesus and Deuteronomy were the essence of Christianity? It would be absurd. But with the Qu’ran/Koran, non-Muslims feel free to pull the most aggressive verses out of context. All major religions can be used in this way.

THE QU’RAN: RESTRAINING WAR

Christians focus on Jesus’ peaceful words, not his violent curses on unreceptive towns such as Chorazin, Bethsaida, and Capernaum [Matthew 11:21-24].

Ex-Catholic nun Karen Armstrong explains, ‘Like the Bible, the Qur’an has its share of aggressive texts, but like all the great religions, its main thrust is towards kindliness and compassion. Islamic law outlaws war against any country in which Muslims are allowed to practice their religion freely, and forbids the use of fire, the destruction of buildings and the killing of innocent civilians in a military campaign. So although Muslims, like Christians or Jews, have all too often failed to live up to their ideals, it is not because of the religion per se.’ (Guardian, 11 July)

MUHAMMAD: NONVIOLENT ACTION

After largely winning a war against his old tribe, who had driven him out with violent persecution (nearly killing him), and successfully blockading them, Muhammad could have destroyed the Quraysh militarily. Instead he led his followers in an unarmed, nonviolent, pilgrimage into the hands of the Quraysh, signed a peace treaty with them, and abandoned the blockade, paving the way for peace in war-torn Arabia. (Karen Armstrong, Muhammad, p. 214-223)

Karen Armstrong comments: ‘It is not true that Islam preaches a total intransigence and inspires a mindless fanaticism. Instead the Qu’ran evolves a complementary theology of war and peace, which most Christians would not find difficult to accept.’ (p. 225)

EXTREMISM AND SOME YOUNG BRITISH MUSLIMS

If Islam itself is not to blame, how is it that young British Muslims could carry out the London bombings? The British Government carried out a secret study of precisely this topic—‘Young Muslims and Extremism’—in 2004 (leaked to the Sunday Times on 10 July, p. 1)

This joint report by the Home Office and Foreign Office (with intelligence input) put together a list of factors causing ‘extremism’. First on the list was British ‘Foreign policy issues’: ‘It seems that a particularly strong cause of disillusionment amongst Muslims including young Muslims is a perceived “double standard” in the foreign policy of western governments... in particular Britain and the US. This is particularly significant in terms of the concept of the “Ummah”, i.e. that Believers are one “nation”...’

‘This perception seems to have become more acute post 9/11. The perception is that passive “oppression”, as demonstrated in British foreign policy, eg non-action on Kashmir and Chechnya, has given way to “active oppression”—the war on terror, and in Iraq and Afghanistan are all seen by a section of British Muslims as having been acts against Islam.’

‘This disillusionment may contribute to a sense of helplessness with regard to the situation of Muslims in the world, with a lack of any tangible “pressure valves”, in order to vent frustrations, anger or dissent.’

In other words, British Muslims see themselves as part of a global Muslim community, and when they see the British government waging violent war on other parts of that global community—against ordinary civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq, it hurts them.

It is their anger over violent civilian deaths at the hands of the US and UK, and their despair at the possibility of changing these foreign policies, which make some young British Muslims vulnerable to recruitment by al Qaeda. This is the Government’s own analysis.

NOT ISLAM, BUT OUR POLICIES ARE TO BLAME

Michael Scheuer, the CIA’s bin Laden expert from 1996 to 1999, says we must understand that ‘the motivation for the people fighting us has to do with our policies... it’s a mistake to think the Muslims don’t understand our policy... we need a shot of democracy inside the United States... If... the decision is to keep those policies kind of as they are—well, I think that might be a mistake. But... at least the country would be going into the war against Islamic militancy with its eyes open, knowing that those policies, more than anything else, motivate our enemy. We would go into it with our eyes open. We’d be expecting a very long war, and a very bloody and costly war.’ (January 2005)

posted August 21, 2006 01:00 AM              

The difference is, if I may point out the obvious, that Islamic extremists target the entire rest of the world, i.e. everyone who is not practicing Islamic law...that means you and me in Canada, those in America & most of Europe, and Israel, Australia, most of Africa, ...simply because they are "infidels". It's nothing to do with what they do, it's all about the fact that they are not Islamic. That is just stupid and delusional.

But terrorism is never ok, regardless.

posted August 21, 2006 12:53 PM            

I want to say first off, that its never nice to condemn something that you do not understand-especially if that something happens to be someone's religion. Islam is not a death cult. Also, Islam really isn't to blame-it is the people with power (like Osama Bin Laden,Al-Qaeda,Taliban,etc.) who twist around the Quran for their own benefit. Its the same thing with Bush and gay marriages who quotes the Bible as his back-up. Is Christianity to blame? No. Is Bush to blame for not seperating church and state? Yes.

I'm not a Muslim but the religion of Islam has flourished in my country for Centuries without any issues. It is the second most dominant religion there after Catholicism. This I believe is because people have learned to interpret the Quran correctly and responsibly. And its not just in my country; I'm sure there are other Muslims around the world who are not fantatical. its the same with thing with Christianity; there are some good apples and then there are some Fanatics and Fundamentalists who either intepret the Bible too literally or they twist it around all together.

posted August 21, 2006 01:34 PM              

I really disagree with the "islam is not to blame" part. That is because the terrorist attacks have been because of their hate towards democracy and power and free thinking to all people in the western world.
And the root of that, is because they are conceived and born and raised in a world where they are brainwashed with their religion to every minute of the day.
And that religion is based on being 100% faithful and a believer to it, or else you'll get killed.
So imagine to have THAT kind of view to the human willpower and our need for freedom and a free world, that you deserve death by actually thinking that could be a reality, induvidualism and freedom of thought.
That is so upside down to our thinking in the western world.
And the people who say not all the muslims are like that and bla bla, sure, well I recently met a girlfriend of mine downtown where I live.
She has converted to islam, and during our conversation, she noticed another woman who she knew was passing by, a muslim as well, and she wasnt wearing shoes to hide all of her feet, like only sandals, and she would talk behind her back to me, saying she wasnt allowed to do that, they must cover ALL of their feet and toes.

And even if that is your choice of life or not, it really said alot to me about whats going on.

Also, I asked a muslim girlfriend who I went to school with as to why she doesnt show her beautiful full hair but instead covers it all with that hijab, and she said that she liked wearing it, that she didnt feel discriminated at all.
And that is good for her though, but I so don't believe that.
Where is the logic to hiding womens beautiful hair? They say its not the religion that say they need to wear the hijab, sure, cause its more beautiful than showing their true hair right?
Like terrorism has got nothing to do with islam right?

posted August 21, 2006 04:41 PM            

I think you may have misinterpreted what has been said here again and again and DayDreamers subsequent reason for starting this thread.

EVERYONE here has posted that Islamic Fundamentalist / Terrorists are to BLAME. NO ONE HERE blamed Islam as a whole - DayDreamer will not let that go. IN her world we are all either proponents of Islam or if we speak out against Islamic terrorists then we are opponents of all of Islam.

Repeatedly, we have stated that we catagorize (and by we, I am talking about the several posters that DD keeps accusing of hating Islam) ALL terrorists as evil. Whether they are from my own Christian background or they are in the form of animal rights activists.

DayDreamer takes offense when we want to see the rights of women in oppressed Mulsim countries (such as under Saddam's and the Taliban's rule) have rights and not be treated like dogs.

She states that means we are against Islam - NOT TRUE. WE, I - wouldn't care if they worshiped Green Beans- if they oppress someone then they are wrong.

Again, how does it always come down to this?

posted August 21, 2006 05:54 PM            

Oh no.... I should have worded it differently because I really wasn't posting to you after the first sentance. It was geared towards DayDreamer and the reason she posted in the first place..

posted August 21, 2006 06:56 PM              

LION EYE - Sorry but i'm CALLING YOU OUT! You're pathetic! I had to say it. You make the most uneducated opinionated comments- that hold no ground. I actually think you are a Twit. Sorry but I’m brutally honest. I’m sure you don’t care and I’m expecting some uneducated comment in return. Instead of trying to see the good in things, you my friend seem like a dark and delusional person. Are you obsessed with making thing seem distorted?

I wanted to comment on what you said, in regards to Islam…

That Islamic extremists target the entire rest of the world, i.e. everyone who is not practicing Islamic law...that means you and me in Canada, those in America & most of Europe, and Israel, Australia, most of Africa, simply because they are "infidels". It's nothing to do with what they do; it's all about the fact that they are not Islamic. That is just stupid and delusional.”

posted August 21, 2006 07:04 PM            

I'm calling you out on being some a-holes alter ego. Why don't you wise up, stop lying (I ripped your doctored pics all to hell you lying sack of racist crap- how dare you take a headline from one article from CNN from an Anti-semetic websites- then apply doctored pictures).

posted August 21, 2006 07:18 PM              

The article was from CNN. CNN is anti-semtic? I didn't think they were because I'm not American, I'm Canadian...i don't watch American News- Most of its Propoganda.But I never knew that CNN was considered Anti-semtic.
And as for applying doctored pictures- I don't have that much time on my hands to do that...but thats the link below..http://www.aztlan.net/iraqi_women_raped.htm

Maybe you can check them for yourself.

posted August 21, 2006 07:20 PM              

Photos Show Rape of Iraqi Women
by US Occupation Forces

(Please Note: Many of the photographs showing the rape of Iraqi women and the sodomization of Iraqi POW's at the Abu Ghraib prison are now at USA pornographic websites pointing to the possibility of collusion between the depraved US soldiers in the pictures and US based Jewish pornographers. Many of these photographs were also freely disseminated to US occupation forces, perhaps to inflame their nefarious desires and to motivate them to strike out against the Iraqi populace in these perverse ways.)

by
Ernesto Cienfuegos
La Voz de Aztlan

Los Angeles, Alta California - May 2, 2004 - (ACN) The release, by CBS News, of the photographs showing the heinous sexual abuse and torture of Iraqi POW's at the notorious Abu Ghraib prison has opened a Pandora's box for the Bush regime. Apparently, the suspended US commander of the prison where the worst abuses took place, Brigadier General Janis Karpinski, has refused to take the fall by herself and has implicated the CIA, Military Intelligence and private US government contractors in the torturing of POW's and in the raping of Iraqi women detainees as well.

Brigadier General Janis Karpinski said to the Washington Post that Military Intelligence, rather than the Military Police, dictated the treatment of prisoners at Abu Ghraib prison. "The prison, and that particular cellblock where the events took place, were under the control of the Military Intelligence command," Brigadier General Karpinski said to the Washington Post Saturday night in a telephone interview from her home in Hilton Head, South Carolina.

Brigadier General Karpinski, who commanded the 800th Military Police Brigade, described a high-pressure Military Intelligence and CIA command that prized successful interrogations. A month before the alleged abuses and rapes occurred, she said, a team of CIA, Military Intelligence officers and private consultants under the employ of the US government came to Abu Ghraib. "Their main and specific mission was to give the interrogators new techniques to get more information from detainees," she said.

Today, new photographs were sent to La Voz de Aztlan from confidential sources depicting the shocking rapes of two Iraqi women by what are purported to be US Military Intelligence personnel and private US mercenaries in military fatigues. It is now known that hundreds of these photographs had been in circulation among the troops in Iraq. The graphic photos were being swapped between the soldiers like baseball cards.

Speaking on condition of anonymity, one Mexican-American soldier told La Voz de Aztlan, "Maybe the officers didn't know what was going on, but everybody else did. I have seen literally hundreds of these types of pictures." Many of the pictures were destroyed last September when the luggage of soldiers was searched as they left Iraq, he said

An investigation, led by Army Major General Antonio M. Taguba, identified two military intelligence officers and two civilian contractors for the Army as key figures in the abuse cases at the Abu Ghraib prison. In an internal report on his findings, Major General Taguba said he suspected that the four were "either directly or indirectly responsible for the abuses at Abu Ghraib and strongly recommended disciplinary action."

posted August 21, 2006 07:31 PM            

1) There is NO rank on any uniform

2) Where is the US Flag

3) The BDU's are old and wrinkled, not standard in the Military even when out in Iraq.

4) The boots are not US issued combat boots

5) All the Soldier have hair that is not within regulations - all hair HAS to be shorter than what is featured there.

6) The Uniform is missing the under-shirt that all must wear - why in the hell would they run around raping people in a BDU top (those BDU's have to have Name, Rank and US Flag SEWN onto them) when they could have worn just the brown BDU shirt.

7) If they were on duty and stripped and SOMEONE got this picture, without their knowledge, WHY are there no clothing impressions on their skin (helmet and bullet proof vest.. and NOTHING on the floor).

Your pictures from your famed website are doctored. They are NOT us Soldiers and that article does not go with those pics.

You post lies.. therefore you are liar..

From here on your word nor your posts are not worth a DAMN THING.

DO I believe they are real pics? Yep, of some pornographic snuff kind of film that is probably really popular down in Mexico.

------------------
The democratic world believes that it is not the terrorists that are to blame, but us. Us, the westerners.
WRONG!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And the sooner you eliminate this misconception from your minds, the better.
We are NOT to blame. It is the freaking terrorists and the freaking terrorists only!!!! They are the bad guys. They do not understand concepts like peace, democracy, and respect for human life. They are, pure and simPle, EVIL!!!!! Behind all their political manipulations, if you carefully look at the actions of these MONSTERS, they are EVIL!!

http://www.mideastweb.org/log/archives/00000489.htm

posted August 21, 2006 07:52 PM              

I just posted the pictures. The article did no go with them. I can say that. I guess that would give someone the false impression as to where they came from. I did most the article the did go w/ the pictures and the links but I also posted other sources relative to that story.

hey this is from MSNBC http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14241223/

BAGHDAD, Iraq - A U.S. Army private on Tuesday described the ever-present fear of death gripping his unit, whose members stand accused of raping and murdering a 14-year-old girl and killing her family in Iraq’s infamous “Triangle of Death.”

“You’re just walking a death walk,” Pfc. Justin Cross told a hearing to determine whether five fellow soldiers must stand trial in the March 12 attack near Mahmoudiya.

But prosecutors argued that the threats of war, arduous missions and frequent loss of life were no excuse for rape and murder.

“Murder, not war. Rape, not war. That’s what we’re here talking about today,” prosecutor Capt. Alex Pickands said in his closing argument before the three-day hearing concluded. “Cold food didn’t kill that family. Personnel assignments didn’t rape and murder that 14-year-old little girl.”

I believe in Freedom, and peace but being a hyprocrite is a different story. I'm not justify anyones behaviour. I'm just showing you that there are both sides to the story. You are sitting comfortably in your home. If you believe so much in what the army is right and you support it...why haven't you enlisted in the army? I mean you might as well fight for it.

posted August 21, 2006 08:00 PM            

No one is advocating rape. YOU, on the other hand, posted FAKE pictures doctored to reflect US Soldiers raping a woman. The picture is not real. The US Soldiers indicted for raping a woman, killing her and her family, THAT IS REAL and people that commit crimes of that nature should have their units chopped off.

BUT.. you posted inflammatory pictures that were not a part of the real story. Those are not real Soldiers..

How do I know? Hmmm... since I am married to an United States Army SGT and I live near an UNITED STATES Army Post, I believe I have a clue as to what the uniform looks like since is hangs in my husbands closet, get pressed when it is wrinkled and it worn with respect.

WHY did I not join the Military, because not everyone that supports the Military has to join. You are proving your bottomed out intellect with that statement and I've seen about 2 other mental midgets do the same. I have always supported the Military as I have family members that served and are still serving- but the Military is not for me nor do I feel I would be a benefit to the Military as my skills are elsewhere. That doesn't mean I won't work for them and when I move to Germany I'll be working for the Army in a civilian position.

posted August 21, 2006 08:05 PM            

Today, new photographs were sent to La Voz de Aztlan from confidential sources depicting the shocking rapes of two Iraqi women by what are purported to be US Military Intelligence personnel and private US mercenaries in military fatigues.

Really? So Aztlan has a confidential source that no one else has.. or some idiot couldn't find a better sucker than Aztlan to produce such BS?

LMAO... and to think people like YOU fell for it.

MI personnel are still Soldiers that wear the same Uniform as the regular Soldiers..MI is just another division.

posted August 21, 2006 08:09 PM              

Well thats niec to know you support you're troops. If ur husbands in the army...kudos 2 u. Doesn't mean other people have to agree with it. I'm not going to lie to you and pretend i'm cool with that. I'm not cool with War. I think that at the end of it all there are many lives lost on both sides. KILLING INNOCENT PEOPLE CAN NEVER BE JUSTIFIED - whether it be a casualites of war being KILLED by the US army or the British army - let alone terrorists killing innocent people.

A F'N INNOCENT PERSON IS AN INNOCENT PERSON. SO STOP TRYING TO MAKE MUSLIMS LOOK BAD. I'm not making American's look bad- i'm just showing you the other side of the equation. THERE IS NO ONE RIGHT IN THIS SITUATION.

It infuriates me because you try to JUSTIFY such hypocracies and contridictions.

posted August 21, 2006 08:29 PM            

YOU infuriate me because you would hide your head in the sand until someone came to take your personal rights away. Then you would be the first shrill voice screaming to have someone defend you.

And don't think I didn't pick up on the "If" your husband is in the Army. Yes, he is.. go through some past posts.. he's known as Bear the Leo and has been in the US Army for 13 years. Hell, go to the LindaLand photo album and you even see him in ACU's.

PS... CNN is NOT anti-semetic.. Aztlan is.. CNN never posted those doctored pics. YOUR website did.