Black Muslim US soldier is a suspect in granade attack!

[L@mplighterM]

Snip

CBS) An American soldier is among three suspects being held in connection with a grenade and small-arms attack that injured at least 16 U.S. soldiers at Camp Pennsylvania in northern Kuwait, reports CBS News Correspondent Mark Strassman, who is on the scene with the Army's 101st Airborne Division.

Eleven of the injured were hurt so seriously they had to be choppered out of the camp.

Strassmann said three grenades were rolled into three officers' tents at the camp. When officers ran from the tents, they were hit by small arms fire.

Three suspects were being held for questioning: two Kuwaitis who served as translators and an American soldier described as an engineering sergeant.

The American was found injured and hiding in a bunker. Asked if he was hurt throwing a grenade, Strassman reports the soldier replied, "Yes."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/main541815.shtml

I wonder if this is going to open up a can of worms? I believe a substantial number of US servicemen are Muslims obviously his allegiance was misplaced. I hope this is an isolated incident!

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
Snip

CBS) An American soldier is among three suspects being held in connection with a grenade and small-arms attack that injured at least 16 U.S. soldiers at Camp Pennsylvania in northern Kuwait, reports CBS News Correspondent Mark Strassman, who is on the scene with the Army's 101st Airborne Division.

Eleven of the injured were hurt so seriously they had to be choppered out of the camp.

Strassmann said three grenades were rolled into three officers' tents at the camp. When officers ran from the tents, they were hit by small arms fire.

Three suspects were being held for questioning: two Kuwaitis who served as translators and an American soldier described as an engineering sergeant.

The American was found injured and hiding in a bunker. Asked if he was hurt throwing a grenade, Strassman reports the soldier replied, "Yes."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/main541815.shtml

I wonder if this is going to open up a can of worms? I believe a substantial number of US servicemen are Muslims obviously his allegiance was misplaced. I hope this is an isolated incident! An action like that in time of war should get the S.O.B his own private firing squad.

[L@mplighterM]

The soldier in question is a Black Muslim and I doubt that he’ll receive the death penalty. As far as I’m concerned he should be executed immediately!

I don’t know how common it is to off a commander these days but I imagine there have been isolated incidents of that happening in previous wars (in all armies).

One thing for certain is that you don’t piss someone off that might end up behind you with a finger on a trigger. It’s estimated that 1% of the population are psychopaths and even if the army subjects you to psychological testing some are bound to squeeze in there.

Two of the questions they asked my buddy were:

1. What would you do if a submarine from Mars landed in your backyard?
2. If your mother and father were drowning which one would you save?

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
The soldier in question is a Black Muslim and I doubt that he’ll receive the death penalty. As far as I’m concerned he should be executed immediately!

I don’t know how common it is to off a commander these days but I imagine there have been isolated incidents of that happening in previous wars (in all armies).

One thing for certain is that you don’t piss someone off that might end up behind you with a finger on a trigger. It’s estimated that 1% of the population are psychopaths and even if the army subjects you to psychological testing some are bound to squeeze in there.

Two of the questions they asked my buddy were:

1. What would you do if a submarine from Mars landed in your backyard?
2. If your mother and father were drowning which one would you save?
Officers did get fragged in Nam. After years of futility a lot of men had developed a certain cynicism and sense of survival. When some green 2nd louie started leading them into certain death, some soldiers just considered it an existential practicality.

You are right about the psychopaths!

And your examples of questions on military psychological tests are too true. I was talking to a student adviser at a local college recently and trying to convey to him to the bizarre nature of such queries compared to the type of questions that are asked on modern civilian personality tests.

As for the eventual punishment of the abysmal rat who did this thing.....a life sentence in Leavenworth might well be worse than a death sentence, particularly given the nature of his crime.

[Johnny Yuma]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
The soldier in question is a Black Muslim and I doubt that he’ll receive the death penalty. As far as I’m concerned he should be executed immediately!

If they find out it's true, and he's a muslim, first thing in the morning, have the Kuwaitis march him outside the camp and whack away 'til the head comes off. He's on their soil.
That's the law.

[Johnny Yuma]

Originally posted by MichaelC
Officers did get fragged in Nam. After years of futility a lot men had developed a certain cynicism and sense of survival. When some green 2nd louie started leading them into certain death, some soldiers just considered it an existential practicality.


They'd just roll the grenade under the door of the latrine.... or give 'em a bullet in the back, out in the bush.

Huge difference with an all volunteer force. No one saw this coming. Didn't do a hell of a lot, PR-wise, for the black muslims.

[Alfred]

Yep, he is a Black Muslim that had been acting weird for the last week or so. They kept him off the front lines for that reason.

If one of the victims dies, then he will get the firing squad. Treason and murder.

He yelled: "we are under attack" and then shot a few guys as they ran out of their tent.

Hang him with a pig skin rope.


How long under we have similar occurances in the US from US Muslims? It may be sooner than we think. Hope not.

[Donna]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
Snip

CBS) An American soldier is among three suspects being held in connection with a grenade and small-arms attack that injured at least 16 U.S. soldiers at Camp Pennsylvania in northern Kuwait, reports CBS News Correspondent Mark Strassman, who is on the scene with the Army's 101st Airborne Division.

Eleven of the injured were hurt so seriously they had to be choppered out of the camp.

Strassmann said three grenades were rolled into three officers' tents at the camp. When officers ran from the tents, they were hit by small arms fire.

Three suspects were being held for questioning: two Kuwaitis who served as translators and an American soldier described as an engineering sergeant.

The American was found injured and hiding in a bunker. Asked if he was hurt throwing a grenade, Strassman reports the soldier replied, "Yes."

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/02/24/iraq/main541815.shtml

I wonder if this is going to open up a can of worms? I believe a substantial number of US servicemen are Muslims obviously his allegiance was misplaced. I hope this is an isolated incident!

Those in the US who want to demonstrate peacefully...I can deal with and and even understand. That freedom of speech thing is part of the deal. When they plan "civil disobedience" as in interfering with ambulances, or destroying personal property, I say arrest them and throw the book and them and the Lord be with 'em if they get in my way and I happen to be on the way to the hospital with a sick child because I won't brake for idiots.

For a soldier who commits such an act, during war no less, well if he doesn't get the firing squad then he sure should rot in prison. I vote for Guantanamo so he can be with his buddies.

[MichaelC]

As of now, one of the wounded has succumbed to his injuries.

[euphoria]

I personally feel that he should be executed. There is no excuse for his conduct, and there is no prison term long enough for his crime. He purposefully attempted to commit murder upon his fellow soldiers, and succeeded in one case so far. Not to mention that if he were imprisoned, I doubt he'd last long. I know that personally, if he were my cellmate, I'd have a new one in a few days.

[takeo]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- A soldier wounded in a grenade attack at a 101st Airborne Division base in Kuwait has died, U.S. Central Command said.

Another soldier attached to the 101st is being questioned in connection with the fatal grenade and small arms attack at one of the division's camps in northern Kuwait, Army V Corps spokesman Max Blumenfeld said early Sunday in Kuwait. U.S. military officials said 12 soldiers were wounded, at least five of them seriously.

A brigade commander said the soldier in custody lobbed three grenades into the three tents housing commanding officers from the tactical operations center, according to a reporter embedded with the unit. (Full story)

Meanwhile, a Royal Air Force aircraft missing after a mission in Iraq might have been shot down by U.S.-operated Patriot missiles near the Kuwaiti border, British military officials in the region said Sunday. (Full story)

While ground forces pushed ahead elsewhere, U.S. and British tanks and troops clashed with Iraqi forces in the southern port city of Umm Qasr.

On Saturday, coalition forces struck Iraqi targets with bombs and missiles, while lead elements of the U.S. Army's 3rd Infantry Division crossed the Euphrates River and pushed to within 160 miles [260 kilometers] of Baghdad -- about halfway to the Iraqi capital from Kuwait, the Pentagon said.

Elsewhere in northern Kuwait, an Iraqi missile was fired at a U.S. post and was destroyed in the air by two Patriot missiles. The missile contained no chemical agents, U.S. commanders said.

Gen. Tommy Franks, head of U.S. Central Command, speaking Saturday at his Persian Gulf base of operations in Qatar, promised that the Iraqi campaign would be "unlike any other in history."

[wellofvow]

I was horrified at this news! But then, I really wondered at American naivite when I heard even before the war started that there were some 400 "Moslem-Americans" with the attacking force.

IMO, for some reason Americans seem to assume that Moslem-Americans are like Jewish-Americans. They forget that Jewish-Americans have been in America for hundreds of years. They fought on both sides of the American Civil War. Moslem-Americans have been there for only a few decades. Jews have tended through centuries to assimilate (e.g., see my remark above about both sides of the Civil War) . Moslems don't assimilate. Period.

If I were in the Pentagon, I would find every Moslem and Black Moslem and get them the hell out of this combat situation. NOW.

[andak01]

Honestly Takeo, I am praying that there isn't any resistance now that this thing is started. I just wish that every word that Bush has said for the last few months were true. IF Saddam really DID have WDMs and really did have his finger on the trigger (like we KNOW that Kim Jong Il DOES), we might be justified in trying to prevent the loss of life that would be caused by that. It would then be worth the loss of American lives, and in fact it would be the Islamic duty of Iraqis to overthrow such a regiem.

But Bush is a proven liar. He makes promises and then does the opposite time and time again. If his main concern were really WDMs, we would already be at war with North Korea. But North Korea doesn't have the oil that Iraq does.

[Johnny Yuma]

Originally posted by wellofvow
If I were in the Pentagon, I would find every Moslem and Black Moslem and get them the hell out of this combat situation. NOW.


You can bet they're looking at each and every one of them with a "jaundiced eye".

[Batman]

MOSLEM CONVERT GI (http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/03/22/iraq/main545426.shtml)
(CBS) A U.S. soldier is suspected of carrying out a grenade attack that killed one Army Airborne trooper and wounded 13 others at Camp Pennsylvania in northern Kuwait, reports CBS News Correspondent Mark Strassman, who is on the scene with the 101st Airborne Division.

Strassmann said three grenades were rolled into the command tent of the 101st Division's 1st Brigade. After the attack at 1:30 a.m. (5:30 p.m. EST) Saturday, troops fanned out around the compound to find the perpetrator.

Strassman said the suspect was a sergeant attached to an engineering platoon. He was found injured and hiding in a bunker. Asked if he was hurt throwing a grenade, Strassman reports the soldier replied, "Yes."

The motive in the attack "most likely was resentment," said Max Blumenfeld, a spokesman for the U.S. Army V Corps. He did not elaborate. Investigators do not yet know if others were involved. Two Kuwaitis who served as translators were questioned and later released.

Military sources describe the suspect as a Muslim convert, according to the New York Times.. ....................

[elreason4]

Originally posted by andak01
Honestly Takeo, I am praying that there isn't any resistance now that this thing is started. I just wish that every word that Bush has said for the last few months were true. IF Saddam really DID have WDMs and really did have his finger on the trigger (like we KNOW that Kim Jong Il DOES), we might be justified in trying to prevent the loss of life that would be caused by that. It would then be worth the loss of American lives, and in fact it would be the Islamic duty of Iraqis to overthrow such a regiem.

But Bush is a proven liar. He makes promises and then does the opposite time and time again. If his main concern were really WDMs, we would already be at war with North Korea. But North Korea doesn't have the oil that Iraq does.

Two wrongs don’t make a right. Whatever actions are warranted regarding North Korea do not change the actions warranted with Iraq. Whatever President Bush said (which upon closer examination contradicts your assertion that he is a liar-let alone a proven liar, also does not change the actions warranted with Iraq.
If you had any genuine understanding of the inherent morality of the Koran and Islam, you would realize that Islam demands action against Saddam. Like the Geneva Conventions, Islam clearly states the rules of combat and distinctions of combatants from non-combatants. In nearly every way, Saddam (and all terrorists perverting Islam) has violated every moral demand. The Conventions explicitely forbids the intentional targeting of non-combatants (the suicide bombers opir-andi). The cowardly act of using non-combatants as de facto human shields clearly charges that any deaths of the non-combatants are judged to be murdered by the cowards hiding among them. By any measure, Islam demands Saddam be held to account for direct use of WMD against his own people, as responsible for the murderous slaughter his blood money buys to Palestinian families after they target and blow up an Israeli school bus or Israeli café to his immoral use of schools, mosques and hospitals whose occupants make effective human shields.

[L@mplighterM]

Muslims can’t be removed from the armed services it would be impossible. Muslims are also employed by the Secret Service, FBI and the CIA.

Substantial numbers of Blacks in the US have converted/are converting to Islam and it appears that the Muslim population in the US will grow (Muslims make Muslim babies).

Hopefully this incident is isolated to just this individual. Based on the fact that the individual didn’t know the individuals that he lopped the grenades at it appears that there were political and/or religious motives behind the attack..

Whether one agrees or not Muslims will remain an integral part that will continue to play a role in the security of the US.

[Isiah 2:4]

The next story that is leaked will probably read like this ;

'US Muslim Soldier responsible for helicopter faults'

or

'Black American behind Patriot that shot down British plane'

It may be the truth about the grenade attack, but any information in war from any side can be considered Propaganda.

Don't be so quick to accept everything they tell you.

What if he was Christian or Jewish?

[Johnny Yuma]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
Muslims can’t be removed from the armed services it would be impossible. Muslims are also employed by the Secret Service, FBI and the CIA.
Whether one agrees or not Muslims will remain an integral part that will continue to play a role in the security of the US.

Perhaps I should elucidate...

When use the term jaundiced eye, I mean in in terms of scrutiny.

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by Isiah 2:4
The next story that is leaked will probably read like this ;

'US Muslim Soldier responsible for helicopter faults'

or

'Black American behind Patriot that shot down British plane'

It may be the truth about the grenade attack, but any information in war from any side can be considered Propaganda.

Don't be so quick to accept everything they tell you.

What if he was Christian or Jewish? If you cannot immediately grasp the implications of a muslim soldier murdering his officers in what is clearly a terrorist type attack, then your agenda is obviously blocking your view.

[L@mplighterM]

There’s no way to tell whether someone within your ranks are going to turn out to be a terrorist. None!

Robert Hanssen was a Catholic that worked for the FBI and sold information to the Russians. There will always be the Aldrich Ames in this world he was CIA operative agent that came from a CIA family and sold information to the Russians. There was also the John Walker family that spied for the Russians over a period of nearly two decades.

Moles like that (there have been several of different ethnicities) have undoubtedly been responsible for the loss of many American lives over the years.

I would like to think that the remaining Muslims that serve in the service of the US will remain loyal to their country.

[Johnny Yuma]

Originally posted by Isiah 2:4
The next story that is leaked will probably read like this ;

'US Muslim Soldier responsible for helicopter faults'

or

'Black American behind Patriot that shot down British plane'

or.........under the headline: "ELVIS FOUND IN BAGDHAD!"

[Isiah 2:4]

Originally posted by Johnny Yuma
or.........under the headline: "ELVIS FOUND IN BAGDHAD!"

To jonny yuma. Haha. I like that one. :D

Well said lamplighter.
To Micheal C, i have no agenda, im just saying that the media is the media, war always generates stories and propaganda lies.
In the U.K i have seen nothing as yet referring to those rsponsible for the attack in kuwait, so forgive me if i am making the wrong interpretation.

[L@mplighterM]

Originally posted by Isiah 2:4
To jonny yuma. Haha. I like that one. :D

Well said lamplighter.


Well I don’t really have any option but to take that position. Do I?

Whether I like or not Muslims are an integral part of this current conflict and that wont change. Sometimes I don’t like reality and I don’t think that a Wildebeest with a Hyena attached to its throat likes it much either. Nevertheless reality remains reality!

[ibrodsky]

I think the US should seriously consider excusing Muslim members of the armed forces from participating in this war. Instead, let them petition to participate - providing evidence and references that would suggest they are not conflicted.

Palestinian supporters constantly claim that Jewish Americans' loyalties are "divided." From what I've seen, this is a much bigger problem among American Muslims. First, the US and Israel are allies. Second, Muslims tend to believe in an inevitable conflict between themselves and the people they see as "infildels."

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by Isiah 2:4
To jonny yuma. Haha. I like that one. :D

Well said lamplighter.
To Micheal C, i have no agenda, im just saying that the media is the media, war always generates stories and propaganda lies.
In the U.K i have seen nothing as yet referring to those rsponsible for the attack in kuwait, so forgive me if i am making the wrong interpretation. So, what kind of "propaganda lie" are you suggesting took place? Reports of the incident are pretty straightforward. Are you inferring that the "muslim" label is a lie?

Seems to me that if authorities wanted to "lie" about this incident, they would have omitted any mention of that soldier's religious affiliation. It opens a can of worms to do so, and may possibly cause some dissension in the ranks, which I assume they would rather avoid.

[andak01]

http://pearly-abraham.tripod.com/htmls/bushlies1.html
http://www.whodies.com/ir_threat.html
http://www.washtimes.com/national/20020927-500715.htm
http://www.whodies.com/ir_other.html
http://www.whodies.com/gulf_war.html
http://www.alternet.org/story.html?StoryID=14518
http://www.commondreams.org/views02/1028-04.htm
http://www.greenleft.org.au/back/2003/525/525p24.htm

John Pilger: Why Bush lies about Iraq
US President George Bush's plans to invade Iraq have nothing to do eliminating “weapons of mass destruction”, preventing terrorism or ending human rights abuses. An attack on Iraq will be the first phase of a pre-existing strategy to increase US control of the world's oil supplies. JOHN PILGER explains.

In a document written more than two years ago and disclosed only recently, the men who now surround Bush outlined in prophetic detail Washington's grand strategy to dominate much of humanity and the world's resources. However, what the US needed to win public support to implement it, it said, was “some catastrophic and catalysing event — like a new Pearl Harbor”.

The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, provided the “new Pearl Harbor”, described as “the opportunity of ages”. The extremists who have since exploited 9/11 come from the era of the Ronald Reagan presidency, when far-right groups and “think-tanks” were established to avenge the US “defeat” in Vietnam. In the 1990s, there was an added agenda: to justify the denial of a “peace dividend” following the Cold War.

The Project for the New American Century (PNAC) was formed, along with the American Enterprise Institute, the Hudson Institute and other outfits that have since merged the ambitions of the Reagan administration with those of the current Bush regime.

One of Bush's “thinkers” is Richard Perle. I interviewed Perle when he was advising Reagan; and when he spoke about “total war”, I mistakenly dismissed him as mad. He recently used the term again in describing America's “war on terror”.

Perle is one of the founders of the PNAC. Other founders include: Dick Cheney, now US vice president; Donald Rumsfeld, defence secretary; Paul Wolfowitz, deputy defence secretary; I Lewis Libby, Cheney's chief of staff; William Bennett, Reagan's education secretary; and Zalmay Khalilzad, Bush's ambassador to Afghanistan. These are the modern chartists of US terrorism.

The PNAC's seminal 2000 report, Rebuilding America's Defenses: Strategy, Forces and Resources for A New Century, was a blueprint of US aims in all but name. Two years ago it recommended an increase in arms-spending of US$48 billion so that Washington could “fight and win multiple, simultaneous major theatre wars”. This has happened. It said the US should develop “bunker-buster” nuclear weapons and make “star wars” a national priority. This is happening. It said that, in the event of Bush taking power, Iraq should be a target.

And so it is.

As for Iraq's alleged “weapons of mass destruction”, these were dismissed, in so many words, as a convenient excuse, which it is. “While the unresolved conflict with Iraq provides the immediate justification”, the PNAC's report says, “the need for a substantial American force presence in the Gulf transcends the issue of the regime of Saddam Hussein”.

[takeo]

Andak, i do not wish this thing to be over quickly, unless the us decides that it was a mistake after all to invade iraq and withraws, but this is unlikely.
An easy victory will mean more us-aggressions in the future, and in my opinion the aggressors need to punished for their crime of invading iraq.
The uS doesn't attack North-Korea because North-korea is really dangerous, on the contrary to iraq.


Two wrongs don’t make a right. Whatever actions are warranted regarding North Korea do not change the actions warranted with Iraq. Whatever President Bush said (which upon closer examination contradicts your assertion that he is a liar-let alone a proven liar, also does not change the actions warranted with Iraq.
If you had any genuine understanding of the inherent morality of the Koran and Islam, you would realize that Islam demands action against Saddam. Like the Geneva Conventions, Islam clearly states the rules of combat and distinctions of combatants from non-combatants. In nearly every way, Saddam (and all terrorists perverting Islam) has violated every moral demand. The Conventions explicitely forbids the intentional targeting of non-combatants (the suicide bombers opir-andi). The cowardly act of using non-combatants as de facto human shields clearly charges that any deaths of the non-combatants are judged to be murdered by the cowards hiding among them. By any measure, Islam demands Saddam be held to account for direct use of WMD against his own people, as responsible for the murderous slaughter his blood money buys to Palestinian families after they target and blow up an Israeli school bus or Israeli café to his immoral use of schools, mosques and hospitals whose occupants make effective human shields.

Iraqi have the duty to defend their country, both military and the civilians who can and whish to carry arms or help their country in other ways(sabotage, information gathering, etc.). As in WWII a lot of civilian Europeans decided to fight the invaders.
Bush says that he is a Christian, but as the pope indicated you can't be a real Christian if you don't explore every peacefull solution available.

[andak01]

We already have a term for soldiers who kill their own in unpopular wars. The term if fragging.

frag

n.,v. [from Vietnam-era U.S. military slang via the games
Doom and Quake] 1. To kill another player's avatar in a multiuser
game. "I hold the office Quake record with 40 frags." 2. To
completely ruin something. "Forget that power supply, the lightning strike fragged it.

I guess I am just now learning that Vietnam was an Islamic Jihad. Else why would they invent such a term that describes only Muslims?

Anyway, since Muslims would find such a thing natural, why is it that the thousands of other Muslims in our armed forces haven't tried such a thing? Is it because they are bad Muslims?

[andak01]

Bush says that he is a Christian, but as the pope indicated you can't be a real Christian if you don't explore every peacefull solution available.

As you know, this is the case with Islam as well. But Saddam did not cause this war. He asked Bush to step down from his own office and was greeted with operation shock and awe. When Bush asks Saddam, or any other leader of a sovereign nation to step down, why should it be an act of war not to?

In fact, failing to recognize a leader is itself very close to an act of war. Failure to recognize a countries boundaries is an act of war. Why should we expect that crossing any countries borders without permission will cause them to do anything other than attack us?

Let's see how Israel likes it because we demand regeim change from Mister Sharon. Would we blame Sharon for the CRIME of not stepping down so as to let the humanitarian armies of America roll into Jerusalem? Since we don't require an act of war from anyone anymore in order to effect regeim change, why not take this show on the road? We have a better government than say, Mexico, India, South Africa.

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by andak01
We already have a term for soldiers who kill their own in unpopular wars. The term if fragging.

frag

n.,v. [from Vietnam-era U.S. military slang via the games
Doom and Quake] 1. To kill another player's avatar in a multiuser
game. "I hold the office Quake record with 40 frags." 2. To
completely ruin something. "Forget that power supply, the lightning strike fragged it.

I guess I am just now learning that Vietnam was an Islamic Jihad. Else why would they invent such a term that describes only Muslims?

Anyway, since Muslims would find such a thing natural, why is it that the thousands of other Muslims in our armed forces haven't tried such a thing? Is it because they are bad Muslims? Go away Mr. Apologist for islamic crimes.

Here we have a muslim convert, like yourself, brainswashed like yourself, hiding his intent until the moment when he chose to slaughter his comrades in arms.

[richcrassus]

I suppose thats why in the israeli army only jews are allowed to serve not israeli arabs and jews together.
Dont the israeli arabs have their own units if they want to serve in the army?

[elreason4]

When a participant in a debate is unwilling or unable to produce specific facts to back up specific counter points-even when all requested ‘help’ has been given, the argument looses real credibility, and all that participants positions no longer commands credibility (no matter how right, or how wrong). While taking up one of takao’s assertion months ago, that the PLO never amended its valid charter’s call for Israel’s destruction, Takao asked for the actual charter by reliable sources, the relevant text, so on and so forth. As the charter obligation was never fulfilled he never followed through with this fact, thereby implying his original statements were still true. Silence does not however change the truth. Until this track is changed (and maybe my bringing up of this again will allow takao to correct this), all of his assertions lose credibility. The issue here was:

Originally posted by takeo
1. The PLO charter has not been amended? hard to believe, as all official texts and press conferences call for peacefull coexistance between a Jewish and Palestinian state. take a look at their website for example.


Originally posted by elreason4
To establish any contradiction to the PLO Charter, you have to do much better than cry because ‘all official texts and press conferences’ say so. For your information, those texts and conferences are their attempts mocking the Western powers. To apply the change to the Palestinians and the Arabs, they must fulfill the following charter clause-"Article 33: This Charter shall not be amended save by [vote of] a majority of two-thirds of the total membership of the National Congress of the Palestine Liberation Organization [taken] at a special session convened for that purpose." So, the Charter is still valid, or can you show the specific date and text required by that special session? (again, the common excuse of the April 24,1996 session does not satisfy its legal obligation to amend the Charter.)

andak01 I asserted that Islam required action against Saddam, and why.-contained in my first post. THIS IS THE ONLY TOPIC OF RELEVENCE IN MY POST.

[elreason4]

I asserted that Islam required action against Saddam, and why.-contained in my first post. THIS IS THE ONLY TOPIC OF RELEVENCE IN MY POST.

Andak01: ideas and truth can stand on their own merits, and are not served nor made legitimate from reprinting outside discussions or sources-especially from someone like John Pilger. “John Pilger: Why Bush lies about Iraq” Please do not attempt to make the discussion now about John Pilger, for the same reasons I shouldn’t do it here-except for illustration (not debating) purposes. Such misdirection is elogently captured in the immortal lyrics from “I am the Walrus”-“ I am he as you are he as you are me and we are all together See how they run like pigs from a gun see how they fly I'm crying Sitting on a cornflake Waiting for the van to come Corporation T-shirt, stupid bloody Tuesday Man you've been a naughty boy you let your face grow long”


Originally posted on HonestReporting.com
Pilger Pilfers the Truth
A British documentary is a veritable encyclopedia of every anti-Israel canard in existence today.
On Sept. 16, while most of British Jewry was celebrating the Yom Kippur break-fast, Britain's most popular television channel, ITV1, aired a ferociously anti-Israel documentary entitled, "Palestine is Still the Issue." The program was produced by Australian-born John Pilger, a columnist for the UK Daily Mirror with a 25-year record of anti-Israel activism.
Scant effort was made to provide context, Israeli perspective or even explanation, with Prof. Ilan Pappe used as a token academic Israeli historian. However, Pappe is far from objective, having run for the Knesset on the radical Communist Party ticket, and is disgraced and discredited in Israel for falsifying historical evidence. Coupled with his post-Modernist perspective and active engagement with Palestinians in an attempt to discredit Zionism, it is unsurprising that Pappe supports Pilger's thesis concerning Israel's fault.
HonestReporting questions not only the biased content of the program (detailed below), but also the decision to broadcast -- on the holiest day of the Jewish calendar -- such a clear affront to the Jewish community. Furthermore, Pilger's discussion of the program on the Gloria Hunniford chat show (carried on British TV Channel 5) was aired on Yom Kippur afternoon, when few Jews were available to participate.
To accompany the documentary, Pilger also published an article in The Mirror, one of Europe's leading dailies with several million readers. Entitled "Israel's Routine Terrorism," Pilger's article mirrors the gross violations of media objectivity seen in his TV documentary.
Read the Mirror article at:
http://pilger.carlton.com/print/116732
Read info on Pilger's documentary at:
http://www.johnpilger.com/palestine
The chairman of Carlton Television, Michael Green, strongly criticized his own company's documentary, John Pilger's "Palestine Is Still The Issue." Green said the program was "factually incorrect, historically incorrect," and a "tragedy for Israel so far as accuracy is concerned."
http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/media/story.jsp?story=334942
In the meantime, Pilger himself bellyached against HR members in a column in the UK Guardian, saying that critics are "orchestrating an email campaign against my film; curiously, many of the emails are coming from America, where it has not been shown."
===== CRITIQUE OF THE DOCUMENTARY ====
From start to finish, Pilger's documentary is a veritable encyclopedia of every anti-Israel canard in existence today:
- Referring to Israel's War of Independence (following Arab refusal to accept the UN partition plan), Pilger's documentary simply stated: "In 1948 the Arab world rose up, when Palestinians were forced to flee from their homes in a blitz of fear and terror." Read carefully: Pilger suggests that the 5-nation Arab attack was in response to Israeli aggression.
- The Six Day War is described similarly: "In 1967 Palestinians were forced to flee again when Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza Strip, describing it as an act of self defense." Pilger insists that 1967 was simply an Israeli fantasy about Arabs wanting to destroy it.
- Operation Defensive Shield is portrayed as a deliberate attempt to vandalize and destroy Palestinian culture; no mention is made of the wave of suicide bombings that forced Israel to defend itself.
- Pilger suggests that Israel systematically murders Palestinians, claiming that 90% of Palestinians killed are civilians. In fact, scholarly studies show that in the last two years of violence, 39% of Palestinian deaths are "non-combatant" -- versus 79% of Israeli deaths are "non-combatant." (See study at
http://www.ict.org.il/researchreport/projectsummary.htm)
- Pilger suggests that the victims of terror are morally equivalent to the terrorist, and asserts that killing a terrorist before he can murder is also "terrorism."
- Pilger decries the inconvenience of IDF checkpoints, but fails to mention that the checkpoints were set up as a response to terrorism. Nor does he mention how the editor of the notoriously anti-Israel Guardian found that the average wait was 20 seconds to pass a checkpoint, with the soldiers being polite to the Arabs.
- Pilger claims that checkpoints have destroyed the Palestinian economy, while ignoring the fact that violence against Israelis forced the loss of tens of thousands of Palestinian jobs. Pilger also omits mention of the severe damage to the Palestinian economy due to corruption of Palestinian Authority officials; Arafat's personal wealth has been estimated at $1.3 billion.
- Pilger interviews an Arab couple who claim that their newborn baby died due to alleged IDF harassment at a checkpoint. The woman says: "This is how they treat all Palestinians. I'm sorry to say this, but they would rather help an animal than an Arab." Pilger offers no counter-claim, and declares that such a story is "typical of the everyday treatment of the Palestinians."
- Pilger characterizes the 1948 refugee issue as "ethnic cleansing." However, it is a historical fact that most Arabs were persuaded to leave by Arab leaders who promised to invade and destroy Israel. Time Magazine (May 3, 1948) reported that "The mass evacuation, prompted partly by fear, partly by orders of Arab leaders, left the Arab quarter of Haifa a ghost city... By withdrawing Arab workers, their leaders hoped to paralyze Haifa."
Pilger of course selectively omits mentioning the equal number of Jewish refugees who fled from Arab countries, and settled in Israel. He also omits that in the 1880s there was no native Palestinian population to displace (as the journal of Mark Twain and other contemporary sources confirm), except in about 5% of "Palestine." In fact, as is thoroughly documented in Joan Peters' classic work, "From Time Immemorial" (available at http://www.amazon.com), most Arabs immigrated into "Palestine" after the Zionist pioneers had worked hard to cultivate land that they had legally bought from absentee Arab landlords, bringing commerce to the region.
- Pilger compares Israel's treatment of Arabs like that of apartheid South Africa. He fails to note, however, that Arabs living under Israeli rule enjoy a far greater freedom of speech and freedom of the press than do Arabs living under the PA, and that the first Middle East country to grant Arab women the right to vote was Israel -- not Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, or any of the 20 other Arab Middle East states. Nor does Pilger mention how in much of the Arab world, Jews and other non-Muslims are treated as second-class citizens (the despised Dhimmi).
- Pilger categorizes at least 3 Israeli prime ministers as "terrorists."
- Pilger claims that "For much of their resistance, the Palestinians have fought back courageously with slingshots." However, he omits reference to the Hebron riots of 1929 when 67 Jews were slaughtered. Or the period of 1951-55, when more than 3,000 armed attacks were launched against Israeli civilians, resulting in the deaths of 922 Israelis and foreign tourists. Or the Oslo period (1993-2000), when 300 Israelis were murdered by Palestinian terrorists. (To cite a few of the many historical examples.)
- Pilger accuses the Jewish world of carrying out a conspiracy to manipulate the non-Jewish world into believing that any criticism of Israel is "anti-Semitic."
- Pilger complains that Israel is being heavily supplied by America, but he selectively omits mention that America gives billions of dollars annually to Arab countries such as Egypt and Jordan.
- For his final thrust, Pilger employs the classic canard of suggesting that Israel's battle against Palestinian terror is akin to Hitler's treatment of the Jews. The conclusion of the documentary, to paraphrase Pilger, is that the world stood silent during the Holocaust -- "will they stay silent again?"

[Johnny Yuma]

Originally posted by andak01
We already have a term for soldiers who kill their own in unpopular wars. The term if fragging.

frag

n.,v. [from Vietnam-era U.S. military slang via the games
Doom and Quake] 1. To kill another player's avatar in a multiuser
game. "I hold the office Quake record with 40 frags." 2. To
completely ruin something. "Forget that power supply, the lightning strike fragged it.

I guess I am just now learning that Vietnam was an Islamic Jihad. Else why would they invent such a term that describes only Muslims?

Anyway, since Muslims would find such a thing natural, why is it that the thousands of other Muslims in our armed forces haven't tried such a thing? Is it because they are bad Muslims?

You will get more information from the library about Viet Nam than you will from a video game. However, since I lived through that era, I'll save you a trip.

The term "fragging" was coined by American soldiers,from their popular use of a fragmentation grenade to kill an undesirable officer, during the Viet Nam war.

[mimil]

Sunday 23 of March 2003. Fox news reported that 101st division had undergone a grenade attack during the night. The attack was aimed at the leadership of the division. The first information identified the attacker as a US soldier. It is also reported that he is a Muslim.

Question from fox news reporter: "Could the motive of the attack be some religious resentment?"

This war is to free the Iraqi people or does it have any religious motives? If not, why are those questions raised on a national high audience news report? I don't understand why they emphasize on such information.

It reminds me of some mistakes that Bush made in speeches after the 09/11 attack, mixing with ease extremist movement and Muslim religion. Or maybe there is a reason for such a behavior. During the cold war, the evil was called "communist", many didn't have a clue what it meant, but American propaganda ensured that everyone knew that they were the "bad" people (I use this term because of its high occurrence in once again Fox news report, I let you judge of its relevance). Today, the world is evolving, communist are no longer a threat. Do not be worry, we have found something new: the "terrorist". How amazing that the same tools of propaganda are used over and over again. Listen to it again, doesn't it make you shiver? "The terrorist" (You could use a grave and solemn voice for a better result). If so, you have been successfully brained washed! Nowadays, everything that generates any problem in the US falls under the wide meaning of terrorist. If you are not with us you are a terrorist! It won't be long before all Muslim would be addressed in those terms. I wish I could be spared of such a day

Regards

[Johnny Yuma]

Originally posted by mimil
Sunday 23 of March 2003. Fox news reported that 101st division had undergone a grenade attack during the night. The attack was aimed at the leadership of the division. The first information identified the attacker as a US soldier. It is also reported that he is a Muslim.

Question from fox news reporter: "Could the motive of the attack be some religious resentment?"

They mean from the soldier directed against his leadership and his personal stance for religious views, not those of the United States government. There is a separation of church and state, here. It is written into the constitution. Having said that, there is another ammendment to the constitution outlining the right to "Freedom of Speech". That means that you can still say whatever you want. That includes the president.


This war is to free the Iraqi people or does it have any religious motives? If not, why are those questions raised on a national high audience news report? I don't understand why they emphasize on such information.

In the United States, the media is not a state run organization; the news media is free to say whatever they wish. It's written into our constitution. It's called "Freedom Of The Press".


It reminds me of some mistakes that Bush made in speeches after the 09/11 attack, mixing with ease extremist movement and Muslim religion. Or maybe there is a reason for such a behavior. During the cold war, the evil was called "communist", many didn't have a clue what it meant, but American propaganda ensured that everyone knew that they were the "bad" people (I use this term because of its high occurrence in once again Fox news report, I let you judge of its relevance). Today, the world is evolving, communist are no longer a threat. Do not be worry, we have found something new: the "terrorist". How amazing that the same tools of propaganda are used over and over again. Listen to it again, doesn't it make you shiver? "The terrorist" (You could use a grave and solemn voice for a better result). If so, you have been successfully brained washed! Nowadays, everything that generates any problem in the US falls under the wide meaning of terrorist. If you are not with us you are a terrorist! It won't be long before all Muslim would be addressed in those terms. I wish I could be spared of such a day

Regards

What you're trying to say in many, many words is: the United States, in order to justify its military industrial complex, needs a constant evil to focus on, and now that communism is no longer a threat, we're using the word "terrorist" in the new propaganda model to manufacture consent, with the ultimate goal of demonizing all Islamic peoples.

Of course, you portray us a being brainwashed and lack the perception to understand something as complicated as that, so you described it in terms to make it sound nefarious, when the truth of the matter is, it's far more complicated and insidious than that.

Our ultimate goal is to put a McDonald's on every corner of every cross street, in every city and town on this planet. Your children will scream and cry and become demanding brats, forcing you to take them there, every day, for Happy Meals, just so they can get the toys. They will be able to recite the McDonald's jingle by the time they're one year old, and will recognize Ronald McDonald and have more loyalty to him than their own parents.

Once that happens, we will have control of a whole new generation and soon, we will rule the world! :eek: :rolleyes:

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by andak01
As you know, this is the case with Islam as well. But Saddam did not cause this war. He asked Bush to step down from his own office and was greeted with operation shock and awe. When Bush asks Saddam, or any other leader of a sovereign nation to step down, why should it be an act of war not to?

In fact, failing to recognize a leader is itself very close to an act of war. Failure to recognize a countries boundaries is an act of war. Why should we expect that crossing any countries borders without permission will cause them to do anything other than attack us?

Let's see how Israel likes it because we demand regeim change from Mister Sharon. Would we blame Sharon for the CRIME of not stepping down so as to let the humanitarian armies of America roll into Jerusalem? Since we don't require an act of war from anyone anymore in order to effect regeim change, why not take this show on the road? We have a better government than say, Mexico, India, South Africa.
This may well be the single most moronic post that you have ever made, at least on this board. And when one takes into consideration the things that you have said here, that is saying a lot.

[mimil]

Originally posted by Johnny Yuma
They mean from the soldier directed against his leadership and his personal stance for religious views, not those of the United States government. There is a separation of church and state, here. It is written into the constitution. Having said that, there is another ammendment to the constitution outlining the right to "Freedom of Speech". That means that you can still say whatever you want. That includes the president.

[...]

In the United States, the media is not a state run organization; the news media is free to say whatever they wish. It's written into our constitution. It's called "Freedom Of The Press".

[...]

Of course, you portray us a being brainwashed and lack the perception to understand something as complicated as that, so you described it in terms to make it sound nefarious, when the truth of the matter is, it's far more complicated and insidious than that.


You must be aware that there is a difference between a constitution and the way it is applied. Iraq is a republic since the late 50's. With all my respect, I find it hard to deny that fox news is politically oriented. It has nothing to do with the freedom of press, it just means that we must be aware that the information is oriented and probably sometimes omitted or changed.

Separation of the state and religion is paramount. If it was the case in the middle east we would be spared of a couple of conflicts. But still all speech from the white house are ended by a solemn "God bless America". This morning Mr Bush called to "The healing power of god".

As for the freedom of speech, it does apply to leaders, but to a certain extand. He represent the state, has a moral role, and must therefore be a little carefull. He cannot for example go around saying that all muslim are evil. Imagine if he was to say "I hate all jewish, and I am tired of israel, I wish we could just erase it from the map". Or "maybe we should put all black back into slavery, we lack cheap workers lately". Please be reminded that after the 9/11 american and foreign politiciens had to step in to explain Mr Bush's position.

Please understand also that I do not doubt American citizen mental capacity. My point is that propaganda is powerfull tool in the US and that it is used mainly to manipulate the public opinion.

Regards.

[christian]

Originally posted by takeo
Andak, i do not wish this thing to be over quickly, unless the us decides that it was a mistake after all to invade iraq and withraws, but this is unlikely.
An easy victory will mean more us-aggressions in the future, and in my opinion the aggressors need to punished for their crime of invading iraq.
The uS doesn't attack North-Korea because North-korea is really dangerous, on the contrary to iraq.



Iraqi have the duty to defend their country, both military and the civilians who can and whish to carry arms or help their country in other ways(sabotage, information gathering, etc.). As in WWII a lot of civilian Europeans decided to fight the invaders.
Bush says that he is a Christian, but as the pope indicated you can't be a real Christian if you don't explore every peacefull solution available.

I don't think this will over easily, because russian are supporting the resistance. The western channels are completely black out.

http://www.aeronautics.ru/news/news002/news066.htm

"In connection with these developments the GRU and General Staff departments responsible for the Persian Gulf region will go to a 24-hour mode of operation. All [Russian] electronic reconnaissance brigades and divisions, intelligence agencies based in regions neighboring the conflict zone, sea- and space-based technical reconnaissance assets will be put on full combat alert.

....GOU GSh finds it possible that the military campaign against Iraq will be considerably more difficult than expected by the US military planners. The US troops may encounter determined resistance from the Iraqi forces, which may lead to the slow down and even complete halt of the attack and will force the US to resume the mass bombing campaign. This will inevitably prolong the war into the 2-3-month timeframe and possibly longer."

[christian]

Bush is not a christian. He belongs to a secret organization called skulls and bones. It is a sect, which controls the military, media, religion and banks. It is much powerful than FBI, CIA, and military. They are the leaders of FBI,CIA, and military.

In fact,the movie "eye wide shut" ideas are motivated by this Skulls and bones activities. This sect involves in child molesting, sex orgies, drug dealing, etc. Blair is also belongs to another sect, called the Freemason. The same sect that FDR belongs to(freemason ).

May be this is the reason, they love each other.

http://images.indymedia.org/imc/uk/conspiracyofsilence56k.rm

The author, John W. DeCamp, was for 16 years a State Senator
in Nebraska, a respected lawyer and businessman in his state.

http://educate-yourself.org/tg/tgvideosandbooks1sep02.shtml

[elke]

IMO, Fox News has jumped the gun in releasing the information on the fact that the man was Muslim. If it turns out that his motivation for the attack was personal, - e.g. "resentment" for being left behind, - then his being Muslim has no relevance whatsoever to the attack. His religion only has relevance if it plays a role in his reason for perpetrating it. Otherwise, it's simply an irrelevant piece of information, the only result - if not the purpose - of which is to stir up problems for the loyal Muslims in the American military.

[cerulean]

Suspect in attack reportedly made anti-US remarks
By David Zucchino, Los Angeles Times, 3/24/2003


CAMP PENNSYLVANIA, Kuwait -- The 101st Airborne Division soldier accused of single-handedly killing a division captain and wounding 15 fellow soldiers is a Muslim who made anti-American statements after he was apprehended, according to soldiers who survived the suspect's grenade and automatic weapon attack early yesterday.

The soldier, who rolled a grenade into each of three tents of sleeping officers and senior noncommissioned officers of the 101st, shot at least two fellow soldiers as they raced from their tents, the witnesses said.

Outside the charred and blood-splattered tents yesterday afternoon, soldiers recalled hearing the suspect say as he was being led away by armed soldiers: ''You guys are coming into our countries, and you're going to rape our women and kill our children.'' . . .

Whatever this man's loyalty, it doesn't appear to be to the US.

[takeo]

oK, elreason, you're right that i didn't yet provided evidences or a long post as i promised. I have started one, but didn't have the time since my job is very hard and i haven't time to make some really elaborated posts. We're currently also engaged in all kinds of activities against the Anglo-american assault on iraq.

[andak01]

The bottom line is, he is not a functional soldier and has committed a crime for which he should be punished within the organization he is a part of by the rules of that organization, even if that includes the death penalty. If he were Christian or Jewish or Hindi, the same would be the case. He was unable to resolve his personal conflicts with the command structure and used his training to attempt to kill his own men. There are plenty of other soldiers of all religions that are able to subvert their conflicts and continue to operate functionally. But the duress of battle has the ability to crack some people under pressure. If he originally had strong convictions that would make it difficult to serve, he should have made them known. But perhaps he wrongly convinced himself that he could subvert such impulses. Unfortunately, humans don't tend to think so logically, particularly in a front line situation. There are thousands of Muslim service men and women. There were Muslims serving during the first Gulf War as well.

[Tan]

[If I were in the Pentagon, I would find every Moslem and Black Moslem and get them the hell out of this combat situation. NOW. [/B]

knwoing that there may be a conflict of loyalty among the muslim, my country have been practising this for many years. Besides being a rifleman in the infantry, no muslim are allow in other sensitive department /unit like intelligence and armour. No muslim are allow in the navy and air force here also. i.e there are no muslim pilot here.

[SteveMetch]

The only Good Muslim is one who doesn't follow the teachings of Muhammad. I haven’t seen a Good Muslim yet that wouldn’t make a better Christian. Why do you have to run away from 80+ percent of your teachings? Practicing the real Islam in a civil society is impossible. At some point in this long war ahead of us we will realize this is not about dictators in the Middle East. Dictators like Saddam are only a symptom of a broader and deeper sickness which is Islam.

[Mediocrates]

Originally posted by christian
Bush is not a christian. He belongs to a secret organization called skulls and bones. It is a sect, which controls the military, media, religion and banks. It is much powerful than FBI, CIA, and military. They are the leaders of FBI,CIA, and military.

In fact,the movie "eye wide shut" ideas are motivated by this Skulls and bones activities. This sect involves in child molesting, sex orgies, drug dealing, etc. Blair is also belongs to another sect, called the Freemason. The same sect that FDR belongs to(freemason ).

May be this is the reason, they love each other.

http://images.indymedia.org/imc/uk/conspiracyofsilence56k.rm

The author, John W. DeCamp, was for 16 years a State Senator
in Nebraska, a respected lawyer and businessman in his state.

http://educate-yourself.org/tg/tgvideosandbooks1sep02.shtml

[elreason4]

Originally posted by andak01
...in fact it would be the Islamic duty of Iraqis to overthrow such a [Saddam] regiem.
Lets try this again without the irrelevant stuff getting in the way.

If you had any genuine understanding of the inherent morality of the Koran and Islam, you would realize that Islam DOES INDEED demand action against Saddam. Like the Geneva Conventions, Islam clearly states the rules of combat and distinctions of combatants from non-combatants. In nearly every way, Saddam (and all terrorists perverting Islam) has violated every moral demand. The Conventions explicitely forbids the intentional targeting of non-combatants (the suicide bombers opir-andi). The cowardly act of using non-combatants as de facto human shields clearly charges that any deaths of the non-combatants are judged to be murdered by the cowards hiding among them. By any measure, Islam demands Saddam be held to account for direct use of WMD against his own people, as responsible for the murderous slaughter his blood money buys to Palestinian families after they target and blow up an Israeli school bus or Israeli café to his immoral use of schools, mosques and hospitals whose occupants make effective human shields.

[Am Yisrael]

Originally posted by richcrassus
I suppose thats why in the israeli army only jews are allowed to serve not israeli arabs and jews together.
Dont the israeli arabs have their own units if they want to serve in the army?

Arabs living in Israel do have their own units if they choose to serve in the IDF. Arabs serving in the IDF mainly consists of Israeli Druze (some of which have to join), Bedouins (mostly recruited by IDF for useful knowledge of a specific land area), and Israeli Arabs (mainly Christian). There are small amounts of Palestinians that also join, either because they are against Palestinian terror activities (why aren’t these Palestinians ever interviewed???), or because they join for personal gain (career etc).

On your point that states that Arabs and Jews do not serve together, this is untrue up to a certain extent. A perfect example is of my father’s army career. After emigrating from Iraq to Israel, my father was placed in a unit containing Bedouins, Jews and Druze (The reason being probably because of my dads strong Arabic dialect to communicate). The unit’s main characteristic was to serve in the Sinai Peninsula to establish friendship between Israel and native Bedouins in the area. It also had to keep lookout for a huge land area using nothing but a few jeeps and "state of the art" camels and native Bedouins help. During my fathers service he created friendship with many Druze and Bedouins that now subside in Israel.

[Mediocrates]

My muslim friends don't overintellectualize it. It's become an us vs. them dogfight. Right or wrong Iraq is seen as the sharp point of the spear against what they see as decades of undue American influence.

I'm just the messenger, thanks.

[wellofvow]

Originally posted by L@mplighterM
Whether one agrees or not Muslims will remain an integral part that will continue to play a role in the security of the US.

Oh great! I might as well tear up my American passport - which I had planned to use when the Palestinians take over Israel with European collusion.....

Well, for sure I won't be taking my gas mask to work any more. What's the purpose?

[wellofvow]

Originally posted by richcrassus
I suppose thats why in the israeli army only jews are allowed to serve not israeli arabs and jews together.
Dont the israeli arabs have their own units if they want to serve in the army?

Jews serve in the Israeli army. All native-born, Jewish Israelis are inducted, except for ultra-religious males, and religious girls may opt out for "national service". Married girls are also not inducted. Immigrants may serve.

Druse MAY serve in the Israeli army (Druse are not Moslems).

Bedouin MAY serve in the Israeli army (Bedouin ARE Moslems).

Israeli Arabs, i.e., NOT Bedouin, whether Moslem or Christians, do NOT serve in the Israeli army. As far as I know, they have never wanted, and still do not WANT to serve in the Israeli army.

[wellofvow]

Originally posted by andak01
There are thousands of Muslim service men and women. There were Muslims serving during the first Gulf War as well.

I've been listening to TV quite a lot lately (duh), but I do take breaks to go to work, shop for food, work on my thesis, junk like that. So, *maybe* I missed something. I heard, LONG before this soldier fired on his fellow soldiers, that there were **400** Muslims in combat, certainly NOT "thousands". At the time, I thought that even sending 400 Muslims as "American" soldiers to fight against fellow Muslims was totally insane.

Heck, my dad (z"l) told me stories that during WWII JEWS were often NOT sent to the European theater because some idiot was convinced that he would go berserk and kill poor Nazi POWs. My dad served nearly 4 years in the Solomon Islands (and although college-educated, never got further than corporal due to an antisemitic commanding officer. He did come back with such severe PTSD that he could not continue med school.)

As far as I remember (rather busy hyperventilating in my sealed room with husband, 3 kids, 2 dogs at the time), the only "Muslims" in the 1991 Gulf War were translators. But I could be wrong.

[cerulean]

Originally posted by wellofvow

As far as I remember (rather busy hyperventilating in my sealed room with husband, 3 kids, 2 dogs at the time), the only "Muslims" in the 1991 Gulf War were translators. But I could be wrong.

I read that this particular soldier did not go to the 1991 Gulf War because he was a Muslim. I guess the policy changed.

[wellofvow]

Am Yisrael, Christian Israeli Arabs do NOT serve in the Israeli army.

Some Christian Arab bishops sound like Palestinian terrorists when interviewed by media. Some have been caught smuggling weapons.

Like I said, Druze may serve, and Bedouin may serve.

Your good intentions are appreciated, and your support is welcome, but it is not useful if you state as fact things about which you are not knowledgeable. Just let it go and someone who does know will answer.

[Am Yisrael]

Originally posted by wellofvow
Am Yisrael, Christian Israeli Arabs do NOT serve in the Israeli army.

Some Christian Arab bishops sound like Palestinian terrorists when interviewed by media. Some have been caught smuggling weapons.

Like I said, Druze may serve, and Bedouin may serve.

Your good intentions are appreciated, and your support is welcome, but it is not useful if you state as fact things about which you are not knowledgeable. Just let it go and someone who does know will answer.

Well my good intentions will not go.

1) Druze are an ofset of Islam.

2) Christians do serve in the IDF if they want to. Maybe you never come in contact with arabs because you live in the southern of Israel but im SURE that some Israeli arabs (not only Druze) serve in the IDF. The following is taken from the IDF site:


http://www.idf.il/english/history/future5.stmThere are many non-Jews serving in the IDF. Most are from the Druze and Circassian communities, who were long allied with Israel and drafted into the IDF. Bedouins, who are the IDF's best scouts, and a small number of Christian and Muslim Arab volunteer to serve in the IDF.

[wellofvow]

Originally posted by cerulean
I read that this particular soldier did not go to the 1991 Gulf War because he was a Muslim. I guess the policy changed.

No kidding! Israelis would say "bassa!".

Well, I certainly hope, for the safety of lots of American soldiers, that Muslim-American soldiers are being shipped back to the States. I also would like to think that whoever was in charge of changing the policy is now cleaning out his desk and making plans for an early (but long overdue, IMO) retirement.

Again, IMO, the families of the dead and injured should sue the army for this change of policy resulting in these needless casualties, a result of treason.

On second thought, I take it back: The guy in charge of change of policy should be court-martialed. Is there a paragraph in military law for being a total moron?

The British House of Commons positively grilled Tony Blair about the shooting down of the British plane by the Patriot missile. Why should the American army get off scot-free for an incredibly stupid decision to allow Muslims to serve in an American combat unit fighting Muslims? It's like they have said for generations: "army intelligence" is an oxymoron.

[wellofvow]

Originally posted by Am Yisrael
Well my good intentions will not go.

1) Druze are an ofset of Islam.

2) Christians do serve in the IDF if they want to. Maybe you never come in contact with arabs because you live in the southern of Israel but im SURE that some Israeli arabs (not only Druze) serve in the IDF. The following is taken from the IDF site:

Oh, please don't be cross with me. I really do like you.

Thanks for the site. I went to it and read it. With all due respect to the IDF Spokesman's Office, there were several mistakes that even I, who did not serve - but whose husband and 3 kids did - noticed.

It claimed that Israeli officers do not go to "acadamies", but "rise through the ranks". This is a half-truth. The IDF does not have a West Point or Annapolis, true, but soldiers showing certain characteristics are offered "course ktzinim", "officer's course", which lasts several months. On the other hand, the rise to non-commissioned officer is quite rapid in the Israeli army. My daughter served the usual 2 and a half years for women, and was discharged at the rank of sergeant.

Another mistake: women now serve in several combat units.

Another mistake: the information given specifically on "Nachal" is no longer true. I had two kids in Nachal.

Again, I said I may be wrong, but the mistakes in the site that you provided does not persuade me that I am wrong.

Ooops, one more thing. Druse are not a branch of Islam, as you suggest. They are a separate sect, and their religious practices are kept very secret. They may have close ties with Moslems, or not.

A former boyfriend of my daughter's had a couple of Drusi boys in his Nachal unit. These boys "fit in" so well with the Jewish boys that a rabbi picked one of the Drusi guys to say the blessings on a Jewish holiday. The rest of the unit thought it was hilarious, especially since he did a very credible job. :)

[MichaelC]

Originally posted by wellofvow
Again, IMO, the families of the dead and injured should sue the army for this change of policy resulting in these needless casualties, a result of treason.

On second thought, I take it back: The guy in charge of change of policy should be court-martialed. Is there a paragraph in military law for being a total moron?
I could be wrong, but I don't think you can sue the military.

And, I wish it were so easy as to be able to pin this idiotic policy on one person but I doubt that is possible either. The policy more than likely passed through numerous stops in the chain of command and it would not be easy to bring it down to one guy.

But the policy itself certainly needs to be changed. An example of a wiser policy is the utilization of Japanese American volunteers during World War II. The Nisei division of Japanese-American volunteers were sent to Europe, not to the Pacific theater.

They are, for those who do not already know it, the most decorated unit in the American military in any theater of combat during that war.

I hate modern political correctness that is utterly blind in situations like this when there are solutions at hand.

[elreason4]

Originally posted by wellofvow
Jews serve in the Israeli army. All native-born, Jewish Israelis are inducted, except for ultra-religious males, and religious girls may opt out for "national service". Married girls are also not inducted. Immigrants may serve.

Druse MAY serve in the Israeli army (Druse are not Moslems).

Bedouin MAY serve in the Israeli army (Bedouin ARE Moslems).

Israeli Arabs, i.e., NOT Bedouin, whether Moslem or Christians, do NOT serve in the Israeli army. As far as I know, they have never wanted, and still do not WANT to serve in the Israeli army.

As a free liberal Democracy, Israel enforces the individual freedoms, like religion. The law of the land in Israel makes discrimination illegal. As such, the Muslim Palestininian Israeli's are the only free Arab peoples in the Middle East who run their own lives. These million+ Palestinian Israeli citizens are not to be confused with the Palestinians under occupation who are currently at war with Israel (the very reason for the occupation).

All Israeli's MAY serve in the army (Jew, Christian or Muslim), but it is the secular Jews who must serve. Israel must use a draft because it is a microscopically small country forced to defend itself from an ongoing Arab war against her. Palestinian Israeli's are not forced to serve in the army under the logic that the IDF does not want to force any of its soldiers to potentially face a relative on the other side of a fight. Of course, the Druse IDF units truly do honor to all Muslims; a Muslim force defending democracy and freedom.

[Am Yisrael]

Originally posted by wellofvow
[B]Oh, please don't be cross with me. I really do like you.
ahh gee thanks! :) . I never mean to be cross in any of my posts (apart from with people like cblanc) so dont take my direct attitude personally :)


Thanks for the site. I went to it and read it. With all due respect to the IDF Spokesman's Office, there were several mistakes that even I, who did not serve - but whose husband and 3 kids did - noticed.
Yes I noticed too (wow you are good at spotting mistakes!) but I still remain optimistic that Israeli Arabs do have a choice whether they want to be drafted into the IDF. One of the reasons why Arabs might want to be drafted is due to the fact that serving in the IDF while an Arab can seriously raise future career opportunities in Israeli cities or towns (same goes with Jews as well). I don’t have any examples of the moment of Israeli Arabs in the IDF but I will try and find some soon.


Ooops, one more thing. Druse are not a branch of Islam, as you suggest. They are a separate sect, and their religious practices are kept very secret. They may have close ties with Moslems, or not.

It is said in many sources, that Druzes are one of the sects of Moslem Shiites. It is the same as stating that Islam is a branch of Judaism. The religion of the Druzes indeed broke of from a Shiitic sect of the Ismaelites in the 11-nth century, but completely changed afterwards, and it is worth regarding it as a completely separate religion.


A former boyfriend of my daughter's had a couple of Drusi boys in his Nachal unit. These boys "fit in" so well with the Jewish boys that a rabbi picked one of the Drusi guys to say the blessings on a Jewish holiday. The rest of the unit thought it was hilarious, especially since he did a very credible job. :)

HAHA!! Yes it is true that Israeli Jews and Druze are very close to one another and it is good!! The Druze are our true friends in the ME at the moment and I am very proud that they choose to be our allies then our enemies (as most Arabs).