Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk Philosophy and Religion Forums

It looks like 'eh' has been avoiding the politics section as the question posed there remains unanswered.

The question is simple - can he confirm that he condemns Baruch Goldstein as a religously based terrorist who was a sane, American born doctor and Israeli army officer who, whilst in uniform, walked into a historical religous site and shot up a room full of worshippers - just because of Goldstein's religous faith (a distorted view of Judaism, imo).

There are those who venerate what this colonialist terrorist did, and 'eh' has thus far refused to condemn explicitly this guy as a terrorist.

It is not for want of asking:

shafique wrote:Bump for eh..

shafique wrote:

event horizon wrote:

shafique wrote:

shafique wrote:

shafique wrote:

shafique wrote:Now, back to my question:

Interesting that when asked to condemn Goldstein's actions and confirm that he was a religously motivated terrorist who killed whilst in Army uniform, rats scurries away and reads Fox News, rather than face the hard cold stats.
...

I really now wonder whether he does, after all, belong to the group of people who refuse to condemn Goldstein - or even those who still venerate what he did. I can't think why else rats evades this question - he condemns terrorism, he says, but does not confirm that he agrees Goldstein was a religously motivated terrorist.

Will we get an answer this time?



The question still hangs....


.still hanging..

Still waiting for the confirmation that rats/ikka/eh agrees that Goldstein is a religiously motivated terrorist who was an Israeli Army officer - many believe he was a hero and not a terrorist. He was also a white American - so some would not call him 'middle eastern' (and the qualification of 'middle easter' for 'terrorists' also speaks volumes).

Therefore, still waiting to see whether Ikka is an apologist for Goldstein or does condemn him unreservedly and acknowledges him as a religiously motivated terrorist.

Cheers,
Shafique

As I said, I have no problem condemning Middle Eastern terrorists just like I have no problem condemning Afghan, Pakistani, British Pakistani, Indonesian, Malaysian terrorists etc,.

Why the reluctance to condemn the American born doctor and religous terrorist, Goldstein?

(I only mention he is American born, because you seem to have missed out any white caucasian terrorists in your list of those who you condemn. I personally don't check a person's nationality before condemning their crime)

There are those who continue to venerate his actions - can you at least confirm you join me in condemning him as a religiously motivated terrorist.

If you can't say yes - should I infer that you do not condemn him unreservedly?

Cheers,
Shafique

Perhaps we'll get an answer this time round?

Cheers,
Shafique

Disapointed, but not surprised that 'eh' is studiously avoiding answering direct questions.

hmmm.

Cheers,
Shafique

If Baruch Goldstein was driven by religion, then it is unfortunate that he took a page from Islam which teaches adherents that martyrdom comes to those who 'kill [unbelievers] and are killed' waging offensive jihad warfare against unbelievers (9:29) because they are unbelievers.

Ah at least you've acknowledged the question - but you still couldn't bring yourself to acknowledge that Goldstein was a religously motivated terrorist and that you condemn him for his actions.

But, you also seem to be implying that his actions on Purim in 1994 stem from the Quran - ROFLMAO !!! - nice one.




Wow - it was worth the wait.


You may be unaware, but his supporters think he is a saint and his tombstone has the following on it:

Here lies the saint, Dr. Baruch Kappel Goldstein, blessed be the memory of the righteous and holy man, may the Lord avenge his blood, who devoted his soul to the Jews, Jewish religion and Jewish land. His hands are innocent and his heart is pure. He was killed as a martyr of God on the 14th of Adar, Purim, in the year 5754 (1994).

So this devoted servant of the 'Jewish religion' according to his supporters was actually a follower of the Quran! 'eh' - I've said it before, and I'll say it again - what a strange world you must live in!


Cheers,
Shafique

Shafique, I have no problem admitting that support for Middle East jihad terrorists, such as Ahmad Dakamseh, a sane, religiously based terrorist and Jordanian soldier who, whilst dressed in army uniform, gunned down seven 11 year old school girls - just because of his religious faith, is high in Jordan.

Recently, a number of elite Jordanian politicians, journalists and human rights activists (!) called for his release after he had only served 12 years in prison for his cold blooded murders:

"After around 12 years in prison, Ahmad Dakamseh deserves your majesty's special pardon," a group of 70 Islamists, unionists, lawyers, human rights activists and former officials said in a signed letter to the king.

Of course, there is the fact that a majority of Jordanians venerate other Jihad terrorists, such as Osama bin Laden and a large minority venerate former Jihad terrorist Abu Musab Zarqawi, even after his involvement in the martyrdom operations that struck the Jordanian capital and seemingly targeted a Palestinian wedding!

As I said, I have no problem condemning these two men even if a plurality of Muslims the world over venerate these individuals and their victims are more likely to be Muslim than non-Muslim - I can only think how popular Zarqawi and Bin Laden would be right now if their organizations only targeted non-Muslim civilians instead of the almost weekly bombings taking place in Muslim countries, such as Iraq and Pakistan, in which Muslims are typically the victims of their Jihad campaign.

Ahh - I thought you were going to continue with your comedy theme of Goldstein being influenced by the Quran.

But - I couldn't see either a condemnation of Goldstein, or indeed a reference to Goldstein in your reply. Did you mistakenly post in this thread?

This thread is about whether you 'eh' acknowledge and condemn Goldstein for what he is - if you want to talk about other terrorists, happy to do so in other threads.

Are you a supporter of Goldstein - is that it?

Cheers,
Shafique

bump

Now that 'eh' has finally agreed that Israeli collective punishments etc as listed by Amnesty International etc are to be condemned by him (as I condemn them too) - I guess we may eventually get him to clarify whether he supports Goldstein or condemns him as the religiously motivated terrorist he was.

C'mon eh - you can do it...

Cheers,
Shafique

If Israel blocked all supplies of food to Gaza and/or prevented the civilians of Gaza from accessing any food - then that should be condemned just as much as Muhammad's blockade of the Banu Qaynuqa tribe.

Huh?

Goldstein wasn't involved in any blockades - he was a colonialist in occupied Palestine, where he committed his religiously motivated massacre on a Jewish festival.

Why the confusion eh-oh?


C'mon, you've made a good step in admitting that Israeli war crimes/crimes against humanity, as described by Amnesty, are worthy of condemnation - so why not also condemn the religious terrorist Goldstein??

Cheers,
Shafique

Goldstein wasn't involved in any blockades

Cool. So that means Goldstein was a better person than Muhammad, who was involved in blockades. Goldstein never owned/sold slaves and never enslaved free men and women.

I would say that Goldstein, in that particular area, was also morally superior than Muhammad - who is supposedly an example for all humanity for all times.

So, we have two areas where Goldstein's ethics and morals trumped those of Muhammad's.

So now you are extolling the moral virtues of Goldstein.

Interesting response when I ask whether you condemn him or not. I had you down for a Christian - perhaps I was mistaken and you're just a serial cut and paste junkie?

Cheers,
Shafique

I'm saying that in some areas, Goldstein was a better person than Muhammad.

I'm not sure that's 'extolling' anyone's moral virtues - in part because Muhammad was not a very moral man himself.

In any event, I'm happy to join you in your condemnation of Muhammad's war crimes, since Muhammad, not Goldstein, is held as an exemplar for humanity by over one billion people.

Still no condemnation of Goldstein?

Fascinating how when discussing the actions of a Jewish terrorist, you first say he was influenced by the Quran (still cracks me up), then want to compare him to Muhammad, pbuh.

Why not compare him to Moses - surely Moses was more wicked as he apparently killed women, children and livestock after they were defeated?

Cheers,
Shafique

False analogies can be fun, but Moses is not considered an exemplar for all humanity, Muhammad is.

Anyway, still waiting for you to tell me if destroying crops to force civilians to surrender is collective punishment.

What has destroying crops got to do with Goldstein the Jewish terrorist and the fact you haven't condemned him?

Are you really having trouble with thread headings?


So, you believe comparing a Jewish terrorist with Muhammad, pbuh, is a valid comparison, but comparing him against Moses (who killed captive women and children according to the Bible) is a 'false analogy'. Hmm.

Cheers,
Shafique

bump for eh - I'm hoping he will find the humanity to condemn the religious terrorism of Goldstein and acknowledge him for what he was.

The silence is a bit worrying - and appears that Islamophobia is not the only failing of eh-oh, but may also extend to supporting the killing of Muslim worshippers by Israeli Army Officers in cold blood, in the name of Judaism.

There is a saying, often attributed to Pope Bonifacious VIII which states ‘Qui tacet consentiret’ (i.e. Silence gives consent).

Cheers,
Shafique

Perhaps that quote was in response to Muhammad's war crimes that receive no condemnation by Muslims?

event horizon wrote:Perhaps that quote was in response to Muhammad's war crimes that receive no condemnation by Muslims?

Perhaps it was, but in this forum it is you that is silent about the condemnation of a Jewish Terrorist.

I've even condemned the imagined crimes that you've brought up, let alone real crimes - so I guess you can't argue the Pope's words apply to moi!

Will you condemn him, or is your line still that he read the Quran?

Cheers,
Shafique

I totally condemn anyone who puts the Koran's instructions to wage warfare against unbelievers into action.

It's unfortunate that many people reading the Koran will actually believe they will become immediate martyrs if they kill and are killed whilst fighting unbelievers.

There you go again, talking about the Quran in a thread about a Jewish Terrorist that you refuse to condemn.

Have you seen anyone about this obsession?

Is it really so hard to not come out and admit that you can't condemn Goldstein as a religious terrorist? As the Pope says:
Qui tacet consentiret’ (i.e. Silence gives consent).

Cheers,
Shafique

bump for eh-oh, don't want this question to be swamped by the other posts.

Cheers,
Shafique

still waiting (patiently)

Maybe in your wait you can find those Bible passages/primary sources from the first century which corroborate your claim that the apostles were weary of Paul for preaching to Gentiles?

When asked if eh-oh condemns or condones the Jewish terrorist, we either get 'he was a tacit Muslim' or 'I condemn Muslim terrorists'.

There is a saying, often attributed to Pope Bonifacious VIII which states ‘Qui tacet consentiret’ (i.e. Silence gives consent).

It appears the Islamophobia runs deep - to the extent where the killing of Muslim worshippers by a devout Israeli Army Officer in the name of religion cannot be condemned by eh-oh. It exposes the hypocrisy of the posts which purport to be about terrorism, but now are clearly about Islamophobic views. I had no problem in condemning any terrorist act - even imagined ones attributed to early Muslims.

The contrast is clear now, I hope.

As Jesus said:

You hypocrite! First remove the beam from your own eye, and then you will see clearly enough to remove the speck from your brother's eye."

Matt 7:5

Cheers,
Shafique

Shafique, I have no problem posting about incidents of Christian terrorists in your own thread with the same title. Just yesterday, one Christian suicide bomber blew himself up at a UN building in Pakistan and a Christian fundie detonated himself at a funeral procession in Iraq.

As I said, your silence when it comes to condemning an Israeli religous terrorist Army Officer speaks volumes. I agree that when the 'terrorists' are ex-Hindus (and Indian) or Arab Christians you do concede that they are Christian terrorists - which makes the refusal to condemn this American Doctor turned Israeli Jewish terrorist all the more intriguing.

You could end the speculation by just condemning him - yet you seem to be happy to be lumped in with those who venerate him (they too refuse to condemn him).

Cheers,
Shafique

Another gentle reminder that we're still waiting for eh-oh's condemnation.

Cheers,
Shafique

bump (again)