>> ^jonny:
Why has nearly everyone else that has engaged in such behavior been given a warning, or at least a forum (siftiquisition) in which to defend themselves? Berticus was afforded no such luxury. He was banned less than 30 minutes after his actions. No talk. No vote. No consensus. Boom. Gone.

Actually, good point. I believe berticus was suspended to remain consistent with other choices the admin has made, and, believe me, I really wish berti was here because he's really the salt of the Sift. I'm torn on this one, but I think the idea behind the temporary suspension of berticus was for consistency more than any other nefarious means. I know your comment about Stalin is meant to be a bit drastic to make a point, but it's a bit overboard, no?

I do believe berticus should've been given a Siftquisition. Personally, I do. But, I think this is one of those times when those in charge would've been damned if they did and damned if they didn't. I don't think we should incite martyrdom from a two week ban. We miss him. I do. He was more than cool in my book.

>> ^Yehoshua:
Ok, so you added some good details to this unilateral plan for peace; the UN comes in and enforces it, the US and EU broker the agreements. At what point would Israel be justified in ending a peace in response to an attack?

This is a wrong way of looking at the situation as you are searching for some kind of allowance to when Israel can use it's military power in response to an attack when we are discussing a peace deal. Such terms can never be defined and have never formed any part of a peace deal. Cessation of terrorist activity yes but not a stipulation of when retaliation can occur. Its unrealistic.

I find it best to look at parallels in other conflicts and how the peace treaty was worked out, in Northern Ireland you had a concrete disengagement from both sides, an agreement to end hostilities, a firm declaration of no favored status from the UK which ultimately lead to peace. This is now the kind of situation we require in the Middle East peace process.

Previous peace engagements have failed due to forced concessionary actions by Israel towards Palestine. In the 2003 Road map for peace article 1 stipulated an end to settler expansions in the West Bank, this was refused by Sharon who claimed that settlements cannot stop in the West bank. Then we had numerous 'reservations' put in place by Israel towards the peace plan - http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/ShArt.jhtml?itemNo=297230

One of which was a complete dismantlement of terrorist organizations before the implementation of the rest of the articles of the Road map to peace, something I always found an unrealistic expectation as its impossible to control the numerous groups that hold extremist views against Israel ranging from pure jihad against Jews to complete annihilation of the State of Israel. The Palestinian people do not have the refined policing force that could prevent and guarantee such action.

Furthermore it stipulated the complete need to disarm the Palestinian people, which is a completely unrealistic thing to ask towards a people that have been fighting a war against occupation. You cannot expect them to suddenly trust your 'word' that you will remain committed to the articles that relate Israeli concessions to Palestinian. All of which were laced with phrases like "Subject to security conditions, Israel will work to restore Palestinian life to normal: promote the economic situation, cultivation of commercial connections, encouragement and assistance for the activities of recognized humanitarian agencies."

This is not a peace process, this is forced concessions on the Palestinians. Bush left the region, the IDF entered Gaza and killed a Palestinian and the cycle of violence escalated again.

Suicide bombing or a rocket barrage, which has been accepted as a valid tactic by the vast majority of the Palestinian people.

Unfortunately the Palestinian people do not have the military assistance and help of the US to allow them to purchase F-16s, Apache attack helicopters, M-16s and other weapons. Israel launched countless rocket attacks over the areas designed to essentially assassinate leaders. What kind of impression does this create in the Palestinian people?

The Palestinians have, in my experience, more often had leadership interested in pursuing military action.

The Palestinians support these attacks because they exist under Israeli occupation, I find it fascinating that you do not look into the sheer conditions that Israel imposes on the Palestinian people which to me explain their armed resistance, from the separation wall, to check points, to arbitrary incursions, to open air prison, to blockades, to home bulldozing, to large scale bombings and destruction that we have witness over the last few weeks.

As I said again terrorist action is a symptom not a disease in Palestine, the Israelis gave no other option to many Palestinians who resist the occupational actions. To us this may seem like lunacy but then again we haven't lived most our lives under occupation.

I don't condone alot of their actions, I believe alot of it is counter productive, but am not living in those conditions and I cannot simply brush aside these attacks and claim that they are simply being stubborn, that they are all extremist or all are seeking martyrdom. Because we have seen such sacrifices and terrorist actions in previous conflicts.

>> ^BillOreilly:
>> ^videosiftbannedme:
>> ^BillOreilly:
that dog must be religious-- an Atheist would never risk his life for someone else like that...

Of course. Because we all know how much compassion you have, BillO.
Give up on sarcasm; it's not your forte.

No sarcasm in my post, son. Atheism contributes nothing good to our society, period.

You're right...just the idea that there is no god contributes nothing to society...where as religion makes a contribution in the form of guilt, dogma, impeding scientific progress, religious wars, martyrdom, hatred and intolerance. Good stuff.

each one that comits suicide is one less exstreamist darwinisum in action.

Unfortunately, thats not necessarily how it works, martyrdom is more like a meme, a replicator that survives not despite, but because the host dies. Just like brainworms can make ants seek out high ground, or even make them look like berrys, just so it can be eaten, and the worm benefits, because it can only continue its lifecycle in cow or birds belly.

The simplistic Darwinistic view is that an action performed is for the benefit of the performer, but thats not always the case. Darwinian manipulation is a fascinating subject

Actions are often for the benefit of someone, or something, but not always what you think.

Darwin works in mysterious ways.

'Lyrical terrorist' sentenced over extremist poetry

A 23-year-old former Heathrow shop assistant who called herself the "lyrical terrorist" and scrawled her extremist thoughts on till receipts has been handed a nine-month suspended jail sentence.
Samina Malik became the first woman convicted under new terrorism legislation after writing poems entitled How To Behead and The Living Martyrs.

Malik, described as an "unlikely but committed" Islamic extremist, was last month convicted by an jury at the Old Bailey of a charge under the 2000 Terrorism Act.

She worked at WH Smith at Heathrow, where she scribbled her extremist lyrics on till receipts. On one she wrote: "The desire within me increases every day to go for martyrdom."

But Malik told the jury she only adopted her "lyrical terrorist" nickname because she thought it was "cool" and insisted: "I am not a terrorist."

Malik had tears in her eyes as she left the dock, while her mother wept during the court hearing. The judge said Malik's crime was on the "margins" of the offence of which she was found guilty. He said Malik was of "good character" and from a "supportive and law-abiding family who are appalled by the trouble that you are in".

"The Terrorism Act and the restrictions it imposes on the personal freedom exist to protect this country, its interests here and abroad, its citizens, and those who visit here. Its protection embraces us all. Its restrictions apply to us all, whatever our personal religious or political beliefs."

He told Malik that if she had been convicted of the more serious charge of possessing an article for terrorist purposes - of which the jury cleared her - she would have faced a jail term. But he said, while a custodial sentence was merited, she had already faced "extremely rigorous" bail conditions which were "tantamount to house arrest".

The court heard that she also spent five months in custody after being arrested in October last year. Malik's sentence was suspended for 18 months, with the condition that she be supervised for the whole period and undertake unpaid work.

Outside court Malik's solicitor Iqbal Ahmed read out a statement on her behalf. He said: "The trial process has been a terrible ordeal for her and she is now relieved that it is all over. The jury found that she did not have the material for terrorist purposes which was an important part of her case. She now wants to get on with her life."

Last month, Malik was found guilty of possessing records likely to be useful in terrorism by a majority of 10 to one. She cried as the verdict was read. Two female jurors were also in tears. The court heard that Malik stocked a "library" of material useful to terrorists at her family home in Southall, west London.

The court was told Malik was 20 years old when she "first started to consider Islam" and was "like most teenagers, somewhat rebellious". Malik had been interested in poetry, and had written love poems, followed by rap poems and later by "what can only be described as the distasteful poetry which has been mentioned in this trial".

John Burton, defending, said: "She became hooked on Abu Hamza-type addresses and that affected her mindset." The jury was told that she joined an extremist organisation called Jihad Way, set up explicitly to spread terrorist propaganda and support for al Qaida.

Jonathan Sharp, prosecuting, told the court she visited a website linked to the jailed cleric Abu Hamza and stored material about weapons. The court also heard Malik belonged to a social networking website called hi5, describing her interests as "helping the mujaheddin in any way which I can".

Under favourite TV shows, she listed: "Watching videos by my Muslim brothers in Iraq, yep the beheading ones, watching video messages by Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahri and other videos which show massacres of the kaffirs." removed

After her conviction, Judge Peter Beaumont, the recorder of London, told her: "You have been, in many respects, a complete enigma to me."

A spokesman for the Muslim Council of Britain welcomed the decision by the judge to suspend the sentence. Inayat Bunglawala said: "It always seemed a rather bizarre decision to prosecute Samina when she is clearly not an actual terror plotter.

"Samina Malik was being prosecuted in effect for a thought crime because she had downloaded some material from the internet which anyone could download."
Mr Bunglawala said the case demonstrated how ill-conceived and "incredibly broad-ranging" the law is under Section 58 of the Terrorism Act. "Teenagers download some quite nihilistic material every day and they are not prosecuted," he said.

"The fact that this case went to court sends a very worrying signal that if you are Muslim and you are downloading from the Internet you may be judged to a quite different standard from others. Fortunately the judge has been sensible about this. The wider Muslim community must be relieved that she hasn't got a custodial sentence."

In a statement, the Crown Prosecution Service said: "Samina Malik was not prosecuted for writing poetry. Ms Malik was convicted of collecting information, without reasonable excuse, of a kind likely to be useful to a person committing or preparing an act of terrorism."

"Islamofacism" is the real crutch, branding an entire region of people as our sworn enemies because they're sick of us bombing and shooting them. They're sick of us over-throwing their governments and installing dictators. They're sick of us getting rich off of their oil and natural resources.

The USA has killed - by far - more innocent people than Al Qaida has.

"...all the peace, love, understanding, and tolerance won't deter some nutjob seeking martyrdom from strapping up and blowing himself..."

I whole-heartedly disagree. We need a lot more peaceful measures and a lot fewer bombs, bullets, and indifferent occupation force.

1600, 16 million, or 16... does it really matter? "Islamophobia" is a crutch, an exploited catch-phrase. One can't criticize non-Muslims for how Muslims are perceived (albeit, often irrationally) if you spend all your time proselytizing to the unwashed masses about said misperceptions and ignore getting your own house in order.

I don't disagree with or dismiss what Craig Murray is saying. There is no doubt fear is being stoked and used by governments (successfully here in the US) to quell dissention and breed indifference to their actions. But, all the peace, love, understanding, and tolerance won't deter some nutjob seeking martyrdom from strapping up and blowing himself, and as many innocent people as possible, to whatever kingdom come he's been programmed to believe in. Cart before the horse, it seems to me.


EDIT: First paragraph wasn't directed at you, Farhad, although it may read that way.

In reply to your comment:
“I despise Scientology as much as the next guy, but I'd like to point out that most of the negative stuff about it comes from the behavior and actions of the Church of Scientology. They're the ones who use deceptive and arrogant tactics. But as a religion, hey, we're all free to believe what we wish.

It's easy to object to Mormonism as well, but note that a lot of the bad stuff about Mormonism (polygamy, killing people) was dictated by the church itself, which has fortunately toned things down in recent years.

And one could do the same towards the Muslim religion, but it's really the more extremist sects of the Nation of Islam that believe that they must go out and kill all the infidels.

And don't think that atheists are blameless. They've done their share of persecuting those with religious beliefs.

All in all, it's not necessarily the entire religion itself that does the "bad" stuff, but rather the extremist parts of it. So don't be too quick to condemn someone for their beliefs when their actions and choices may not be so negative after all.”

I'm sorry Sylvester_Ink, but I'm a former Mormon (AKA LDS)and nowhere in the history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints there are no random acts of murder or violence committed in the name of the religion. There are many random acts of murder and martyrdom against the religion though (if you have ever heard of Joseph Smith you will know what I'm talking about).

And once the State (or maybe country) outlawed polygamy the church also outlawed it. Also people commonly mistaken the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints as the same religion (RLDS, which does practice polygamy illegally, the name Warren Jeffs comes to mind (fucking psycho)), but they are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, and the RLDS church no longer even recognizes the Book or Mormon anymore, and the two religions are not even associated at all, EVER. Please do your homework before you bash any religion again.

As far as Scientology goes, they are fucked up, and i have done my homework on them. Just remember the last lines of this video: http://www.videosift.com/video/Scientology-Orientation-Video-watch-it-while-you-can "...or you can jump off a bridge or blow your brains out." What kind of religion would tell people to do that or join their church!? It's fucking ridiculous! Scientology is more like a Tax Exempt corporation because you have to buy the e-meter readings and buy the books to "move up" in their church.

I'm sorry Sylvester_Ink, but I'm a former Mormon (AKA LDS)and nowhere in the history of The Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints there are no random acts of murder or violence committed in the name of the religion. There are many random acts of murder and martyrdom against the religion though (if you have ever heard of Joseph Smith you will know what I'm talking about).

And once the State (or maybe country) outlawed polygamy the church also outlawed it. Also people commonly mistaken the Reorganized Church of Jesus Christ of Later Day Saints as the same religion (RLDS, which does practice polygamy illegally, the name Warren Jeffs comes to mind (fucking psycho)), but they are COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, and the RLDS church no longer even recognizes the Book or Mormon anymore, and the two religions are not even associated at all, EVER. Please do your homework before you bash any religion again.

As far as Scientology goes, they are fucked up, and i have done my homework on them. Just remember the last lines of this video: http://www.videosift.com/video/Scientology-Orientation-Video-watch-it-while-you-can "...or you can jump off a bridge or blow your brains out." What kind of religion would tell people to do that or join their church!? It's fucking ridiculous! Scientology is more like a Tax Exempt corporation because you have to buy the e-meter readings and buy the books to "move up" in their church.

I don't doubt that there are those who are able to use the martyrdom element within the religion to inspire people to take the actions they do, just as there are those in the West able to convince people that their kids should give their lives "for God and country".

You are, however, going to have a pretty hard time convincing me that the religion is looking for people to become martyrs and that the current tensions just provide a good excuse for making it happen.

This clip shows Shi'a Muslims on the day of Ashura (عاشوراء) overcome with emotion and crying and beating themselves in protest and remembrance of a horrible tragedy - the murder of Husayn ibn Ali, the grandson of Muhammad, and his family at the Battle of Karbala in the year 61 AH (AD 680). The imam has just finished reading about the tragedy and he is deeply moved. He and the others inflict pain on themselves to remind themselves of the pain that Husayn and his family suffered. Husayn's martyrdom is seen by Shi'a as a symbol of the struggle against injustice, tyranny, and oppression. Saddam Hussein, himself a cruel, unjust and tyranical leader, banned Shi'a Muslims from publicly commemorating Ashura. This is a very important and sad day for Shi'a Muslims and one which I personally don't think should be trivially mocked by those who know nothing about it.

I'm not against good religious satire - this just isn't any good!

Believe it or not, suffering, poverty, and the occupation are not the main motivators in palestinians committing terrorist attacks. Its martydom.

Here's an excerpt of an article written by Nasra Hassan, a Pakistani Muslim:
SINCE 1982, I have been an international relief worker. In 1996 I was posted to the Gaza Strip during one of the most vicious cycles of suicide bombings. To understand why certain young men voluntarily blow themselves up in the name of Islam, I began, without official sponsorship, to research their backgrounds and the beliefs that had led them to such extreme tactics.

From 1996 to 1999, I interviewed nearly 250 people involved in the most militant camps of the Palestinian cause: volunteers who, like S, had been unable to complete their suicide missions, the families of dead bombers, and the men who trained them.

None of the suicide bombers — they ranged in age from 18 to 38 — conformed to the typical profile of the suicidal personality. None of them was uneducated, desperately poor, simple-minded, or depressed. Many were middle-class and held paying jobs. Two were the sons of millionaires. They all seemed entirely normal members of their families. They were polite and serious, and in their communities were considered to be model youths. Most were bearded. All were deeply religious.

The bomber’s family and the sponsoring organisation celebrate his martyrdom with festivities, as if it were a wedding. Hundreds of guests congregate at the house to offer congratulations. The hosts serve the juices and sweets that the young man specified in his will. Often, the mother will ululate in joy over the honour that Allah has bestowed upon her family.

Read the full article here http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,7-1692606,00.html

+1 @brendotroy

And @LadyBug, +1 @fardhad's explanation - not being masked would be their own death sentence.

If you didn't load the whole Salon article because of the stupid ad mechanism, I direct you to this:
The tribunal also had a unique sense of timing when choosing the day for Saddam's hanging. It was a slap in the face to Sunni Arabs. This weekend marks Eid al-Adha, the Holy Day of Sacrifice, on which Muslims commemorate the willingness of Abraham to sacrifice his son for God. Shiites celebrate it Sunday. Sunnis celebrate it Saturday –- and Iraqi law forbids executing the condemned on a major holiday. Hanging Saddam on Saturday was perceived by Sunni Arabs as the act of a Shiite government that had accepted the Shiite ritual calendar.

Wow - that's just plain stupid and perhaps uber-childish. Not only do you insult ~20% of your countrymen (the childish part), but you do it with a holiday ABOUT MARTYRDOM/SACRIFICE (yeah, the stupid part).

They need some Semiotics Majors in Baghdad. Now.

Among many other things, anyway.

The writer seems to agree

The timing also allowed Saddam, in his farewell address to Iraq, to pose as a “sacrifice” for his nation, an explicit reference to Eid al-Adha. The tribunal had given the old secular nationalist the chance to use religious language to play on the sympathies of the whole Iraqi public.

The political ineptitude of the tribunal, from start to finish, was astonishing. The United States and its Iraqi allies basically gave Saddam a platform on which to make himself a martyr to Iraqi unity and independence -- even if by unity and independence Saddam was really appealing to Sunnis' nostalgia for their days of hegemony.

Here's another way to look at it: was this, in the end, just another of the 500 daily deaths, or will it have lasting impact?

The egomaniac in Saddam was, I figure, no doubt be afraid of the former outcome.

BTW, welcome back deathcow, you've been quiet for a while.