Father of 9/11 Victim Fights to Have 'Murdered by Muslim Terrorists' Inscribed on Son's Me

[Reggy]

Admin Note:

Please continue the US Civil War discussion here
US Civil War Myths and Facts

Arnisador.

Not to beat a dead horse, but, your comment, "all the Abrahamic religions are violent", is exactly the concern that I have, with much of the blog/forum posts that I see in the news these days. This sweeping statement, could make one take the "next step" and formulate the thought that since "all the Abrahamic religions are violent", then the "jihad" that some in Islam are waging against the non-Muslim world, is, OK, ...."since, you know, everyone's doing it"......This is why I feel a better route, is to call it out, when we see it and had I lived during the Crusades, I would have been ok with "calling out" that bit of Christian barbarity. In my view, this is a Muslim issue and it is they who should reign in the "violent jihadis" in their midst. I believe they would get all the help and appreciation that they could stand, should they go that route.....unfortunately, I'm not seeing much of this on their end and the silence can be (and sometimes is) taken to be, acceptance and even condoning of these terrorist actions....and given that "their" problem is killing "us" and "them"....it has now become "our" problem too.....so maybe "us" calling it out (Muslim Terrorists), will embolden some within Islam to say "TRUE!"...and "shame on us, this is NOT what we want and we don't condone it!".....I know a few Imam's have said this, but I'm talking about a ground-swell, massive, world shaking, "NO"....Think how that would send a message of solidarity, to all peace loving people's of the world.

 

[Tez3]

It's not the religions that are violent, it's people. With or without religions people can be inhumanely cruel, religion is just the excuse. If it's not religion it would be another excuse.
If one lived in the time of the Crusades criticising them would have got you swiftly tortured and killed, the same applies in many countries where
Muslim extremism holds sway. Do you honestly think that it's about religion and not power? It's always about power, land and wealth, thats why we have wars, religion is just an excuse. You think the Middle East is about Jews v Muslims? Think again, it's about land, water. power and wealth just as it was in the days of the Crusades,not one of which was actually about religion or even G-d.

 

[Sukerkin]

Example, please?

The terrorist groups which were active in Europe during the 70's are a classic example of Atheist Terrorists- tho admittedly still driven by an ideology, it was an ideology of anti-establishment nature rather than A-N-Other-God-botheryness.

 

[CanuckMA]

example, please?

eta

 

[arnisador]

The terrorist groups which were active in Europe during the 70's are a classic example of Atheist Terrorists- tho admittedly still driven by an ideology, it was an ideology of anti-establishment nature rather than A-N-Other-God-botheryness.

Like the Red Brigade in Italy, you mean? Weren't these generally indifferent to religion? Would any of them have refused to accept a Christian member on grounds of his religious persuasion? There may have been some communist group that incorporated atheism in as a secondary consequence of their communist beliefs, but as a rule I think these groups simply didn't have a religious stance as groups. Certainly they weren't specifically targeting anyone or anyplace based on (ir)religious grounds.

eta

The Basques? They're largely Catholic--it's just that the ETA opposes having a state religion.

 

[Carol]

The most vicious "atheist" terror group that I can think of is the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam. They aren't well known in the west, but when referred to over here they are typically called the "Tamil Tigers".

Atheist is in quotes because I highly doubt that you'd find them reading James Randi and debating critical thinking. They do, however, promote an independent Marxist state for the Tamil where they are (naturally) the only authority.

http://www.satp.org/satporgtp/countries/shrilanka/terroristoutfits/LTTE.HTM

 

[Tez3]

The Maoist insugents in Nepal.
The Tamil Tigers are well known here for their sheer viciousness and for having both male and female suicide bombers.
The Red Army Faction also known as the Bader-Meinhof Group.
The Shining Path in Peru.
ETA is Markist-Leninist in outlook, it adopted those principles in the 1960s.

 

[Sukerkin]

Weren't these generally indifferent to religion?

Ah, I see. That's generally what I mean by 'Atheist'.

I know that some here apparently see Atheism as some sort of organised anti-religious crusade but that's not how I interpret it.

 

[arnisador]

Yes, I see what you mean...I meant that as opposed to those fighting to advance or defend or destroy a particular religion, were there atheist groups doing the same in the name of atheism, or even groups composed wholly of atheists. Some of the communist groups might be entirely atheist or at least atheistic in their propaganda because that's a common aspect of a communist viewpoint, secondary though it is.

For example, according to Wikipedia the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam "is a secular organization, regarding the religious beliefs of its members as private matters". I don't see that as atheistic: The members might be quite religious, and the motivation is political, not religious or anti-religious. I don't know of statements on religion by the Bader-Meinhof Group, though their communism likely entailed it. The Nepal Maoists are probably closer--they want a secular communist state. Of course wanting to overthrow a state religion in favor of no state religion isn't necessarily atheistic--it happened here in the U.S., for example.

 

[Tez3]

Nepal is a secular state, it doesn't have a state religion.

 

[Carol]

The LTTE, moreover, is a secular group which regards religion as a private matter. The ‘cult of personality,’ however, prevails. The devotion of the Tigers is to the LTTE chief who is considered supreme.

A secular devotion to me sounds atheitistic in nature. It may not be done in the name of Atheism. But if the devotion is to the Chief, then there does not seem to be room for devotion elsewhere.

There is no indication that religious practices could flourish under the LTTE. They are statist in nature and don't want to share their power.

 

[arnisador]

Nepal is a secular state, it doesn't have a state religion.

That's as of 2006, and they've been at it since the early 90s.

 

[Tez3]

That's as of 2006, and they've been at it since the early 90s.

Well I'm not about to disagree with the Gurkhas, you may if you wish but it was Ghurka colleague I consulted thinking that he may know more about their country than I.

 

[arnisador]

I was going by Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nepal

Nepal was formerly the world's only constitutionally declared Hindu state, but following the movement for democracy in early 2006 and the breaking of King Gyanendra's power, the Nepali Parliament amended the constitution to make Nepal a secular state.

 

[Tez3]

I was going by Wikipedia:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_Nepal

I'll direct my Nepalese colleague to that, I'm sure he'll be unamused. He also explained a lot about who actually are Nepalese and who aren't, the various tribes, religions and customs but I expect I shall have to go to Wiki for the 'truth'

 

[arnisador]

I'll direct my Nepalese colleague to that, I'm sure he'll be unamused. He also explained a lot about who actually are Nepalese and who aren't, the various tribes, religions and customs but I expect I shall have to go to Wiki for the 'truth'

The NY Times and the CIA agree with me. From the NY Times (17 Dec. 2006):
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/17/world/asia/17nepal.html

The new Constitution is to determine whether Hinduism will remain the official state religion.

From the CIA World Factbook (as of 2001, periodically updated):
https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/geos/np.html

note: only official Hindu state in the world

Also a major Nepalese newspaper:
http://www.telegraphnepal.com/news_det.php?news_id=6522

On May 18, 2006, the re-instated parliamentary government severely stripped the King’s power and, to the surprise of most Nepalese citizens, Nepal was declared a secular state.

But perhaps some random guy you know knows better.

 

[Carol]

I suspect you are both right. Nepal may be a secular government on paper, but I dont't in any way think that a culture that is centuries old has changed seemingly overnight.

The world's largest Democracy (India) is a secular state, yet certain rights in the constitution are defined by religion.

 

[Tez3]

How strange to argue with someone who's country it is! I've since asked other Ghurkha colleagues and they agree with what I was first told so I guess I'll go with what they say.
These aren't random guys these are serving Ghurkha SNCOs and a serving (but ex Ghurkha soldier) Ministry of Defence Police Officer all of whom I would trust my life with. The Ghurkhas have served with distinction recently in Afghanistan and are now training Ghurkha recruits here. All of whom are Nepalese of different religions and beliefs.