Islamic militants suspected in Moscow bombings

[AllieBaba]

was that supposed to be some effort at the english language?

Says the English professor who forgot to capitalize the beginning of her sentence criticizing another's writing skill....

i rarely use caps. and i think you're capable of understanding what i write.

her rant was unintelligible.

but it's very cute that you defend her.

so not using caps is a superior form of gibberish?

 

[Philobeado]

...were revealed yesterday - as it was claimed that 21 MORE may be ready to strike.

Faces of the ‘Black Widow’ Moscow bombers revealed | The Sun |News

 

[Munin]

That's a lot of work that wholly fails to justify bigotry against muslims. Two quick examples:

Head scarves: who the fuk cares if they demanded to wear them as part of their identity? You act like they were trying to force everyone else to wear them.

You missed the part in the sentence that said "SECULAR SCHOOL".

They are FORCED upon other people, often by using violence/harrasment and threatening people who do not wear headscarfs: f.e. calling them whores (as that is what more extremist muslims believe western woman to be and any muslim that doesn't wear a headscarf), attacking them, ... . I m not saying every muslim does it, but once a big number of people start to wear headscarfs there is a big pressure upon the people that are not wearing them. Some muslims simply see it as their religious duty to harras people who do not wear headscarfs (even non-muslims), usually when you get areas with a dense muslim population from areas like Northern Africa (f.e. morroco) and the arab world it is most common.

1 exception on this are the turkish immigrants, they re divided as their home country is secular "non-muslim" state (at least for now the current Turkish constitution neither recognizes an official religion nor promotes any, but things could change with erdogan).


This is the reason why many secular government schools in europe started a ban on headscarfs as the few schools that still allow headscarfs attract extremist muslims that generate an unpleasant climate for moderate muslims and non-muslims.

the fact the West had been killing muslims in huge numbers. I know it's difficult for bigots to see things from other perspectives but it doesn't justify the hatred.

What do you mean? Were they killed because they were muslim? Because that seems to be what you re implying. If people (muslims/christians/...) get accidentally killed during a war that is not the same as saying that they were killed because they were muslim. Do you think the Catholics in Europe were being bombed to death during WWII because they were Catholic (as the Brittish/americans who bombed were Protestants)?

Ok let s look at it from your simplified muslim perspective as that makes things much easier for you:
*muslims are being killed in Gaza,
*muslims are being killed in Russia,
*muslims are being killed in Iraq,
*muslims are being killed in Afghanistan.
=> Conclusion that can probably be made from this "religious view" is that the West is in favor of killing muslims ... maybe that s the problem: your way of looking at things is flawed (at least if that is what you implied).





Let s look at it from neutral perspective: replace "muslims" with "people who happen to be muslim" (as being muslim is in most cases not the reason for violence to happen).

*People in Gaza are being killed because they are ruled by a government that provoces a military superpower

*People in Russia are being killed because they are a separatist movement (much like the separatist rebels from spain: Basque separatists), many innocents get killed because Russia is a murderous state when it comes to dealing with rebels.


*Why people are being killed in iraq? If you know why the US invaded it (other than the invisible WMDs), let me know. Other than that: civil war between ethnic groups: the destruction of the dictatorship of Saddam resulted in a power vacuum that is seen as an opportunity for every possible warlord in the Iraqi area to become "presidente" and american/brittish/... troops are/were the only thing in the way of grabbing that vacant dictator seat. And guess what: many innocent people die when there is a war going on in an urban area (another example: see Mexico urban drug war).


*Why people get killed in Afghanistan? Guerilla warfare tactics result in waging a very ugly kind of warfare (with many civilian casualties), civilians being mixed up with "military" units makes it difficult to distinguish between civilians and "rebels". This is a reason why civilised armies wear uniforms, so civilians can be easely distinguished from soldiers.

 

[CurveLight]

That's a lot of work that wholly fails to justify bigotry against muslims. Two quick examples:

Head scarves: who the fuk cares if they demanded to wear them as part of their identity? You act like they were trying to force everyone else to wear them.

You missed the part in the sentence that said "SECULAR SCHOOL".

They are FORCED upon other people, often by using violence/harrasment and threatening people who do not wear headscarfs: f.e. calling them whores (as that is what more extremist muslims believe western woman to be and any muslim that doesn't wear a headscarf), attacking them, ... . I m not saying every muslim does it, but once a big number of people start to wear headscarfs there is a big pressure upon the people that are not wearing them. Some muslims simply see it as their religious duty to harras people who do not wear headscarfs (even non-muslims), usually when you get areas with a dense muslim population from areas like Northern Africa (f.e. morroco) and the arab world it is most common.

1 exception on this are the turkish immigrants, they re divided as their home country is secular "non-muslim" state (at least for now the current Turkish constitution neither recognizes an official religion nor promotes any, but things could change with erdogan).


This is the reason why many secular government schools in europe started a ban on headscarfs as the few schools that still allow headscarfs attract extremist muslims that generate an unpleasant climate for moderate muslims and non-muslims.

the fact the West had been killing muslims in huge numbers. I know it's difficult for bigots to see things from other perspectives but it doesn't justify the hatred.

What do you mean? Were they killed because they were muslim? Because that seems to be what you re implying. If people (muslims/christians/...) get accidentally killed during a war that is not the same as saying that they were killed because they were muslim. Do you think the Catholics in Europe were being bombed to death during WWII because they were Catholic (as the Brittish/americans who bombed were Protestants)?

Thank you. Thank you very much for an excellent example of how bigots dance when shown their positions are based on bullshit. Here is what you first said about the headscarves:

(MuninCaptainFullOfShit)
"Then there was another issue with muslims wearing head scarves in PUBLIC SECULAR schools in europe, defending the wearing of the headscarf by saying that it is part of their religious identity and that they could otherwise not go to school."

So you switch up from complaining they wanted to wear the headscarves to now saying they are forcing everyone else to wear them.......I guess anyone can dance with the stars if they fantasize enough......

 

[AllieBaba]

Hmm...it's sounds a lot like people saying that those who wear crosses to school or pray publicly are "forcing" their religion on others...

 

[CurveLight]

Hmm...it's sounds a lot like people saying that those who wear crosses to school or pray publicly are "forcing" their religion on others...

Sounds like you haven't heard about the free tutorship available for Spin School.

 

[Kalam]

You just did.

Every person who hates all Muslims is guilty of prejudice against an entire group. Every person who hates someone merely because of their ethnic or religious identity is an ignoramus. These aren't generalizations; they're statements of fact.

Not all people hate them because they are being ignorant and prejudical, some people hate them for trying to impose their medieval beliefs upon us.

Hatred of all Muslims is, as I said, an example of prejudice.

Some hate muslims for not acting against the extremists that they say abuse their religion,

That is hatred born of ignorance. Anybody who believes that Muslims are "silent" when it comes to groups such as al-Qa'idah does not pay a bit of attention to international affairs or current events in general.

up until recentently I only saw this influential guy speaking out to defend his religion ( BBC News - Islamic scholar Tahir ul-Qadri issues terrorism fatwa ).

You have only yourself to blame for failing to note the many differences in opinion between various Islamic scholars.

People often say that when you say/do nothing you unwillingly/willingly agree with something and that is how it is perceved by many:

I'll go ahead and assume that you support the recent attacks in Moscow, then. After all, according to your logic, the Russians who were killed tacitly supported Russian aggression in the Caucasus. I respectfully disagree; equating silence or non-action to tacit support is a feeble attempt to justify hatred and aggression.

Some hate muslims for being extremists themselves: for example, many muslims assume that wearing a headscarf is obligated for a muslim and impose it upon others.

Modesty is obligatory. Wearing Islamic religious clothing is not "imposed" on non-Muslims.

Or take the muhammed cartoon incident, in europe there is a division between church and state: the latest european evolution was to a more secular society (the last 50 years). One were people of all beliefs are free to express their opinions, make jokes, FREE press (that does not mean that it is only free to say things that are in line with Islam). In short: Europeans demand respect for their culture, values and traditions (secularity is one of the more modern european traditions). Even so it is officially a multicultural society, multiculturality does not mean you have the right to spit on the native culture, if you come to another country you need to show respect for the country.

Nonsense. "Secularists" don't target specific religions like Geert Wilders in the Netherlands, who argues in favor of banning the Qur'an, banning the construction of Islamic buildings for a period of at least five years, and replacing a clause of the Dutch constitution requiring equality under the law with a clause praising the country's Christian and Jewish roots.

Another thing that bothers many people is the building of minarets, as they are often felt as an agressive form of spreading Islam by muslims. How would you feel when a man yells the name of his diffent god to you when you re praying/... in your mosque/house/... , it is agressive by shoving anothers god propaganda song down your throat at your own house.

That's the stupidest thing I've heard today. The adhan is not "aggressive" or used for purposes of "propaganda"; it's a call to prayer. Christians call their faithful to prayer with bells, Jews use the shofar in their services, and we use our voices. Hearing church bells or the shofar every day wouldn't bother me at all.

In a recent documentary I saw on TV about Jerusalem showing the extremism of some Isreali jews I was kind of struck by the yelling of a foreign god while they were doing their prayers, I could understand why people would become hostile towards a different religion when it is as intrusive as that.

Faithful Jews worship the same God. If they don't like it, they shouldn't have moved to a part of the world that has been heavily Islamic for the last 1300 years.

In a way it shows a lot of disrespect when you see at how a minority of muslims can violate the non-religious areas of hundreds/thousands of non-muslims.

Gosh, you're right. Muslims sure do oppress people by aggressively forcing those near our places of worship to hear our call to prayer.

Then there was another issue with muslims wearing head scarves in PUBLIC SECULAR schools in europe, defending the wearing of the headscarf by saying that it is part of their religious identity and that they could otherwise not go to school. As I see it, this is a case in point where muslims expect everyone to put out their shoes and show respect for Islam when entering a mosque but then go outside and take a shit on the non-believers (/ "Kuffars") in the name of allah.

I'm sorry; how exactly does covering ones hair oppress others? This is now the stupidest thing I've heard today. You set and broke your own record in one post.

I will show respect when you show me that you deserve it, some muslims I know deserve my respect but this is not because of their religious aspects but their human qualities. For now I do not really see what considerable contribution Islam has brought to society in this latest century, if you know 1 please let me know (I m curious).

I'm not here to justify the existence of Islam to you. If you like it, great. If you don't, tough shit, because we'll only continue to grow.

 

[Kalam]

Hmm...it's sounds a lot like people saying that those who wear crosses to school or pray publicly are "forcing" their religion on others...

There's nothing wrong with dressing in accordance with religious requirements or praying in a public area as long as it doesn't interrupt the normal school day, etc.

 

[Xenophon]

I wasn't chilled by that.

 

[Kalam]

To get back on topic, Doka Umarov has personally claimed responsibility for ordering the recent subway attacks in Moscow. From a rebel news outlet:

In his video statement, recorded on March 29, 2010, Dokka Abu Usman said that the attack had been a retaliation and a retribution for the massacre by Russian invaders of the poorest residents of Chechnya and Ingushetia, who were picking wild garlic in the Arshty village on February 11, 2010, to feed their families.​

The incident Umarov mentioned involved Russian soldiers gunning down 12 schoolchildren in a village in Ingushetia last month. Umarov says that additional attacks should be expected and has evidently renounced his belief that rebel operations should not target civilians. Justifying his actions in a manner disturbingly reminiscent of the claims made by Russian oppressors, Umarov asserted that all Russians are guilty of providing their government with "tacit support." By targeting civilians, the Amir has resorted to using infidel tactics. I can only hope that he will discontinue operations that endanger innocent lives and reaffirm his belief in avoiding civilian casualties.

We need another mujahid like Khattab (RA) to wreak havoc on the oppressors' military rather than on civilians.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9WKbLS6i8IU]YouTube - ‫???? ??? ??????? ??? ??????? ??????? ???? ???? ???? 10/11‬‎[/ame]

 

[Munin]

So you switch up from complaining they wanted to wear the headscarves to now saying they are forcing everyone else to wear them.......I guess anyone can dance with the stars if they fantasize enough......

I never switched, I argued from the start that wearing a headscarf represents a more radicalized islam and that I am against it when it starts to become forced upon others like in areas where a majority of people wear them: especially secular public schools. It is forced upon other muslims by peer pressure, creating a radicalized society.

I think it s hard to understand without me giving a specific example:http://www.economist.com/blogs/charlemagne/2009/09/antwerps_muslim_headscarf_row

And then, there was the problem of the veil. In 2001, we had 46% Muslims. In 2008 we had 80% Muslims. And all that increase was in the three years from 2006. There are two reasons for that. The number of Muslims in Antwerp increased. And because schools changed their headscarf rules, one by one, quietly, and in the end only three schools in the city allowed scarves.

At the beginning, I didn’t see a problem, we’d do a dialogue among Muslims. But then, because we were one of the only schools to allow scarves, we attracted a very conservative group, who identified very much with the veil. In 2003, the discussion was still, should we wear the veil or not. We did a fashion show on the theme of choice with girls wearing scarves or not. One girl wore half a scarf to show her uncertainty. We wanted girls to decide.

By 2008, discussion was how to wear the scarf. Not whether. In 2007-8 there were 15 girls who came with long robes, gloves, and only their faces showing. Scarves became longer and longer. I had a lot of confrontations with those girls, I said to them: “you’re spoiling the educational project.” I said to them: “you’re stigmatising yourselves. You’re breaking with society by wearing those clothes.”

They always said, “you’re stigmatising us”. In 2007 and 2008 I banned gloves, very long robes. Even that was hard for the girls. We saw girls starting to wear veils who had not before, and asked them why. They said they did not feel very comfortable without a scarf, I must be accepted. We had girls who wore scarves at school, but teachers saw them outside the school without scarves.

There was a sense that girls wearing veils were showing they were more pious. My view was each girl had the right to wear a scarf, to preserve equality. The last two years, there was a sense of a heavy, oppressive atmosphere over the schoolyard.

[Note from Charlemagne: On September 1st this year, the new school year began with scarves banned. On September 11th 2009, the Flemish education council passed a rule banning scarves across the 700 secular state schools it runs in Dutch-speaking Belgium. Those secular schools educate about 15% of Flemish pupils. The majority are taught in state-funded, religious denominated schools, which basically means Catholic schools in Flanders, though there are Jewish schools in Antwerp, home to a sizeable Hasidic community. Religious schools are free to draw up their own dress codes in Flanders: most Catholic schools in Antwerp have banned headscarves for a while. By 2008, only three schools in the city allowed scarves.]

Last Friday [September 11th], a group of five girls, 18 years old, came to me to say how grateful they were to me that I had done this. We feel freer, they said, you’ve no idea the pressure we were under.


[Q: what else changed over the past three years?]

We used to do a two day trip to Paris. For 15 year olds. Suddenly, in the last three years it was not possible. Suddenly their older brothers had to come too, it was a problem for them to stay overnight. In 2007, we cancelled the two day trip and it became a day trip, we left at 5 in the morning.

We used to go to Istanbul for a week with the 18 year olds, too. We chose that city as a crossing point of cultures. Then because of security fears, we decided to go to Italy instead of Istanbul. We chose Italy to give them a sense of humanism, of da Vinci. But, oh, the difficulties I had to explain to the students that they should be interested in our culture, for the sake of reciprocity. It hurt, when students said they were not interested in western culture.

 

[Munin]

I'll go ahead and assume that you support the recent attacks in Moscow, then. After all, according to your logic, the Russians who were killed tacitly supported Russian aggression in the Caucasus. I respectfully disagree; equating silence or non-action to tacit support is a feeble attempt to justify hatred and aggression.

I did not say that this was a justification for russian agression. I was saying that this was a reason for "people" to hate muslims (separate answer on a separate issue). As I never understood that a cartoon of muhammed in a public newspaper is more insulting to muslims then a guy murdering thousands of civilians in the name of allah.

I do not support Russians or the nationalists in this conflict, although I aim against the way Russians seriously go out of line and misbehave towards civilians.

That's the stupidest thing I've heard today. The adhan is not "aggressive" or used for purposes of "propaganda"; it's a call to prayer. Christians call their faithful to prayer with bells, Jews use the shofar in their services, and we use our voices. Hearing church bells or the shofar every day wouldn't bother me at all.

Gosh, you're right. Muslims sure do oppress people by aggressively forcing those near our places of worship to hear our call to prayer.

How about five times each day? dawn, noon, mid-afternoon, sunset, and night.

And I m not talking about some old beatiful architectural historic mosque somewhere in a muslim city, I m talking about a new mosque in a dense city area with a lot of non-muslims. A bell is a short lasting sound and does not implicate the name of a god: any religion can use it. Singing your religious song over a non-religious city does have something intrusive, but that s just my view.

Faithful Jews worship the same God. If they don't like it, they shouldn't have moved to a part of the world that has been heavily Islamic for the last 1300 years.

True the mosque was there before them, but still: I do not think muslims would like it when they heard the sound of the Jewish god 5 times a day over Gaza.

 

[CurveLight]

So you switch up from complaining they wanted to wear the headscarves to now saying they are forcing everyone else to wear them.......I guess anyone can dance with the stars if they fantasize enough......

I never switched, I argued from the start that wearing a headscarf represents a more radicalized islam and that I am against it when it starts to become forced upon others like in areas where a majority of people wear them: especially secular public schools. It is forced upon other muslims by peer pressure, creating a radicalized society.

I think it s hard to understand without me giving a specific example:Antwerp's Muslim headscarf row, the story on the ground | The Economist

And then, there was the problem of the veil. In 2001, we had 46% Muslims. In 2008 we had 80% Muslims. And all that increase was in the three years from 2006. There are two reasons for that. The number of Muslims in Antwerp increased. And because schools changed their headscarf rules, one by one, quietly, and in the end only three schools in the city allowed scarves.

At the beginning, I didn’t see a problem, we’d do a dialogue among Muslims. But then, because we were one of the only schools to allow scarves, we attracted a very conservative group, who identified very much with the veil. In 2003, the discussion was still, should we wear the veil or not. We did a fashion show on the theme of choice with girls wearing scarves or not. One girl wore half a scarf to show her uncertainty. We wanted girls to decide.

By 2008, discussion was how to wear the scarf. Not whether. In 2007-8 there were 15 girls who came with long robes, gloves, and only their faces showing. Scarves became longer and longer. I had a lot of confrontations with those girls, I said to them: “you’re spoiling the educational project.” I said to them: “you’re stigmatising yourselves. You’re breaking with society by wearing those clothes.”

They always said, “you’re stigmatising us”. In 2007 and 2008 I banned gloves, very long robes. Even that was hard for the girls. We saw girls starting to wear veils who had not before, and asked them why. They said they did not feel very comfortable without a scarf, I must be accepted. We had girls who wore scarves at school, but teachers saw them outside the school without scarves.

There was a sense that girls wearing veils were showing they were more pious. My view was each girl had the right to wear a scarf, to preserve equality. The last two years, there was a sense of a heavy, oppressive atmosphere over the schoolyard.

[Note from Charlemagne: On September 1st this year, the new school year began with scarves banned. On September 11th 2009, the Flemish education council passed a rule banning scarves across the 700 secular state schools it runs in Dutch-speaking Belgium. Those secular schools educate about 15% of Flemish pupils. The majority are taught in state-funded, religious denominated schools, which basically means Catholic schools in Flanders, though there are Jewish schools in Antwerp, home to a sizeable Hasidic community. Religious schools are free to draw up their own dress codes in Flanders: most Catholic schools in Antwerp have banned headscarves for a while. By 2008, only three schools in the city allowed scarves.]

Last Friday [September 11th], a group of five girls, 18 years old, came to me to say how grateful they were to me that I had done this. We feel freer, they said, you’ve no idea the pressure we were under.


[Q: what else changed over the past three years?]

We used to do a two day trip to Paris. For 15 year olds. Suddenly, in the last three years it was not possible. Suddenly their older brothers had to come too, it was a problem for them to stay overnight. In 2007, we cancelled the two day trip and it became a day trip, we left at 5 in the morning.

We used to go to Istanbul for a week with the 18 year olds, too. We chose that city as a crossing point of cultures. Then because of security fears, we decided to go to Italy instead of Istanbul. We chose Italy to give them a sense of humanism, of da Vinci. But, oh, the difficulties I had to explain to the students that they should be interested in our culture, for the sake of reciprocity. It hurt, when students said they were not interested in western culture.

The economist? I won't click on that link. I breezed through the bullshit and you've just danced. You switched your position and now the best you can do is the economist that points out veils were.......banned. I respect your attempt to justify your bigotry but if you have to work so hard to try and justify it......what does that say?

 

[kyzr]

It says that some folks just shouldn't be allowed out of their home country. Then again, just like Farrakhan's personal body-guard just happened to be the "DC sniper", some hateful people people need to be marginalized. I wonder what the creeps are planning next.

 

[Charles Stucker]

As of now, Doka Umarov and the Caucasus Emirate have not claimed responsibility for the operation in Moscow. Rebel sources indicate, however, that this may have been a botched martyrdom operation targeting the central offices of the KGB and the Interior Ministry. A large number of the deaths occurred when subway passengers trampled each other as they ran towards the exits.

Does that fact that innocent people die when Islamic nutjobs set off a bunch of bombs never bother you?

 

[Kalam]

As of now, Doka Umarov and the Caucasus Emirate have not claimed responsibility for the operation in Moscow. Rebel sources indicate, however, that this may have been a botched martyrdom operation targeting the central offices of the KGB and the Interior Ministry. A large number of the deaths occurred when subway passengers trampled each other as they ran towards the exits.

Does that fact that innocent people die when Islamic nutjobs set off a bunch of bombs never bother you?

It bothers me that Russia has slaughtering these people for nearly two decades simply because they desired independence. It also bothers me that, outside of a tiny handful of Arabs, Turks, Americans, and other foreigners driven by their religious convictions to fight in Chechnya's defense, little attention is paid to the plight of the North Caucasus. It bothers the mujahideen as well. Unfortunately, some of them have been bothered so much that they've turned to the same tactics that are used to oppress them. Innocent deaths are always troubling.

 

[asaratis]

I wasn't chilled by that.

Maybe he meant the photos were chilling...like maybe on ice.

The accomplice looks like one the Mario Brothers.


On edit:
The title is false advertising anyway. He promised chilling images of the bombers. Both nouns there are plural. He produced only one image of one dead bomber. How distastefully dishonest...and it was only a picture of her head. Let's see the rest of her blown-to-bits body. Now that might be chilling...might discourage some of the remaining trainees and change their stupid, brainwashed minds. All those that praise the bitch should be shot dead.

 

[Si modo]

"Troubling"?

Riiight.

 

[Kalam]

"Troubling"?

Riiight.

Yes.

http://www.usmessageboard.com/current-events/111371-islamic-militants-suspected-in-moscow-bombings-10.html#post2161713

 

[eagleseven]

Did her bomb go off? Her face is still rather intact...and I've seen what a HE round can do to someone.