The Strategypage is a comprehensive summary of military news and affairs.
 News As History - November 23, 2009




New Strategy - Wargames at Discount Prices
1.Modern Air Power: War Over the Middle East
2.Commander: Napoleon at War
3.Close Combat: Watch am Rhein
4.Gallic Wars
5.Fast Action Battle: The Bulge

100+ Computer and Board games all with free shipping.
 
 
 
Military History | How To Make War | Wars Around the World Rules of Use
How to Behave on an Internet Forum
United States Discussion Board
Sign In   Return to Topic Page
Subject: Quik question: Has any sane secular individual committed random mass murder?
Le Zookeeper    11/7/2009 3:25:54 PM
Shouldn't groups with extreme religious views now be suspect and profiled if necessary?
 
Quote    Reply

Email Me When A New Comment Is Made
Show Only Poster Name and Title     Sort in Reverse Order Posted

Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT
Zhang Fei       11/7/2009 3:52:14 PM
Hitler, Stalin and Mao were all secular. Nehru and Jinnah were secular, yet stood aloof as millions were killed during India's partition.
 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       11/7/2009 3:59:34 PM
Yes, Timothy McVeigh is secular.
 
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2001/jun/11/mcveigh.usa4
 
[quote]
In his letter, McVeigh said he was an agnostic but that he would "improvise, adapt and overcome", if it turned out there was an afterlife. "If I'm going to hell," he wrote, "I'm gonna have a lot of company." His body is to be cremated and his ashes scattered in a secret location.
[unquote]
 
Quote    Reply

Le Zookeeper    My question is in reference to Major Hasan type events in USA.   11/7/2009 4:01:34 PM

Hitler, Stalin and Mao were all secular. Nehru and Jinnah were secular, yet stood aloof as millions were killed during India's partition.


None of the above randomly shot people or lived in USA>
 
Quote    Reply

Le Zookeeper    McVeigh was raised Catholic and overly exposed to guns   11/7/2009 4:04:03 PM

McVeigh was introduced to firearms by his grandfather and became increasingly fascinated by them. McVeigh told people he wanted to be a gun shop owner and he sometimes took firearms to school to impress his classmates. McVeigh became intensely interested in gun rights after he graduated from high school, as well as the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, and read magazines such as Soldier of Fortune. He briefly attended Bryant & Stratton College before dropping out.[9][10]

Beliefs

Political

McVeigh's only known political affiliations were his voter registration with the Republican Party when he lived in New York and a membership in the National Rifle Association while in the military.[11] McVeigh self-identified as a libertarian in a statement that was reported by MSNBC.com and The Washington Post;[12] and while in federal prison, he voted for Libertarian candidate Harry Browne in the 1996 United States presidential election.[13]

Religious

Throughout his childhood, he and his father were Roman Catholics and often attended daily Mass. In a recorded interview with Time magazine[14] McVeigh professed his belief in "a God", although he said he had "sort of lost touch with" Catholicism and "I never really picked it up, however I do maintain core beliefs." The Guardian reported that McVeigh wrote a letter to them claiming to be an agnostic.[15] McVeigh at one time said that he believed the universe was guided by natural law, energized by some universal higher power that showed each person right from wrong if they paid attention to what was going on inside them. He had also said, "Science is my religion."[16]

 
Quote    Reply

CJH       11/7/2009 4:05:13 PM

Shouldn't groups with extreme religious views now be suspect and profiled if necessary?

You describe Timothy McVeigh in your title.
You raised his name. He is your secular, sane individual.
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       11/7/2009 4:07:04 PM

McVeigh was introduced to firearms by his grandfather and became increasingly fascinated by them. McVeigh told people he wanted to be a gun shop owner and he sometimes took firearms to school to impress his classmates. McVeigh became intensely interested in gun rights after he graduated from high school, as well as the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution, and read magazines such as Soldier of Fortune. He briefly attended Bryant & Stratton College before dropping out.[9][10]


Beliefs


Political


McVeigh's only known political affiliations were his voter registration with the Republican Party when he lived in New York and a membership in the National Rifle Association while in the military.[11] McVeigh self-identified as a libertarian in a statement that was reported by MSNBC.com and The Washington Post;[12] and while in federal prison, he voted for Libertarian candidate Harry Browne in the 1996 United States presidential election.[13]


Religious


Throughout his childhood, he and his father were Roman Catholics and often attended daily Mass. In a recorded interview with Time magazine[14] McVeigh professed his belief in "a God", although he said he had "sort of lost touch with" Catholicism and "I never really picked it up, however I do maintain core beliefs." The Guardian reported that McVeigh wrote a letter to them claiming to be an agnostic.[15] McVeigh at one time said that he believed the universe was guided by natural law, energized by some universal higher power that showed each person right from wrong if they paid attention to what was going on inside them. He had also said, "Science is my religion."[16]



Hitler had been a Catholic alter boy. Yet his atitude towards God was the same as McVeigh's.
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       11/7/2009 4:12:12 PM

Shouldn't groups with extreme religious views now be suspect and profiled if necessary?

And by the way, "extreme religious views" applies to feminists and environmentalists more than anyone else.
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       11/7/2009 4:13:46 PM



Shouldn't groups with extreme religious views now be suspect and profiled if necessary?



And by the way, "extreme religious views" applies to feminists and environmentalists more than anyone else.

 Well, I'll add animal rights fanatics and Obama worshippers to that list.

 
Quote    Reply

YelliChink       11/7/2009 4:17:35 PM
Herc, thrown away reading and comprehension skill is not the right way of trolling.
 
It is making yourself look stupid.
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       11/7/2009 4:22:41 PM



Hitler, Stalin and Mao were all secular. Nehru and Jinnah were secular, yet stood aloof as millions were killed during India's partition.





None of the above randomly shot people or lived in USA>
Your question did not mention US residency as a condition.
 
Communists murdered over 100 million innocent people. I hear that Communists are secular.

 
Quote    Reply

CJH    Without a ?Caste Analysis? India Can Not be Understood   11/7/2009 4:30:03 PM

Shouldn't groups with extreme religious views now be suspect and profiled if necessary?

Perhaps you consider these people to need profiling, After all, I hear many of them are converting to Christianity.
 
Quote    Reply

Zhang Fei       11/7/2009 4:39:54 PM
None of the above randomly shot people or lived in USA
 
Secular enablers of mass killings are fine as long as they are not Americans? Well, Timothy McVeigh was agnostic. In fact, the Wall Street bombing is suspected to have been carried out by anarchists, who were probably atheists:
The Wall Street bombing occurred at 12:01 p.m. on September 16, 1920, in the Financial District of New York City. Thirty-eight people were killed and 400 injured by the blast.[1] It was more deadly than the 1910 bombing of the Los Angeles Times building by the McNamara brothers and would remain the deadliest bomb attack on U.S. soil for nearly seven years, until the Bath School bombings in Bath Township, Michigan.
 
The case was investigated for over three years; in the end, the Bureau of Investigation was not able to identify the perpetrators.[4] Decades later the FBI said "the best evidence and analysis since that fateful day of September 16, 1920, suggests that the Bureau's initial thought was correct—that a small group of Italian Anarchists were to blame. But the mystery remains."[4]

Anarchists were suspected, especially the Galleanists, Italian anarchist followers of Luigi Galleani. The Galleanists had a motive for planning the bombing, because they were incensed over the indictment for murder of two of their colleagues, Sacco and Vanzetti. Discrimination against immigrants and resident aliens, especially those from Eastern Europe and Sicily, increased notably after the attack, bolstering flagging public support for the Palmer raids. Investigators searched hundreds of stables to determine who had purchased the horse and wagon, but nothing was uncovered. The note[which?] was analyzed and its language structure found similar to other 'bomb' leaflets left at the scene by the Galleanists, but this by itself was insufficient. Despite vows that the police would catch the perpetrators, no charges were ever filed. The FBI rendered the file inactive in 1940, and the crime remains officially unsolved.[7]

One Galleanist in particular, Mario Buda (1884 - 1963), an associate of Sacco and Vanzetti whose car led to the arrest of the latter for a separate robbery and murder, is alleged by some historians, including Paul Avrich, to have planted the bomb as revenge for the arrest and indictment of his fellow Galleanists.[8] Buda's involvement was confirmed by statements made by his nephew Frank Maffi and Charles Poggi, who interviewed Buda himself in Savignano, Italy, in 1955.[8] Buda (at that time known by the alias of Mike Boda) had just managed to elude authorities at the time of the arrests of Sacco and Vanzetti, was experienced in the use of dynamite and other explosives, and is believed to have constructed several of the largest package bombs for the Galleanists, including a large black powder bomb that killed ten persons {including nine policemen} in Milwaukee, Wisconsin November 24, 1917.[7][9][10][11][12][13] Moreover, Buda was in New York City at the time of the bombing. However, he was never arrested or questioned by police. Interestingly in the San Francisco Preparedness Day Bombing of July 22, 1916, a sash weight bomb had been used which killed 10 and wounded 40.

There's a reason you don't hear of many non-Muslim terrorists acting in the name of religion. I can't think of any non-Muslim religion that exhorts its adherents to kill non-believers as a matter of duty. Raymond Ibrahim explains how Islam is unique* in this respect:

Moreover, concerning the current default position which purports to explain away Islamic violence—that the latter is a product of Muslim frustration vis-à-vis political or economic oppression—one must ask: What about all the oppressed Christians and Jews, not to mention Hindus and Buddhists, of the world today? Where is their religiously-garbed violence? The fact remains: Even though the Islamic world has the lion's share of dramatic headlines—of violence, terrorism, suicide-attacks, decapitations—it is certainly not the only region in the world suffering under both internal and external pressures.

For instance, even though practically all of sub-Saharan Africa is currently riddled with political corruption, oppression and poverty, when it comes to violence, terrorism, and sheer chaos, Somalia—which also happens to be the only sub-Saharan country that is entirely Muslim—leads the pack. Moreover, those most responsible for Somali violence and the enforcement of intolerant, draconian, legal measures—the members of the jihadi group Al-Shabab (the youth)—articulate and justify all their actions through an Islamist paradigm.

In Sudan, too, a jihadi-genocide against the Christian and polytheistic peoples is currently being waged by Khartoum's Islamist government and has left nearly a million "infidels" and "apostates" dead. That the Organization of Islamic Conference has come to the defense of Sudanese president Hassan Ahmad al-Bashir, who is wanted by the International Criminal Court, is further telling of the Islamic body's approval of violence toward both non-Muslims and those deemed not Muslim enough.

Latin American and non-Muslim Asian countries also have their fair share of oppressive, authoritarian regimes, poverty, and all the rest that the Muslim world suffers. Yet, unlike the near daily headlines emanating from the Islamic world, there are no records of practicing Christians, Buddhists, or Hindus crashing explosives-laden vehicles into the buildings of oppressive (e.g., Cuban or Chinese communist) regimes, all the while waving their scriptures in hand and screaming, "Jesus [or Buddha or Vishnu] is great!" Why?

There is one final aspect that is often overlooked—either from ignorance or disingenuousness—by those who insist that violence and intolerance is equivalent across the board for all religions. Aside from the divine words of the Qur'an, Muhammad's pattern of behavior—his sunna or "example"—is an extremely important source of legislation in Islam. Muslims are exhorted to emulate Muhammad in all walks of life: "You have had a good example in God's Messenger."[18] And Muhammad's pattern of conduct toward non-Muslims is quite explicit.

Sarcastically arguing against the concept of moderate Islam, for example, terrorist Osama bin Laden, who enjoys half the Arab-Islamic world's support per an Al-Jazeera poll,[19] portrays the Prophet's sunna thusly:

"Moderation" is demonstrated by our prophet who did not remain more than three months in Medina without raiding or sending a raiding party into the lands of the infidels to beat down their strongholds and seize their possessions, their lives, and their women.[20]

In fact, based on both the Qur'an and Muhammad's sunna, pillaging and plundering infidels, enslaving their children, and placing their women in concubinage is well founded.[21] And the concept of sunna—which is what 90 percent of the billion-plus Muslims, the Sunnis, are named after—essentially asserts that anything performed or approved by Muhammad, humanity's most perfect example, is applicable for Muslims today no less than yesterday. This, of course, does not mean that Muslims in mass live only to plunder and rape.

But it does mean that persons naturally inclined to such activities, and who also happen to be Muslim, can—and do—quite easily justify their actions by referring to the "Sunna of the Prophet"—the way Al-Qaeda, for example, justified its attacks on 9/11 where innocents including women and children were killed: Muhammad authorized his followers to use catapults during their siege of the town of Ta'if in 630 C.E.—townspeople had refused to submit—though he was aware that women and children were sheltered there. Also, when asked if it was permissible to launch night raids or set fire to the fortifications of the infidels if women and children were among them, the Prophet is said to have responded, "They [women and children] are from among them [infidels]."[22]
* Unique if you don't consider Marxism-Leninism a religion, that is.
 
Quote    Reply

CJH       11/7/2009 4:58:01 PM
Should we forget Ted Kaczynski,  Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers?
 
Say, that's right. Obama reportedly launched his political career in the living room of two terrorists.
 
Quote    Reply

Hugo       11/7/2009 5:58:58 PM
What about hte Columbine students?  Naturally sanity could be argued but there is no evidence to support the notion that they were insane.
 
Quote    Reply

Hamilcar    Joe Stalin and Mao tse Dung   11/7/2009 11:56:34 PM
 
Quote    Reply
Pages: 1 2 3   NEXT



StrategyWorld.com© 1998 - 2009StrategyWorld.com. All rights Reserved. StrategyWorld.com, StrategyPage.com, FYEO, For Your Eyes Only and Al Nofi's CIC are all trademarks of StrategyWorld.com Privacy Policy