the term "islamo-fascism", valid?

Originally Posted by Carrera

Therefore, if there's a terrorist attack and police find a copy of the Koran nearby, it's not rocket science to deduce that maybe your suspects hail from the Middle East.

Originally Posted by darkboong

It's not science at all. If anything it rates as circumstantial evidence. The Koran could have belonged to one of the victims, it could have been planted there, or it could even belong to Cat Stevens (who is not from the Middle East).

Originally Posted by darkboong

It's not science at all. If anything it rates as circumstantial evidence. The Koran could have belonged to one of the victims, it could have been planted there, or it could even belong to Cat Stevens (who is not from the Middle East).

Originally Posted by Carrera

However, the sheer scale of the attack and the fact they found several copies of the Koran made it pretty obvious is was an Al Quaida style operation.

Originally Posted by Carrera

Seems like a question of balance, common sense and good intelligence so you know you've got the right people before you move in.

Originally Posted by Carrera

The idea that terrorism is related to race is a ridiculous argument - one I never put forward.
What I have stated is that the whole idea there is no such thing as race is totally unscientific and amounts to a load of twaddle. I was talking about physical attributes and mental attributes being distinguished by race. The sumo wrestler argument you put forward is demonstrably wrong as sumo wrestlers aren't strong and, besides that, their average life expectancy is 42.
Next time you watch the Olympics try and find a top Japanese weight-lifting contender as it's pretty hard to do. It's a known fact the Slavic peoples are naturally stronger just as black runners are better than white runners - generally speaking. This is basic genetics. Races are not the same but different. Goldfish and and silver dollars are both freshwater fish but genetically distinct the same as people are.
Why does the U.S. always do so well in the Olympics? Simple answer. They put forward athletes from various ethnic backgrounds, sprinters from Africa, gymnasts from Russia e.t.c.
"That is why racial profiling is incompatable with justice as far as determining if an individual is a terrorist or not."
Naturally. Whoever argued we should try and pick out terrorists by determining their race? That's not what we mean by racial profiling. What people are saying is something like if a bottle of vodka is stolen in a house shared by Russians and American Mormons, you can bet your bottom dollar the Russians are the most likely suspects for having stolen the vodka.
Or would you start your investigations by searching the American Mormons?
Therefore, if there's a terrorist attack and police find a copy of the Koran nearby, it's not rocket science to deduce that maybe your suspects hail from the Middle East.
"You deny genetic research when it suits you too Crappy. You refuse to accept that the indigenous Jews in Israel are in anyway connected with the indigenous Gentiles in Israel for example, despite the peer reviewed studies that say the contrary."
I studied genetics at university some years ago. However, I don't plan to reopen this debate over Israel on account of people getting upset. Nuff said.
"Again, I have yet to see any objective evidence presented by you or your pals that race and religion are reliable indicators of terrorist activity."
You're straying from the point a bit as that wasn't my argument. The source of terrorism isn't racial but it is religious - motivated by religion. People are saying that suicide bombings are typical of Middle Eastern tactics and that Italians, Germans or your average American tourist doesn't blow himself up in a public area.

Originally Posted by lyotard

here in the us this term has been used in the media of late, a recent spate of white house press releases and official talking heads have used this term in the media, and it is now being given commonplace use in the media/political arena.

fact is, a cursory "google" for this gets no hits for dictionary definition references, and i would think, in any regard, the commonly understood definition of "fascist" would be of dubious validity when combined with a religious generalization...funny how we do not hear of "judeo-christian fascism", for example.

i wonder, one, what people think about the use of this term, it's acceptibility, validity, and implications,
and two, if it is being used in the mainstream media in the UK.

Originally Posted by gavin11756

Well for a start, there is really no such thing as "Judeo-Christian"! That's just the zionists seeking a kind of shelter under Christians! Christianity has more in common with Islam than Judaism, mainly via traditional religious non usurious banking!

You will never here of jews described as fascists as they are traditionally hostile to it and usually to the extent they occupy leadership in the communist party, as in pre Stalinist Soviet Union and eastern Europe and Germany prior to the war.

BTW. Fascism was popular before WW2 and it only became unpopular via the media after the communists effectively won WW2

Now! Back to cycling!

Originally Posted by gavin11756

Well for a start, there is really no such thing as "Judeo-Christian"! That's just the zionists seeking a kind of shelter under Christians! Christianity has more in common with Islam than Judaism, mainly via traditional religious non usurious banking!

You will never here of jews described as fascists as they are traditionally hostile to it and usually to the extent they occupy leadership in the communist party, as in pre Stalinist Soviet Union and eastern Europe and Germany prior to the war.

BTW. Fascism was popular before WW2 and it only became unpopular via the media after the communists effectively won WW2

Now! Back to cycling!

Originally Posted by Carrera

Christians persecuted Jews before Moslems and both Christians and Moslems tend to persecute Jews. There was very strong anti-semitism amongst the Greek communities of the Roman Empire around the 2nd century A.D.
Clearly anti-semitism arose due to the idea Jews crucified Jesus Christ and rejected the overall Christian doctrine. Both Jews and Moslems reject the concept Jesus was the son of God. Now we are finding ancient gnostic texts that would seem to indicate Jesus never specifically taught what we now accept as Christian orthodoxy so who's to say Jews and Moslems have got their interpretations wrong?
Whichever way you look at it though, religion is at the centre of it all.
I'm not religious myself but the thing that gets up my amazes me is that Christians and Moslems base their entire religion on Judaism - a monotheistic authoritarian set of beliefs. They (Christians and Moslems) have their religion, Moses, the prophets and the Old Testament on account of Judaism. Christians took the O.T. as official creed so they believe in Adam and Eve and the flood, just as Jews do. Christians believe Adam and Eve over the alternative theory of evolution and, in the U.S., evolution teaching is being squeezed out of schools in favour of the 6 day creation creed.
However, if the Jewish clerics themselves disagree over creed and interpretation, they are ridiculed.
I feel O.K. over Buddhists having a go at Jews, perhaps, since the Buddhists have their own texts based on their own history and culture. The Buddhists don't have a saviour who's ancestry and ethnic line is believed to go all the way back to King David of Israel and, therefore, they have no particular axe to grind.
I think we'd all be better off without religion to be honest as it caused nothing but problems and wrangles for millenia.

Originally Posted by gavin11756

Jews have for some reason never wanted to fit in to host cultures. This is why they have been persecuted. A mob of Christians led by Christ were persecuted long before Christians persecuted jews. Jews have always been allowed to make a living and become wealthy. The host culture has never persecuted jews until they, jews got out of hand with either usury or ancient barbaric practices.

Judaism is, after all, an ancient barbaric cult!


Christians do not accept the O.T! That is the Torah! And King David is not for those of Northwest European blood! To take up Jesus as a saviour due to his fine example does not mean you support jewish interpretations

Originally Posted by Carrera

Mainstream Christians do accept the Torah. Historically they had no choice. The main Christian group that rejected the O.T. was the Marcionites led by Marcion who you should find on Google. Marcionites excluded the O.T. and clung to St Paul since Paul differed from Peter over the old Law vs Grace scenario.
Marcion didn't survive orthodoxy since he offered no ancient historical source which is why Christians needed to use the O.T. as canon.
Like it or not, Jesus was Jewish, Mary was Jewish, the apostles were Jewish and the texts Jesus read in the temples were O.T. texts. I hate to be awkward but virtually all Christians use the O.T. and accept the O.T., including David Koresh and even the Children Of God (the former cult).
Last point. It's accepted Christians caused the Roman Empire more problems than Jews. Christians didn't believe in sex and taught it was sinful. They wouldn't fight in the army either. Christianity caused a major headache and now, even today, we're stuck with George W Bush - another radical adherent.

Originally Posted by Carrera

...What people are saying is something like if a bottle of vodka is stolen in a house shared by Russians and American Mormons, you can bet your bottom dollar the Russians are the most likely suspects for having stolen the vodka.
Or would you start your investigations by searching the American Mormons? ...

Originally Posted by gavin11756

Is Bush really a Christian or a neocon jew puppet ? Christian generally are
not aware thay the OT is a jewish book. If they were, they would be like
others and reject it! I think Christians don't have a prblem with Christ
being Jewish!

G

Originally Posted by gavin11756

Is Bush really a Christian or a neocon jew puppet ? Christian generally are
not aware thay the OT is a jewish book. If they were, they would be like
others and reject it! I think Christians don't have a prblem with Christ
being Jewish!

G