SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Islamic State militants beheaded Khaled al-Asaad, 82, a renowned antiquities scholar in the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra and hung his mutilated body on a column in a main square of the historic site because he apparently refused to reveal where valuable artifacts had been moved for safekeeping.
Before the city's capture by Isis, Syrian officials said they moved hundreds of ancient statues to safe locations out of concern they would be destroyed by the militants. Isis was likely to be looking for portable, easily saleable items that are not registered.
Unesco warned last month that looting had been taking place on an "industrial scale". Isis advertises its destruction of sites such as Nimrud in Iraq but says little about the way plundered antiquities help finance its activities. Stolen artefacts make up a significant stream of the group's estimated multi-million dollar revenues, along with oil sales and straightforward taxation and extortion.
Asaad had worked over the past few decades with US, French, German and Swiss archaeological missions on excavations and research in Palmyra's famed 2,000-year-old ruins. "He was a fixture, you can't write about Palmyra's history or anything to do with Palmyrian work without mentioning Khaled Asaad. It's like you can't talk about Egyptology without talking about Howard Carter."
Archaeological experts say Isis took over the already existing practice of illegal excavation and looting, which until 2014 was carried out by various armed groups, or individuals, or the Syrian regime. Isis initially levied 20% taxes on those it "licensed" to excavate but later began to hire its own own archaeologists, digging teams and machinery.
"Their systematic campaign seeks to take us back into pre-history. But they will not succeed."
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @01:51PM
What I believe is, it's past time for the world community to wade into that mess, and put a stop to it.
No, I'm not talking about kicking asses, and taking names. I'm talking about putting mad dogs down. We keep hearing that Islam is a religion of peace. Well, if that be true, then the rest of Islam should cooperate with the world community in putting their mad dogs down. No more ISIS, or Daesh. Kill 'em all, let Allah sort them out.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @01:56PM
Ooops - apologies. I realize that many of you don't know what Daesh is. This article should aid in your understanding -
https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2014/10/09/words-matter-isis-war-use-daesh/V85GYEuasEEJgrUun0dMUP/story.html [bostonglobe.com]
PLEASE, stop referring to those animals as "ISIS" or "ISIL" or any other name that lends any degree of dignity or humanity to them. They are animals, lower than dogs or swine. Daesh. Not MY name for them, but the name assigned by more moderate Muslims. Pretentious animals, claiming to know the will of God.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @07:20PM
Well, if that be true, then the rest of Islam should cooperate with the world community in putting their mad dogs down.
Implying that the Muslim people support (or at least don't oppose) them...
Daesh. Not MY name for them, but the name assigned by more moderate Muslims.
Implying that moderate Muslims condemn them...
So which position do you think is the true one? I expect it is the latter, so why did you say the former?
(Score: 2) by PartTimeZombie on Friday August 21 2015, @12:54AM
I don't think there's too much doubt that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are among the biggest funders of ISIS.
I don't think the average Muslim person in either of those countries would be particularly happy about what ISIS does, but since when do repressive governments like Saudi Arabia care what their subjects think?
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @11:20AM
The truth is, huge numbers of Muslims in the world are very like the ISIS or prefer an interpretation of Islam that would result in ISIS like behaviour.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ani-zonneveld/isis-muslim-world-similar_b_7998418.html [huffingtonpost.com]
Many of them would want to treat their enemies similar to how the ISIS treat their enemies. They just disagree on who their enemies are. Go look what the head of Al-Azhar (one of the top religious leaders of the Sunni Islam world) says: http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/1/64/122176/Egypt/Politics-/AlAzhar-head-says-IS-murderers-deserve-to-be-kille.aspx [ahram.org.eg]
Ahmed El-Tayeb said: "The Quran mandates that the perpetrators of this cowardly act, which goes against God's word, deserve to be killed, or crucified, or have their legs and arms amputated."
Many Muslims believe they should follow the examples of their religious leaders in history and a number of those leaders did very similar things to what the ISIS did: http://www.firstthings.com/blogs/firstthoughts/2015/08/why-did-the-isis-caliph-rape-american-kayla-mueller [firstthings.com]
In contrast it doesn't take much studying of Buddhism for you to realize that the Buddhists in Sri Lanka and Myanmar who are killing others are definitely not following the ideals of Buddhism or the example of the various Buddhas. Yes Buddhism allows military folk to kill however it's not something that's encouraged it's more like a lesser evil. Whereas many Muslims do not consider stuff like the forced marriage/enslavement of women captives as a lesser evil. In fact very many like the idea of fighting and killing people and dying as a Syahid.
And thus no surprise that Islam with such popular interpretations tends to result in more violence nad evil than say Buddhism or the worship of the FSM.
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @03:05AM
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
It is OK to call any people "animals", since it is literally true. But they are also obviously, plainly, uncontroversially "human" in every sense of the word.
Most people who claim to be members of the Islamic State obviously think of their actions as basic survival; they also think of it as a struggle for their personal freedom, and many (although probably not most) think of it as a fight for their political freedom. While you think they are "lower than swine" (in what sense?), they regard the west as a worthy adversary, and these kinds of mentalities must be factoring into why they are still winning and the west got its knickers in a bunch. IS manages to maintain a semi-functioning state, while at war with all of their neighbors, the USA, and its allies, all the while the surrounding regimes are coming apart at the seams. These people have to know quite a bit more about humanity and freedom than you give them credit for. And the sum of all of their atrocities so far is nothing compared with what, mmm, say, USA does every year for the last 40+ years.
~ Anonymous 0x9932FE2729B1D963
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2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=lAIS
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
(Score: 5, Insightful) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:14PM
Why are 1.7 billion Muslims somehow responsible for ISIS...relatively speaking, an infinitesimal minority of their numbers. Is / has the Protestant religion been responsible for the KKK? Next people will start posting links from that horrific bigoted TheReligionOfPeace.com site...this shit incenses me to no end.
As far as "cooperating" or whatever, I'd say that in areas where people the population is "tolerating" them, it's primarily because all other options have worked out worse for them.
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:18PM
> Why are 1.7 billion Muslims somehow responsible for ISIS
Good point. I sure hope 350 million Americans aren't responsible for them either.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:35PM
Well, America created the political situation that allowed them to thrive, so yes, America is responsible.
(Score: 0, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:46PM
Sorry, but for nut jobs like them you don't need to create anything. They'll do it all by themselves.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:56PM
No, you have to create something. Namely a space where they can grow to become a serious problem before anyone stops them.
You think they would have had the slightest chance under Saddam Hussein?
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:29PM
America created the political mess that is the Middle East? You, sir, are an ignorant dumbass that needs glasses that can look back a couple thousand years.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @04:22PM
Daesh didn't form 1000 years ago. It didn't form 500 years ago. It didn't even form 50 years ago. It didn't form until America entered Iraq, removed its government, and then didn't do the tedious job of rebuilding it into a reasonable state, but left it in a desolate condition. This power vacuum they created was what enabled Daesh to become a dangerous power.
George Bush was wise enough not to remove Saddam Hussein from power. George W. Bush didn't have that wisdom.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by bzipitidoo on Thursday August 20 2015, @04:53PM
"America is responsible" sounds very like an arrogant "White Man's Burden" view of the situation. There's much more to it than that. Invading Iraq was a major blunder. The neocons oversimplified the problems, and mostly got it all wrong. They went charging in, pretending even to themselves that they were on white horses. That there's a lot of oil involved was kept as quiet as they could, which wasn't very quiet. Killed a bunch of people and flipped Iraq from Sunni domination to Shia, and solved nothing. Made a lot of things worse. The Shias have no better idea what to do than the Sunnis did.
Iraq and Syria are ecological disasters. Any solution that doesn't account for that is going to fail. Syria destabilized when a major drought struck, and the Assad government responded with stupidity and brutality.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Joe Desertrat on Thursday August 20 2015, @07:18PM
"America is responsible" sounds very like an arrogant "White Man's Burden" view of the situation. There's much more to it than that. Invading Iraq was a major blunder. The neocons oversimplified the problems, and mostly got it all wrong. They went charging in, pretending even to themselves that they were on white horses. That there's a lot of oil involved was kept as quiet as they could, which wasn't very quiet. Killed a bunch of people and flipped Iraq from Sunni domination to Shia, and solved nothing. Made a lot of things worse. The Shias have no better idea what to do than the Sunnis did.
Iraq was a created nation in the first place, essentially three regions forced together, with mistakes made every step of the way. The Kurds were split in half with Turkey retaining control of one part, and Sunnis and Shiites made up the rest. The Shiites were the majority, but the Sunnis dominated the government, from the monarchy set up by the British through Saddam Hussein. Every step of the way was in part a result of interference by Western governments. When Hussein was removed with no leadership plan in place beyond some fairy tale idea that the Iraqis would cheer their liberators, naturally the majority faction (the Shiites) would hold the most influence, but no one was in charge. When there is a power vacuum, power moves in to try to take control. Anyone with half a brain should not be surprised by the rise of an ISIS or a Taliban or some other brutal, repressive force.
As far as the ecology of the region, it has been in decline since before the Mesopotamians fell apart. If it were not for the presence of oil and Western interference, "civilization" there would likely be small, scattered villages with little connection between them. When the oil runs out or demand for it falls far enough, that is what it will likely become. Whether those villages are controlled by benevolent leaders or brutal fundamentalists will probably be determined by what outside influences do between now and that point in the future.
(Score: 2) by HiThere on Thursday August 20 2015, @07:15PM
You, also, are neglecting to distinguish between groups given a name, and individuals given the same name. Very few of the individuals would agree with the actions that the "group with the same name" takes. This is why authoritarians love hierarchies--most people don't get a real voice, and certainly no effective power, but those at the top of the hierarchy can act "in the name of the group" and get the blame diffused over bunches of people who had no say in what was going on, and often wouldn't have approved of it. (Sometimes they are decieved into approving of an action based on false evidence, but usually they are just ignored.)
Javascript is what you use to allow unknown third parties to run software you have no idea about on your computer.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @07:40AM
The majority of Americans voted for a second term of Goerge W. Bush. Which shows that they did agree and actively support his politics.
That's the difference between a democracy and a dictatorship. In a democracy, the citizens share some of the blame, because they could do something about it. In a dictatorship, short of a revolution, nothing can be done about it.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:51PM
Off topic? Really?
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:22PM
Correction. That was supposed to be 1.57 billion.
Don't get me wrong, I think they're animals that need to be taken out as well. I just think that holding 22% of the worlds population responsible for them based on their religion is inexcusable.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:34PM
Has the Protestant movement been responsible for the KKK? Well - yes, actually. A predominantly Protestant nation has indeed passed the laws to deal with those racist assholes, and that same predominantly Protestant nation has gone to some effort to enforce those laws.
This shit incenses you? Well, light another stick of incense, because there's more to come.
Let Brigitte explain it to you - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry3NzkAOo3s [youtube.com]
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:50PM
Ah right...so it's not because we're a better country with a better system, it's because we're predominantly Protestant. You do a great job of making my point for me.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @04:56PM
What is your point?
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday August 20 2015, @05:11PM
The very fact that he attributes all of this (good or bad) to the prevailing religion shows the bigotry behind his thinking.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @06:59PM
Is a parent not responsible for their children?
Abramaic religions preach and control through a similar relationship between the followers and the one true god.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @06:57PM
By that logic, all Jews and Christians are responsible for the actions of Muslims, especially Christianity for being the parent religion of Islam. So every single individual believer of an Abrahamic religion is personally responsible for ISIS's actions.
(Score: 1, Troll) by moondrake on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:54PM
Funny you say that...You realize that saying that a religion is to blame for the actions of a number of people, even when they use it as a justification for their actions is on almost the same level as blaming people with a different skin color are to blame for thievery (the difference being that you do not get to chose your skincolor, but I would argue that most religious people did not chose their religion either).? Even when you can show statistics that criminal activity is more prevalent under a certain ethnic group, it does not make the group as a whole responsible for it. Even when individuals claim that they have to steal because there are prejudices that prevent them from getting a job (i.e. using their color as a justiciation) it is still does not mean than being black (or brown or whatever) people are responsible for criminal activity.
Religion is exactly the same. Even if it makes them a 1000x more predisposed to being a terrorist, it is still not the religion that is to blame, its the people. They make choices based on thousands of factors in their life. Some make the wrong choice. But it is their own responsibility, not their religion. In fact, I find blaming the religion takes away some of the guilt that rests on a terrorists shoulder. Why not face the facts that humans are stupid, gullible and sometimes downright evil.
You might as well kill all men just because they are more predisposed to violence compared to females. These are nonsense arguments and actually polarize society, leading to more problems instead of less.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:03PM
Those are all very fine academic arguments. Maybe you can arrange to bring Daesh into Academia, sot that nice academic solutions to the world's problems can be found.
I'm not holding my breath, waiting for that to happen. Fact is, the world community needs to smash Daesh, and those Muslims you are defending need to step up to the plate, and and take responsibility. Daesh has probably murdered more people than the total number of casualties during the Iraq war. They drag women, children, old people - anyone who offends them in the slightest manner - to the gallows, or to the chopping block, or to the nearest ditch. Nothing matters to them - if you so much as pronounce the name of Allah with the wrong dialect, you die.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by moondrake on Thursday August 20 2015, @04:30PM
Smash, burn, murder, gallows, chopping, and ditching...DIE!
ah...the delights of seeing the world simple. Why strive for being civilized if you can just join the fun and burn and pillage (on either side of the conflict)...
Interestingly, the guy killed in the FA was an Academic. He was also a Muslim. He defended his Academic interest and paid with his life. Did he not step up and take his responsibility? There are thousands like him and they are all heroes. But it is still silly to hold them as a group responsible for the actions of ISIS or Daesh or other criminals. Even when they do not act (as the FA is a good example of what happens when you do act).
The US is the land of tortured prisoners and unlawful prisons (and lots of other problems, take your favcorite). Should I smash and burn all USians just because a few bad ones at the top and the majority fails to step up? Especially since it seems to me that in the US you just vote to make a change, and there seems to be little risk to being beheaded when doing that.
Face it, your argument is just dumb. You are simply looking for an convenient and abstract target to focus your negative feelings at.
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday August 20 2015, @05:20PM
Exactly. ISIS represents a whopping .002% of the worlds Muslim population. It stuns me that people don't see how absurd and hateful this blame game bullshit is.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Thexalon on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:58PM
Oh really?
1. Being a member of the KKK (and their many imitators) is perfectly legal in this "predominantly Protestant nation". The Southern Poverty Law Center [splcenter.org] is currently working with law enforcement to track over 1600 active racist groups in the US.
2. Historically speaking, there was a period where the KKK effectively controlled the government of approximately 1/3 of the United States, and a decade where they had about 6 million active members and sympathizers occupying the Oval Office and several state houses.
The US still really hasn't dealt with those. But nobody outside of Ireland ever said "Just kill all the Protestants, that will solve the problem."
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:05PM
I have close to zero respect for the SPLC.
(Score: 2) by edIII on Thursday August 20 2015, @09:29PM
Why?
I'm genuinely curious. I've never heard a single bad thing about them. I noticed you were modded insightful, and I'm curious as to why.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @12:23AM
If you were curious you should have googled for it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Poverty_Law_Center#Controversy [wikipedia.org]
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2014/03/26/fbi-dumps-southern-poverty-law-center/ [breitbart.com]
http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2012/05/splc-highlights-new-extremist-leaders-watch [motherjones.com]
Thats right folks, both mother jones and brietbart don't have kind feelings for the SPLC.
Shit Huff Po and the tea part agree that SPLC is off their rocker.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/carol-m-swain/mission-creep-and-the-sou_b_255029.html [huffingtonpost.com]
http://www.teaparty.org/bishop-jackson-racism-worst-splc-label-ben-carson-extremist-85943/ [teaparty.org]
How have you missed all of this. All you have to do is sneeze in the general direction of a minority to be declared a hate group by them. As far as I am concerned their opinion is pure unadulterated shit.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 21 2015, @01:09AM
AC summed it all up very nicely - and I'll thank him for that link about Dr. Ben Carson being an extremist. Wow - holy shit - a man who spent his career advancing the state of the art in neuroscience, saving many, many lives along the way - he's an EXTREMIST?!?!?!
Fact is, the SPLC is itself an extreme organization which cannot tolerate any sort of opposition.
Carson. Who would have thought of that one?
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Hairyfeet on Friday August 21 2015, @03:48AM
Because last I checked they simply pretend groups like the Black Panthers do not exist or "don't count" because they tend to support the left, even when the leader of the BPP was calling for the extermination of white people?
A hate group is a hate group is a hate group, no matter their party affiliation, but the SPLC tends to ignore hate groups who support the left while condemning those who support the right even when their rhetoric is identical. So I'm sorry if you support them, but SPLC is about as impartial as MSNBC and Fox News.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 4, Informative) by M. Baranczak on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:09PM
Has the Protestant movement been responsible for the KKK? Well - yes, actually. A predominantly Protestant nation has indeed passed the laws to deal with those racist assholes, and that same predominantly Protestant nation has gone to some effort to enforce those laws.
After about 100 years in which the predominantly Protestant nation allowed the KKK to do their thing with impunity.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:15PM
That is one perspective.
Another perspective is that this nation was so sickened by slavery that it fought a civil war in protest of slavery. Having settled the question of slavery, the nation has gone on to combat terrorism against the former slaves.
I am not committing to that position - it is merely a a comparison of perspectives.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @07:00PM
Fighting against the other half, who thought so little of niggers that they were willing to commit treason, sedition, murder, and also die in order to ensure that niggers would never be treated as humans.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @04:59PM
The difference is the KKK isn't waging war on everyone which isn't them and cutting off the heads of archaeologists. In the rare cases when they do commit crimes they are treated as criminals. ISIS and friends are treated with little more than a shaking finger at best in the Islamic world.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @05:25PM
> A predominantly Protestant nation has indeed passed the laws to deal with those racist assholes,
It just took them over a century to do it.
And if you don't think protestantism created the KKK, you haven't been paying attention. Those fuckers put burning crosses on the land of the people they are terrorize. They were founded on christmas eve. [kkkknights.com]
> Let Brigitte explain it to you - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ry3NzkAOo3s [youtube.com]
You are a gamergater too aren't you? Y'all got exactly the same playback. Why is it that dumbfucks think linking to tedious videos videos of ranting nobodies is helpuful to their arguments? Nobody sane has time to waste on that.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @08:32PM
You are a gamergater too aren't you?
Stereotyping
Y'all got exactly the same playback.
Bad grammar, and more stereotyping.
Why is it that dumbfucks
Name calling
ranting nobodies
Sounds like an appeal to authority here, logical fallacy
Nobody sane has time to waste on that.
So everyone who listens to all of the arguments, must not be sane.
Grow up.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @12:37AM
Honestly you should watch the video.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:52PM
Why are 1.7 billion Muslims somehow responsible for ISIS...relatively speaking, an infinitesimal minority of their numbers.
What are they doing to keep ISIS or the next such groups an infinitesimal minority? One of the huge problems with just ignoring radical, expanding ideologies is that they keep growing. For example, the Khymer Rouge probably could be similarly dismissed as a "infinitesimal minority" of Cambodia, until they took over and killed more than a million people.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by digitalaudiorock on Thursday August 20 2015, @04:36PM
Seriously bad analogy. The bottom of your fraction (the population of Cambodia at that time) was less than 8 million people. How does that compare to blaming 1.57 billion Muslims all over the world for the actions of ISIS?
(Score: 1) by khallow on Thursday August 20 2015, @11:24PM
Seriously bad analogy. The bottom of your fraction (the population of Cambodia at that time) was less than 8 million people. How does that compare to blaming 1.57 billion Muslims all over the world for the actions of ISIS?
Yea, that would be at least 200 million dead Muslims. Maybe now would be a better time to do something about ISIS and all the other groups like ISIS.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Hairyfeet on Friday August 21 2015, @03:55AM
Insightful? Really mods? Its in fact a PERFECT analogy as a majority that does nothing does not matter, for some examples see the last century. the majority of Soviets were nice people, but that didn't stop Stalin from killing over 40 million, did it? I'm sure the average German didn't support the crazy Austrian, didn't stop him from committing mass murder on an insane scale did it?
We have seen time after time after time that a passive majority that refuses to squash radicals may as well not even exist because they have ZERO effect on the outcome. I'm sure the majority of Muslims are nice people but they don't picket and shut down mosques preaching jihad, don't say shit about Sharia law which alloows hanging of gays and stoning of rape victims so the fact that they are nice people means absolutely nothing as they have NO effect on the outcome, none at all.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 2) by digitalaudiorock on Friday August 21 2015, @09:48PM
FFS...I had a feeling you'd chime in on this one. How does that relate to you and Runaway pinning the blame for ISIS on 22% of the population of the planet based on the religion they practice?
Exactly what religion practiced around the world, that's so inferior to our wonderful Christian majority, is that was responsible for Stalin and Hitler? You can intellectualize all you want...all I hear is Islamaphobia.
Reply if you want...I'm done here. You guys are fucking scary.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Hairyfeet on Saturday August 22 2015, @06:10AM
I Love how all you can do is throw insults and run away, classic progressive, if the facts aren't on your side? Throw insults or scream "ist!" and refuse to debate, classic.
How EXACTLY is their religion any different than the racial purity religion preached by the NSDAP? How exactly is it any different than the communist/totalitarian doctrine preached by Stalin? I would argue that there is no difference because the results are the same, a passive majority that supports a radical minority equal death on a massive scale. As for the other religions, which just FYI I think are all BS? They grew the fuck up, Islam didn't. When was the last time you heard of a Christian stoning anybody? A jew chopping off hands of thieves? They both have those passages in their books but they became civilized for the most part whereas Islam is no different than it was a 1000 years ago. I will leave you with some quotes from their book, which until they grow the fuck up we have to take as law, because they sure as hell do..
Quran 4:89: They (infidels) desire that you should disbelieve as they have disbelieved, so that you might be (all) alike; therefore take not from among them friends until they fly (their homes) in Allah's way; but if they turn back, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them, and take not from among them a friend or a helper.
Quran 8:12: Instill terror into the hearts of the unbelievers;
Quran 2:191: kill the disbelievers wherever we find them
Quran 22:19-22: for them (the unbelievers) garments of fire shall be cut and there shall be poured over their heads boiling water whereby whatever is in their bowels and skin shall be dissolved and they will be punished with hooked iron rods.
Quran 8:12: Your Lord inspired the angels with the message: I will terrorize the unbelievers. Therefore smite them on their necks and every joint and incapacitate them. Strike off their heads and cut off each of their fingers and toes.
Quran 8:7: Allah wished to confirm the truth by His words: Wipe the infidels out to the last.
Quran 8:59: The infidels should not think that they can get away from us. Prepare against them whatever arms and weaponry you can muster so that you may terrorize them. They are your enemy and Allah's enemy.
Quran 8:60: Prepare against them whatever arms and cavalry you can muster that you may strike terror in the enemies of Allah, and others besides them not known to you.
Quran 9.29 Fight those who do not believe in Allah, nor in the latter day, nor do they prohibit what Allah and His Apostle have prohibited, nor follow the religion of truth, out of those who have been given the Book, until they pay the tax in acknowledgment of superiority and they are in a state of subjection.
ACs are never seen so don't bother. Always ready to show SJWs for the racists they are.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @06:54PM
Because they're not Christians. Fucking sandniggers aren't human and don't deserve to live because they worship something other than mon---I mean, Aryan Jesus. As soon as they let the turn and repent to Aryan Jesus, all of their sins will be forgiven and they will regain their humanity. Praise be to Aryan Jesus!
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:20PM
What seems to be missing from your thinking is that "the rest of Islam" is indeed cooperating with the world community in "putting their mad dogs down". The countries doing the majority of the fighting against Daesh are:
- Iraq (what's left of their military, plus various non-governmental militias)
- Iran
- Syria (the Assad regime, which aren't friends of the "world community" but are no friends of Daesh)
- Jordan
- U.A.E.
- Turkey (kinda, they're mostly just keeping Daesh outside of their borders)
- The Kurdish PKK, which isn't exactly a foreign country but would sure like to be.
The US is helping out with equipment and air strikes, but basically everybody fighting Daesh on the ground are Muslims. Your position seems to suggest that you believe the proper course of action is religiously-based genocide of over a billion people, even those who are your allies against "their mad dogs". Well, I for one will not support the sort of actions that would make WW II seem like a minor skirmish.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:37PM
Turkey. Let me offer you a new source of news - http://kurdishdailynews.org/feed/ [kurdishdailynews.org]
(Score: 4, Informative) by Thexalon on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:42PM
Turkey considers the Kurds their enemy and treats them accordingly. That's not news, nor is it surprising: the Kurds have been in armed rebellion against the Turkish government for decades.
But your position was that Muslims were not fighting Daesh. That Turkey is also fighting the PKK does not refute the fact that Turkey is fighting Daesh as well.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @02:56PM
"But your position was that Muslims were not fighting Daesh."
I don't think that I said that. Nor was it my intent to imply that. It WAS my intent to imply that Islam in general is far to tolerant of Daesh, and all the lesser militant groups.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Thexalon on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:02PM
So let me get this straight: Your argument is "Muslims are too tolerant of Daesh ... and the fact that a lot of Muslims are currently taking the lead in defeating Daesh is irrelevant"?
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:12PM
"It WAS my intent to imply that Islam in general is far to tolerant of Daesh, and all the lesser militant groups."
Recruits from around the world are making their way to Iraq and Syria, mostly by way of Turkey, to join Daesh. These people were taught by SOMEONE that Daesh' goals are laudable, even admirable. Who? I don't think that Wiccans are teaching such a thing. Or Shintos. Or Bhuddists. I doubt that any Native American tribes are teaching such a thing. Maybe ethnic Tibetans? Maybe the Chinese?
WHO IS TEACHING YOUNG PEOPLE THAT IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO BECOME A JIHADIST?!?!?!?!?!
(Score: 2, Informative) by Post-Nihilist on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:42PM
Adil Charkaoui [wikipedia.org] is one of those hyenas. He is an expert at using western democracies to avoid imprisonment and deportation while teaching that democracy is bad and that being a desert hyena is good.
p.s. if you know of an animal more hateful and coward than the hyenas please reply, I will use that term to designate those barbaric sand dwellers (with apologies to barbarian and dwellers)
Be like us, be different, be a nihilist!!!
(Score: 2) by AnonymousCowardNoMore on Thursday August 20 2015, @05:21PM
Perhaps a rat—besides the obvious I understand that they are considered "servants of Satan" by muslims. Failing that, you could hardly go wrong with "pig".
(Score: 2) by Subsentient on Thursday August 20 2015, @07:41PM
How dare you compare us large rodents to ISIS?! Rats are decent creatures with moral fiber, unlike ISIS, which is probably why they always have the shits.
"It is no measure of health to be well adjusted to a profoundly sick society." -Jiddu Krishnamurti
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday August 21 2015, @01:37AM
What's wrong with hyenas? Yeah, that have a weird laughing sound, and they mostly feed on carrion, but so what? Someone needs to clean up dead carcasses. As for rats and pigs (which someone else suggested), what's wrong with them? Rats are intelligent (really, really intelligent for their size and small brain), and pigs are really smart too, and very affectionate, though not very attractive (but that's not their fault).
If you want to compare ISIS to some kind of animal, I suggest something like the mosquito, or the tapeworm, or the leach, or the gadfly.: animals which really serve no useful purpose in the natural order and have no redeeming qualities whatsoever, animals which no one would miss if they disappeared, and do nothing but cause problems for other animals.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @07:47AM
The mosquito eating birds disagree.
(Score: 5, Informative) by Thexalon on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:46PM
That's easy: Jihadists. Who are not, as you seem to think, the vast majority of local imams and other religious leaders. Indeed, the imams are at the forefront of trying to convince young Muslims that joining Daesh is anti-Islam.
What you are continuing to refuse to do is recognize that approximately 99.9% of Muslims oppose Daesh (and other jihadist groups), and that far more are putting their lives on the line to oppose Daesh than are to fight for them. You do this in an attempt to justify atrocities on a scale that would make Francisco Franco, Josef Stalin, Chairman Mao, and Pol Pot seem like wimps.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:59PM
Exaggerate, much? You seem to suggest that I've called on the western world to just nuke the mideast.
Atrocities? That is what is happening right now, today, everywhere within Daesh's power. Did you read the story about - uhhmm, I think it was 19 - women put to death because they refused to marry the swine? "Marry this soldier." "No, I don't want to marry him." "Then, die bitch!"
Atrocities. Is it an atrocity to kill a man who is standing over the bodies of women and children he has butchered? If so, then I'm all for atrocities.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday August 21 2015, @01:40AM
Is it an atrocity to kill a man who is standing over the bodies of women and children he has butchered? If so, then I'm all for atrocities.
There's a whole bunch of groups of armed Muslims fighting Daesh right now; do you think they're worried about fighting them fairly? I don't. I'm sure the Kurds, Iraqis, Iranians, Jordanians, etc. would all be happy to exterminate every last Daesh if they had the ability to do it easily. I'm sure they'd also be happy to have you go over there and help them; there's already a few western soldiers who have gone over there voluntarily to fight them. One's been killed.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 21 2015, @02:25AM
Then it's time we did OUR PART.
The Kurds have been clamoring for the weapons needed to do the job. Turkey objects to arming the Kurds. The US is honoring Turkey's objections. The Kurds have done a magnificent job, considering their very limited resources. The United States and Europe need to supply the Kurds with anything they ask for, up to and including armor. Then, we need to offer them air support. "We" - the US and Europe. And, if Turkey doesn't like it, we tell Turkey to go stuff themselves. We tell them as diplomatically as possible, but we tell them to fuck off.
The Druze are just as dangerous as the Kurds, but alas, they have not yet been goaded into action. The Druze also have a complicated loyalty thing going - they are very reluctant to offend a host nation's government in any way. Syria would be very offended if the Druze were to arm themselves, separately from the Syrian army.
The Yazidi? As far as I can tell, they've just run from every potential fight, abandoning their week and feeble. I've not read of one single time the Yazidi have stood and fought.
Those are just the Christians in the affected area - Muslims also have various reactions to Daesh. One sect seeks to make peace with Daesh, some tribes hope to escape notice, others just pack up and leave.
Aside from the Kurds, NO ONE is doing nearly enough to destroy an organization which poses an existential threat to almost all groups in the region.
And, let me be very clear. Daesh does pose an existential threat to every government in the region, as well as every religious group or sect, in addition to the many different tribes.
As evidenced by TFA, Daesh is intent on destroying any and all opposition, as well as destroying the history, the culture, and the legacy of any opposition. Complete and utter genocide for any and all who disagree with this supposed "Islamic State".
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @04:14PM
> WHO IS TEACHING YOUNG PEOPLE THAT IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO BECOME A JIHADIST?!?!?!?!?!
You are.
Look in the mirror, half your life is dedicated to preaching that the only good muslim is a former muslim. Your entire worldview is defined by your belief that regular and crazy and are interchangeable. And then you wonder why some people believe you?
You are the problem.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @08:37PM
half your life is dedicated to preaching that the only good muslim is a former muslim
How ironic that that to become that former Muslim makes you guilty of apostasy, and you get sentenced to death.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @10:26PM
People like you, who discriminate them. They want to fight back against that...and there just happens to be an organization that seeks them out...
(Score: 2) by M. Baranczak on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:37PM
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:49PM
"Just like most of the victims of ISIS"
Bingo. Most of the victims of Daesh HAVE BEEN Muslims. But, that will change, eventually. Once Daesh has executed all the convenient victims, they'll move abroad, looking for more victims. Your neighborhood, mine, they'll get to all of us in turn.
And, once again, Islam nurtured the beast - Islam should be taking a leading role in killing it.
And, once again, the entire world community needs to step in, bringing enough force to get the job done quickly and efficiently.
Also - I have not claimed a special position of leadership for the US. The WORLD needs to step in, and say "enough is enough".
(Score: 5, Insightful) by snick on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:13PM
The fact that we do not have *the ability* to do this is what yahoos like this miss. We have already been killing everyone we can find for over a decade, and things have only gotten worse. Short of carpet nuking huge swaths of the world (including areas that other folks with nukes would be unhappy to see nuked) we have demonstrated that we are *unable* to "Kill 'em all, let Allah sort them out." And it isn't for lack of trying.
So yeah, tough talk makes the talker feel better about themselves. But it isn't going to fix anything.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Thursday August 20 2015, @03:20PM
Yeah - but soft talk hasn't fixed anything either.
I hope that you are aware that we attacked the wrong nation, for the wrong reasons, when we went into Iraq? I was very much opposed to invading Iraq. I argued against it, loud and long. The only thing we did in Iraq, was to destabilize it. As evil as Sadman Hussein was, he was a stabilizing force in the region.
We oust Sadman, create a vacuum, and Daesh moves in. Amazing, ain't it?
And, Daesh further destabilizes the region.
Note, I said "world community" and "Islam" - I made no mention of the US going it alone. Nor did I make any mention of the US taking leadership.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @04:32PM
So you now claim that it was the Islam's fault that America invaded Iraq and removed Saddam Hussein?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 20 2015, @07:50PM
No way. Our hands have been tied by self-imposed ideas about war crimes and genocide. These ideas are an obsolete luxury.
You start by taking out any moving vehicle, power plant, dam, and other piece of modern infrastructure. Next, you hit every structure. Next, you dump a mix of cholera, anthrax, and hantavirus. Finally you patrol with drones, looking for any sign of motion or heat. People can't stay underground forever.
There you go, done, without even using anything nuclear.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 21 2015, @04:40AM
Clearly you don't like young girls.
(Score: 2) by panachocala on Thursday August 20 2015, @06:14PM
Yeah, I'm also not into simplistic solutions like nuking everyone. So let's deliver nuclear strikes everywhere instead. See I'm not an idiot?!
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday August 21 2015, @01:02AM
We keep hearing that Islam is a religion of peace. Well, if that be true, then the rest of Islam should cooperate with the world community in putting their mad dogs down.
In case you haven't noticed, ISIS/Daesh is at war with a bunch of other groups in the region: the Kurds, the Iraqi Army, Iranian-backed militias, various groups in Syria, the Egyptian government, etc. What feature do all those groups have in common? They're all Muslims.
The only non-Muslims that are fighting them are the US military operatives, which I believe mostly consist of drone operators dropping bombs on them (in support of all those other ground forces).
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 21 2015, @01:35AM
*cough*
You really need to read up on the Kurds. They are as Muslim as I am. Ditto with the Yazidi - remember them? ISIS has executed many hundreds of Druze, as well. As I stated, Daesh is non-discriminatory, they will kill anyone, Muslim, agnostic, Christian, Jewish, atheist, it simply doesn't matter.
The Iraqi government isn't Muslim. Somewhat like Turkey, Iraq is a non-theistic government. In the view of Daesh, they are worse than Turkey, because the Iraqi government is viewed as a western puppet. The Syrian government and it's army is also non-Muslim.
Even if all of these people were viewed as "Muslim" by Daesh, they are still not the right flavor of Muslim.
Daesh is a poison, bent on destroying everything around them. Once again, I've included the world community and Islam in the call to destroy Daesh. The world has not done enough, and Islam has not done enough. Daesh can be compared to the Khmer Rouge, and as long as it exists, no one can be said to have done enough. The world's leaders, in regards to doing "enough" would be the Kurds.
(Score: 2) by Grishnakh on Friday August 21 2015, @02:56AM
The Iraqi government isn't Muslim. Somewhat like Turkey, Iraq is a non-theistic government.
Oh please, that's like saying the US government isn't Christian. Yes, it isn't officially, but most of the people in it are, and I'm quite sure that on average, the people in the Iraqi government are much more likely to be Muslim than the people in the US government are to be Christian (only because in the US, there's more diversity: there's some people of other religions, and there's a bunch of non-religious/atheist people too, whereas in the middle east (minus Israel), pretty much everyone, outside of a few small sects, is Muslim. This doesn't mean they're all super-devout, but they're all nominally Muslim.
Also, in the US, there's very few politicians who aren't officially Christian. It's pretty hard to get elected as a non-Christian in this country.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Friday August 21 2015, @01:39PM
Oh, please. The US government is NOT "Christian", not by a long shot. So many people whine and bellyache about our "Christian" laws - and you pretend not to notice that Blue Laws have largely been repealed, virtually all schools in America teach evolution, no one has been put in the stocks for a long long LONG time for professing atheism, we've not put any Satan worshippers to death within living memory - we don't even hang witches!
Iraq? No, it isn't an Islamic government, and the Iraqi code of laws was largely dictated by the US and that mystical coalition. The official law of the land is very much un-Islamic. The government that administers that law is composed of Muslims almost exclusively, yes, but that doesn't make the government Islamic. Take a look at Turkey. The vast majority of the population, and governmental office holders, are Muslims. Don't dare to declare that Turkey's government is Muslim, or even that it should be. Their consitution is very explicit that they DO NOT and WILL NOT have a theistic government. Separately from the government itself, the army is sworn to defend the separation of church and state. If government should begin to move toward a more theistic form of governance, the army will step in.
(Score: 0) by oldmac31310 on Friday August 21 2015, @04:23PM
You are an idiot here and on /.