double standards : LUSENET : Grassroots Information Coordination Center (GICC) : One Thread

Enough soft stepping!

We are willing to shoot civilian aircraft out of the sky if hijacked, yet we step ever so softly around the Muslim world. Why?

The answer is obvious, “political correctness.”

Americans will soon realize that al this political correctness, hate crime laws, etc. are blinding us from the truth. We are allowing the “moral” majority (minority) to obscure our natural defensive instincts.

The “peace mongers” are subverting reality.

The Nation of Islam is not one that preaches peace as our leaders tell us. It is a faith based system that denounces man for being creative, for surviving as he should. It aims to place man in the servitude of God by coercion. Those who practice the Muslim faith are opposed to individual rights and liberty. In Islam there is no room for many faiths, there is no room for “choice.”

By the very nature of our Capitalist system we become obstacles to the Nation of Islam. We are their enemy by design. We who respect other’s rights to worship and to live as they see fit, are the targets of these radicals.

True, like many none practicing Catholics, there are Muslims who mouth their belief only… They find the American way of life too tempting to adhere to their own religious teachings.

What has become apparent is that we are carrying out military action with too much restraint. If we maintain this pace, in the long run we will have more US casualties. The world is watching and we are going about like armature actors on opening might.

We need to bring our enemies to their knees with ruthless power! We need to dismiss all this media attention of Afghan civilian casualties and stand firm in our resolve.

We must be ready to take this war as far as it must go, even if it draws us into a nuclear war. The enemy must be pulverized! Civilians and all!

Just as we would not blink twice before shooting down a hijacked US civilian airliner, with innocent US citizens on board, we should not soften our strikes against the Taliban as they hide among Afghan civilians.

No double standards!

-- Justo Perez (, October 31, 2001


Good point! What i' would like to say is (I'm not a very religious person, but i think...) when you have given your life up to god, you do everything that you can to promote: Peace, understanding, and love. If god truely loves his children, than god accepts them the way that they are. God being perfect must know that the children are not perfect, and have many human problems to deal with. God understands that children are falible and given to losing control to their emotions. When we look at things in this light, we strive to bring understanding, and tolerence to help us deal with our neighbors. Above all to love is to protect and guide, although it is often not an easy task to guide people. However, i think that in every person there is small existing nature of God that knows that love and nurturing is what the children need so badly. Sometime we will run from this presence because we are easily distracted and may think that these feelings are unnatural because the tide of events are so counter to this nature. At this point the mind becomes frustrated as to what to express. Any pause of doubt is an open invitation for fear to step in. Once fear is in the mix of emotions it gains a life of it's own, and prompts the host to lash out at outer threats, concepts or entities that it does not understand. Thus, feeling threatened, the natural respose is to and defend. God would never oppose protecttion of a child/loved one. There is of course a fine line between attacking and defending, and in the heat of a moment, a falible human may not hold the reigns of emotion, which could easily rage out of control. This is where cold inhuman laws must step in and be the guidance for people. Where laws are open to the interpretation of people, falibilty is also a possiblilty. People dispensing the justice of these laws must you a godlike detachment from human emotion to try and the spriit be served in the most positve manner, as god would see fit. Human consequences may easily not match what would be the best course of action to yeild a god-like treatment. Often it is an individual preference of what jsutice can satisfy the spirit of the person that has been wronged. A God of love would not want to be respected due to fear of the subjects, but of admiration of the loving and nuturing qualities that were held to be divine. This would naturaly echo the will of God. Amen.

-- jimmie-the weed (, October 31, 2001.

I think that Mr. Perez would have made a great crusader during the Inquisition of the Middle Ages. I get the impression that he would not have spared the rack or the thumbscrews to achieve his aims. Nice going, Mr. Perez, for your contribution in raising us up higher than the animal kingdom.

-- Lori Cabirac (, November 01, 2001.

The enemy, not the civilians, must be pulverized, but not for pulverizations sake. If the civilians resist the new government that will be coming their way very shortly, they will need some WWII lessons (Dresden) in short order. If it so happens the Taliban hide weapons in peoples homes, schools, hospitals and mosques too bad, war is hell. We must avoid the nukes if possible.

Lori: Have you forgotten the WTC so quickly? You can thank the terrorists for their "contribution in raising us up higher than the animal kingdom", not Mr. Pereez. FYI: The inquisition and the crusades were two different events.

-- Steve McClendon (, November 01, 2001.

Re:"FYI: The inquisition and the crusades were two different events. "

You are right. Don't you love it when people spout so- called "historical facts" that have nothing to do with reality?

-- K (, November 01, 2001.

It's obvious that Lori missed the point and decided it was easier to classify me as a crusader.

There is a double standard...

Will Lori criticize the US Government policy of shooting down a US airliner full of passengers, possibly her own loved ones aboard, to take out the threat of an aircraft being used as missile by terrorists?

Chances are she won't, but she will readily defend the civilian's of Afghanistan. She will readily defend the people who's beliefs have festered into the formation of a Taliban Government.

I'm quite surprised, being that Lori is a woman, she would find herself with no rights in that Government.

Anyway, enough about Lori.

There is a lack of depth in the way most Americans view religion. We tend to have a limited superficial view or perspective. We Americans tend to cast a generalized opinion of religion that falls under one concept, "freedom of worship."

We have this benign view of religion because our founding fathers primarily of Christian belief. Their experience with religion was mostly limited to their own. They figured that any person could worship as they wish, so long as they did not violate other's rights...

- Not to expound a great deal, suffice it to say that when they used the word rights, they were explicit in addressing them as life, liberty, and property rights. From these three corner stones of freedom we can branch out to many connected specifics in rights. -

... It still holds, in-spite of their narrow foresight, that we all (including Muslims) have the right to worship as we wish. However, there is a limit to that freedom of worship. It is limited to the extent of other's rights.

Every human being is vested in "rights," but not every Government recognizes these rights. No Government is hatched independently of its people. Even Totalitarian extreme Governments and their controlling inner circles such as the Nazi regime, were not formed independent of its people.

That the people were naive and uninformed does not relieve them of the responsibility of the Government they have. It is precisely the point here, people of every Nation are responsible for their Government and there is no excuse to relieve them of that responsibility. To do so, would class them as "irresponsible." Either way, they are at the root of their festered Government and the tyranny that they foster. Individuals, that fail to become involved in politics and philosophy of their culture are just as much the creators of their Government, by inaction, as those that are actively involved and participate in the dynamics of their system.

Like Ms. Lori, many Americans fail to look deeper into the issue that forms the foundation of our world events today and more precisely in this country.

Any religion that teaches and inspires followers to conquer those who do not believe as they do or those who do not practice as they do, is a real threat to the American way of life. Any religion that demands that man be in servitude to God, Government, or other men, is a tyranny in the making.

These types of religion do not attempt to divorce themselves from the Government system, they aim to become the Government system. They aim to rule by oppression and coercion of the individual. They instill fear and abandonment of reason as their tool of control.

Humans have the capacity to think and fend for themselves individually. This capacity was recognized as early as the Greek period of history. Many Philosophers reasoned that man was able to "choose" and that man had a definite "morality." Not a morality based on subjective views, but on of clear distinction. In essence any ideology that promotes life is moral and any that opposes it is immoral.

Now for the rub with the Koran. How is it moral to deny man his only tool of survival? Man has no fangs, no claws, no natural weapon as most animals. Man has one and only one tool for survival, "his mind."

Any religion or ideology that condemns man for thinking and being free to make choices is outright immoral. It is immoral because it strips man of his only tool for survival. His mind!

For a man to submit himself or be forced into servitude of God, Government, or other men, is no different than to sentence him to death. The way of Islam and the Koran, does just that.

Having gone this great length to explain the depth of religion, let me return to the Afghan people. But, believe me if you care to go deeper, I'd be glad to do so...

These people have been living in impoverished condition for years. They blame the US for it wealth and egoism. They blame us for being progressive and materialistic. In other words, human progress is a taboo in Islam.

The Afghans and most Muslims in the middle east do not progress independently of the US or other Democratic Countries. They cannot because they do not observe individual rights. They, and I mean not only their Government, the people of Afghanistan are part of the cause of their own nightmare. In their abandonment of the "mind" they have created their own predicament.

Why should we continue to risk our knobble men and women, our Nation, for the sake of people who refuse to use their mind? Why risk our Nation for people who have abandoned their human rights?

This war will fail if we continue to soft step, if we continue to embrace "political correctness." We cannot win this war if stay the course because we cannot separate the civilians from the Taliban. The civilians collaborate with the Taliban not only by allowing them to hide in their homes and villages, but more so by adhering to their beliefs and ideology. They are one and the same. Guilty by association!

I proudly will ware Lori's title of Crusader in the quest for reality and will not succumb to this liberal "political correctness" crap!

-- Justo Perez (, November 01, 2001.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ