On May 27, 2008, at 3:26 AM, David Cake wrote: > At 8:13 AM -0700 26/5/08, Chris Gehlker wrote: >> The narrative of fear turns out to be more bullshit. >> <http://www.newsweek.com/id/138508> >> > > Really interesting result (and not entirely unexpected) > Its not to say that the Iraq war hasn't, I think, made things > worse as far as terrorism goes (the terrorist attacks in Jordan in > 2006, for example, absolutely wouldn't have happened without the Iraq > war), but I think its very valuable to defuse the idea of global > Islamic terrorism still rising (and idea that, for example, it seems > Chuck still adheres to). > Cheers > David > _______________________________________________
Indonesia and the Philippines are the result of the Iraq war? The Christians being killed in Africa by Muslims are the result of the Iraq war? "More Buddhists killed in Thailand's Muslim south" Would never have happened if not for the Iraq war? Nonsense. A simple google search of news events of Christians or Buddhists being killed by Muslims (not in Iraq) will yield more results than you can read today. My point wasn't about rising amount of terrorism, it was, to state it simply. While not all muslims are terrorists, (by any stretch of the imagination.. p.c. disclaimer etc...) the vast majority of terrorists acts in the world today are committed by muslims. In the 21st century, it's not even close. This quote really pisses me off.. "They count civilian casualties from the war in Iraq as deaths caused by terrorism. This makes no sense. Iraq is a war zone, and as in other war zones around the world, many of those killed are civilians" Let me call bullshit in the strongest possible terms. We are not carpet bombing cities like wwii. So when this headline hits. " A suicide bomber killed 125 people and wounded 130 by detonating a car" He thinks what? "Act of war, let's not count it?" The vast majority of civilians killed are not the result of collateral damage, as he implies, but are targeted directly by terrorists.. Collateral damage does happen but it doesn't involve VBIEDs in the middle of a market place filled with civilians. When you strap an explosive belt on a retarded women, send her into a crowd and remotely blow her up, killing hundreds of civilians, it is not collateral damage, it's evil but he would discount that as an act of war. When you strap explosives to a three year old baby, it damn well had better be counted as a terrorist act or this idiot has no concept of evil. (or is simply an apologist trying to discount the obvious to make his point) Page through the database at www.iraqbodycount.org (Not a fan of the US or the war..) How many of the civilian deaths are the result of collateral damage? =c= _______________________________________________ OSX-Nutters mailing list | [email protected] http://lists.tit-wank.com/mailman/listinfo/osx-nutters List hosted at http://cat5.org/
