Mosques Protected by Administration When it Comes to Survelliance

[bodecea]

Mosques off-limits by government snooping since 2011, IBD editorial claims - Washington Times

THIS you believe?

 

[Sunshine]

Sushine -

Otherwise it didn't happen.

Historical events do not requite Wiki pages in order for them to have occured.

Put it this way - 3.85 million people lost their lives in the recent Congolese Wars, the greatest loss of life in a single conflict since WWII. Almost all of the 13 combatant armies utilised terror, and were at least nominally Christian. Most also used rape as a form of punishment.

And then there is Cote C'Ivore, Mozambique, Angola, Sierra Leone and Liberia - all wars which involved both terror and which involved religion as a key aspect of the conflict.

We do not see threads on these wars not because they "didn't happen" but because the combatants were black.

Historical events are documented. Academic honesty requires that you post that documentation along with your assertions. No student in my class would have gotten a passing grade on a research paper just on his/her say so.


ss

 

[daveman]

Uh yeah, thanks Dave.
Tellya what, don't do me any more favors. You have the voice all wrong.

But the content is dead accurate.

May be, but it's dead irrelevant.

Tissue?

 

[daveman]

Actually I did that not long ago. All I have to do is remember where I put it. I'll get back to you. You know, returning the favor and all.

Bet they don't add up to the number of Islamic attacks.

This is true; they far exceed it. But I can't remember the exact numbers until I dig it up. Just got home, I'm gettin' on it.

[edit: updates]

Here we go. Browser history library is your friend...

We often hear some of your knuckledragger friends crowing something like "Not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslim". That's the point of departure for this headline:

All Terrorists are Muslim-- Except the 94% that aren't
>> On the FBI’s official website, there exists a chronological list of all terrorist attacks committed on U.S. soil from the year 1980 all the way to 2005. That list can be accessed here (scroll down all the way to the bottom) <<

​

​

>> According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%). These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion. These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.

Yet notice the disparity in media coverage between the two. It would indeed be very interesting to construct a corresponding pie chart that depicted the level of media coverage of each group. The reason that Muslim apologists and their “leftist dhimmi allies” cannot recall another non-Islamic act of terrorism other than Waco is due to the fact that the media gives menial (if any) coverage to such events. If a terrorist attack does not fit the “Islam is the perennial and existential threat of our times” narrative, it is simply not paid much attention to, which in a circuitous manner reinforces and “proves” the preconceived narrative. <<

Basis for the above here:
Study: Threat of Muslim-American terrorism in U.S. exaggerated

But wait -- there's more. Now how much would you pay.... this next page criticized the pie chart above (correctly) for mixing nationalities with political positions, and took on its own study:

>> The START Global Terrorism Database spans from 1970 through 2012 (and will be updated from year-to-year), and – as of this writing – includes 104,000 terrorist incidents. As such, it is the most comprehensive open-source database open to the public.

We counted up the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims. We excluded attacks by groups which are obviously not Muslims, such as the Ku Klux Klan, Medellin Drug Cartel, Irish Republican Army, Anti-Castro Group, Mormon extremists, Vietnamese Organization to Exterminate Communists and Restore the Nation, Jewish Defense League, May 19 Communist Order, Chicano Liberation Front, Jewish Armed Resistance, American Indian Movement, Gay Liberation Front, Aryan Nation, Jewish Action Movement, National Front for the Liberation of Cuba, or Fourth Reich Skinheads.

We counted attacks by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Black American Moslems, or anyone who even remotely sounded Muslim … for example anyone from Palestine, Lebanon or any other Arab or Muslim country, or any name including anything sounding remotely Arabic or Indonesian (like “Al” anything or “Jamaat” anything).

If we weren’t sure what the person’s affiliation was, we looked up the name of the group to determine whether it could in any way be connected to Muslims.

Based on our review of the approximately 2,400 terrorist attacks on U.S. soil contained within the START database, we determined that approximately 60 were carried out by Muslims.

In other words, approximately 2.5% of all terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1970 and 2012 were carried out by Muslims. <<


So the jury's out. It could be 6%, it could be 2.5%. Clearly that proves "all" terrorists are Muslim. Case closed. Hope this helped.

Cherry-picking is certainly one way to skew your results.

I'm talking world-wide. You've shown only what occurs in the US.

Try again.

 

[daveman]

Bet they don't add up to the number of Islamic attacks.

Put it this way - can you name a country with a large Hndu population which has not suffered internecine violence?

There are 40 Islamic countries and only 10 Buddhist ones - I would say the rates of violence and terror are actually the same.

What you SAY is meaningless. Back it up with facts.

 

[Sunshine]

Bet they don't add up to the number of Islamic attacks.

This is true; they far exceed it. But I can't remember the exact numbers until I dig it up. Just got home, I'm gettin' on it.

[edit: updates]

Here we go. Browser history library is your friend...

We often hear some of your knuckledragger friends crowing something like "Not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslim". That's the point of departure for this headline:

All Terrorists are Muslim-- Except the 94% that aren't
>> On the FBI’s official website, there exists a chronological list of all terrorist attacks committed on U.S. soil from the year 1980 all the way to 2005. That list can be accessed here (scroll down all the way to the bottom) <<

​

​

>> According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%). These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion. These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.

Yet notice the disparity in media coverage between the two. It would indeed be very interesting to construct a corresponding pie chart that depicted the level of media coverage of each group. The reason that Muslim apologists and their “leftist dhimmi allies” cannot recall another non-Islamic act of terrorism other than Waco is due to the fact that the media gives menial (if any) coverage to such events. If a terrorist attack does not fit the “Islam is the perennial and existential threat of our times” narrative, it is simply not paid much attention to, which in a circuitous manner reinforces and “proves” the preconceived narrative. <<

Basis for the above here:
Study: Threat of Muslim-American terrorism in U.S. exaggerated

But wait -- there's more. Now how much would you pay.... this next page criticized the pie chart above (correctly) for mixing nationalities with political positions, and took on its own study:

>> The START Global Terrorism Database spans from 1970 through 2012 (and will be updated from year-to-year), and – as of this writing – includes 104,000 terrorist incidents. As such, it is the most comprehensive open-source database open to the public.

We counted up the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims. We excluded attacks by groups which are obviously not Muslims, such as the Ku Klux Klan, Medellin Drug Cartel, Irish Republican Army, Anti-Castro Group, Mormon extremists, Vietnamese Organization to Exterminate Communists and Restore the Nation, Jewish Defense League, May 19 Communist Order, Chicano Liberation Front, Jewish Armed Resistance, American Indian Movement, Gay Liberation Front, Aryan Nation, Jewish Action Movement, National Front for the Liberation of Cuba, or Fourth Reich Skinheads.

We counted attacks by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Black American Moslems, or anyone who even remotely sounded Muslim … for example anyone from Palestine, Lebanon or any other Arab or Muslim country, or any name including anything sounding remotely Arabic or Indonesian (like “Al” anything or “Jamaat” anything).

If we weren’t sure what the person’s affiliation was, we looked up the name of the group to determine whether it could in any way be connected to Muslims.

Based on our review of the approximately 2,400 terrorist attacks on U.S. soil contained within the START database, we determined that approximately 60 were carried out by Muslims.

In other words, approximately 2.5% of all terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1970 and 2012 were carried out by Muslims. <<


So the jury's out. It could be 6%, it could be 2.5%. Clearly that proves "all" terrorists are Muslim. Case closed. Hope this helped.

Cherry-picking is certainly one way to skew your results.

I'm talking world-wide. You've shown only what occurs in the US.

Try again.

Agree, waiting.

 

[Trajan]

Mosques off-limits by government snooping since 2011, IBD editorial claims - Washington Times

THIS you believe?

some didn't believe the committee existed either, but it does.

I have not seen evidence that the fbi has bugged say a catholic church or any other religious org.s for that matter....then again I am not sure there has been a religious grp. here that has a similar profile, I think the question is- does the committee disallow surveillance measures that may penetrate into mosques or their clerics communications due to the extra-ordinary sensitivity that we accord the Muslim/Islamic sects with?

 

[Pogo]

This is true; they far exceed it. But I can't remember the exact numbers until I dig it up. Just got home, I'm gettin' on it.

[edit: updates]

Here we go. Browser history library is your friend...

We often hear some of your knuckledragger friends crowing something like "Not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslim". That's the point of departure for this headline:

All Terrorists are Muslim-- Except the 94% that aren't
>> On the FBI&#8217;s official website, there exists a chronological list of all terrorist attacks committed on U.S. soil from the year 1980 all the way to 2005. That list can be accessed here (scroll down all the way to the bottom) <<

​

​

>> According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%). These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion. These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.

Yet notice the disparity in media coverage between the two. It would indeed be very interesting to construct a corresponding pie chart that depicted the level of media coverage of each group. The reason that Muslim apologists and their &#8220;leftist dhimmi allies&#8221; cannot recall another non-Islamic act of terrorism other than Waco is due to the fact that the media gives menial (if any) coverage to such events. If a terrorist attack does not fit the &#8220;Islam is the perennial and existential threat of our times&#8221; narrative, it is simply not paid much attention to, which in a circuitous manner reinforces and &#8220;proves&#8221; the preconceived narrative. <<

Basis for the above here:
Study: Threat of Muslim-American terrorism in U.S. exaggerated

But wait -- there's more. Now how much would you pay.... this next page criticized the pie chart above (correctly) for mixing nationalities with political positions, and took on its own study:

>> The START Global Terrorism Database spans from 1970 through 2012 (and will be updated from year-to-year), and &#8211; as of this writing &#8211; includes 104,000 terrorist incidents. As such, it is the most comprehensive open-source database open to the public.

We counted up the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims. We excluded attacks by groups which are obviously not Muslims, such as the Ku Klux Klan, Medellin Drug Cartel, Irish Republican Army, Anti-Castro Group, Mormon extremists, Vietnamese Organization to Exterminate Communists and Restore the Nation, Jewish Defense League, May 19 Communist Order, Chicano Liberation Front, Jewish Armed Resistance, American Indian Movement, Gay Liberation Front, Aryan Nation, Jewish Action Movement, National Front for the Liberation of Cuba, or Fourth Reich Skinheads.

We counted attacks by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Black American Moslems, or anyone who even remotely sounded Muslim &#8230; for example anyone from Palestine, Lebanon or any other Arab or Muslim country, or any name including anything sounding remotely Arabic or Indonesian (like &#8220;Al&#8221; anything or &#8220;Jamaat&#8221; anything).

If we weren&#8217;t sure what the person&#8217;s affiliation was, we looked up the name of the group to determine whether it could in any way be connected to Muslims.

Based on our review of the approximately 2,400 terrorist attacks on U.S. soil contained within the START database, we determined that approximately 60 were carried out by Muslims.

In other words, approximately 2.5% of all terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1970 and 2012 were carried out by Muslims. <<


So the jury's out. It could be 6%, it could be 2.5%. Clearly that proves "all" terrorists are Muslim. Case closed. Hope this helped.

Cherry-picking is certainly one way to skew your results.

I'm talking world-wide. You've shown only what occurs in the US.

Try again.

Agree, waiting.

Don't like the answer? Tweak the question. I love it.

While y'all are "waiting", that answer went by too. Post 57.

Wait, don't tell me-- you mean "intergalactically"...

I'll give you the answer in advance:

"42".

 

[USNavyVet]

Bet they don't add up to the number of Islamic attacks.

This is true; they far exceed it. But I can't remember the exact numbers until I dig it up. Just got home, I'm gettin' on it.

[edit: updates]

Here we go. Browser history library is your friend...

We often hear some of your knuckledragger friends crowing something like "Not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslim". That's the point of departure for this headline:

All Terrorists are Muslim-- Except the 94% that aren't
>> On the FBI’s official website, there exists a chronological list of all terrorist attacks committed on U.S. soil from the year 1980 all the way to 2005. That list can be accessed here (scroll down all the way to the bottom) <<

​

​

>> According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%). These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion. These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.

Yet notice the disparity in media coverage between the two. It would indeed be very interesting to construct a corresponding pie chart that depicted the level of media coverage of each group. The reason that Muslim apologists and their “leftist dhimmi allies” cannot recall another non-Islamic act of terrorism other than Waco is due to the fact that the media gives menial (if any) coverage to such events. If a terrorist attack does not fit the “Islam is the perennial and existential threat of our times” narrative, it is simply not paid much attention to, which in a circuitous manner reinforces and “proves” the preconceived narrative. <<

Basis for the above here:
Study: Threat of Muslim-American terrorism in U.S. exaggerated

But wait -- there's more. Now how much would you pay.... this next page criticized the pie chart above (correctly) for mixing nationalities with political positions, and took on its own study:

>> The START Global Terrorism Database spans from 1970 through 2012 (and will be updated from year-to-year), and – as of this writing – includes 104,000 terrorist incidents. As such, it is the most comprehensive open-source database open to the public.

We counted up the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims. We excluded attacks by groups which are obviously not Muslims, such as the Ku Klux Klan, Medellin Drug Cartel, Irish Republican Army, Anti-Castro Group, Mormon extremists, Vietnamese Organization to Exterminate Communists and Restore the Nation, Jewish Defense League, May 19 Communist Order, Chicano Liberation Front, Jewish Armed Resistance, American Indian Movement, Gay Liberation Front, Aryan Nation, Jewish Action Movement, National Front for the Liberation of Cuba, or Fourth Reich Skinheads.

We counted attacks by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Black American Moslems, or anyone who even remotely sounded Muslim … for example anyone from Palestine, Lebanon or any other Arab or Muslim country, or any name including anything sounding remotely Arabic or Indonesian (like “Al” anything or “Jamaat” anything).

If we weren’t sure what the person’s affiliation was, we looked up the name of the group to determine whether it could in any way be connected to Muslims.

Based on our review of the approximately 2,400 terrorist attacks on U.S. soil contained within the START database, we determined that approximately 60 were carried out by Muslims.

In other words, approximately 2.5% of all terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1970 and 2012 were carried out by Muslims. <<


So the jury's out. It could be 6%, it could be 2.5%. Clearly that proves "all" terrorists are Muslim. Case closed. Hope this helped.

Cherry-picking is certainly one way to skew your results.

I'm talking world-wide. You've shown only what occurs in the US.

Try again.

You should give him a time period also since he had to skew the numbers by going back in time. His own link talks about the changes in terrorists over time. Geez some people really give support to those terrorists.

 

[Pogo]

This is true; they far exceed it. But I can't remember the exact numbers until I dig it up. Just got home, I'm gettin' on it.

[edit: updates]

Here we go. Browser history library is your friend...

We often hear some of your knuckledragger friends crowing something like "Not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslim". That's the point of departure for this headline:

All Terrorists are Muslim-- Except the 94% that aren't
>> On the FBI&#8217;s official website, there exists a chronological list of all terrorist attacks committed on U.S. soil from the year 1980 all the way to 2005. That list can be accessed here (scroll down all the way to the bottom) <<

​

​

>> According to this data, there were more Jewish acts of terrorism within the United States than Islamic (7% vs 6%). These radical Jews committed acts of terrorism in the name of their religion. These were not terrorists who happened to be Jews; rather, they were extremist Jews who committed acts of terrorism based on their religious passions, just like Al-Qaeda and company.

Yet notice the disparity in media coverage between the two. It would indeed be very interesting to construct a corresponding pie chart that depicted the level of media coverage of each group. The reason that Muslim apologists and their &#8220;leftist dhimmi allies&#8221; cannot recall another non-Islamic act of terrorism other than Waco is due to the fact that the media gives menial (if any) coverage to such events. If a terrorist attack does not fit the &#8220;Islam is the perennial and existential threat of our times&#8221; narrative, it is simply not paid much attention to, which in a circuitous manner reinforces and &#8220;proves&#8221; the preconceived narrative. <<

Basis for the above here:
Study: Threat of Muslim-American terrorism in U.S. exaggerated

But wait -- there's more. Now how much would you pay.... this next page criticized the pie chart above (correctly) for mixing nationalities with political positions, and took on its own study:

>> The START Global Terrorism Database spans from 1970 through 2012 (and will be updated from year-to-year), and &#8211; as of this writing &#8211; includes 104,000 terrorist incidents. As such, it is the most comprehensive open-source database open to the public.

We counted up the number of terrorist attacks carried out by Muslims. We excluded attacks by groups which are obviously not Muslims, such as the Ku Klux Klan, Medellin Drug Cartel, Irish Republican Army, Anti-Castro Group, Mormon extremists, Vietnamese Organization to Exterminate Communists and Restore the Nation, Jewish Defense League, May 19 Communist Order, Chicano Liberation Front, Jewish Armed Resistance, American Indian Movement, Gay Liberation Front, Aryan Nation, Jewish Action Movement, National Front for the Liberation of Cuba, or Fourth Reich Skinheads.

We counted attacks by Al Qaeda, the Taliban, Black American Moslems, or anyone who even remotely sounded Muslim &#8230; for example anyone from Palestine, Lebanon or any other Arab or Muslim country, or any name including anything sounding remotely Arabic or Indonesian (like &#8220;Al&#8221; anything or &#8220;Jamaat&#8221; anything).

If we weren&#8217;t sure what the person&#8217;s affiliation was, we looked up the name of the group to determine whether it could in any way be connected to Muslims.

Based on our review of the approximately 2,400 terrorist attacks on U.S. soil contained within the START database, we determined that approximately 60 were carried out by Muslims.

In other words, approximately 2.5% of all terrorist attacks on U.S. soil between 1970 and 2012 were carried out by Muslims. <<


So the jury's out. It could be 6%, it could be 2.5%. Clearly that proves "all" terrorists are Muslim. Case closed. Hope this helped.

Cherry-picking is certainly one way to skew your results.

I'm talking world-wide. You've shown only what occurs in the US.

Try again.

You should give him a time period also since he had to skew the numbers by going back in time. His own link talks about the changes in terrorists over time. Geez some people really give support to those terrorists.

I don't "support terrorists"; what I support is facts. So when some wag comes out with "not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims' or "In America the percentage is much higher. Not sure where you pulled your numbers from but I think I know", I'll attack that myth. It's just how I roll. Change the targeted hate-myth group to Jews or Christians or Zorastrians, and I'll do the same thing. Facts are the antidote to myth, and as long as y'all keep flinging the latter like so much skeet, I'll just keep shootin' 'em down with the former.

The numbers, as shown, come from the FBI.

 

[USNavyVet]

Cherry-picking is certainly one way to skew your results.

I'm talking world-wide. You've shown only what occurs in the US.

Try again.

You should give him a time period also since he had to skew the numbers by going back in time. His own link talks about the changes in terrorists over time. Geez some people really give support to those terrorists.

I don't "support terrorists"; what I support is facts. So when some wag comes out with "not all Muslims are terrorists but all terrorists are Muslims' or "In America the percentage is much higher. Not sure where you pulled your numbers from but I think I know", I'll attack that myth. It's just how I roll. Change the targeted hate-myth group to Jews or Christians or Zorastrians, and I'll do the same thing. Facts are the antidote to myth, and as long as y'all keep flinging the latter like so much skeet, I'll just keep shootin' 'em down.

The numbers, as shown, come from the FBI.

Your skewed numbers don't support you. If you had taken the time to read just some of the article you'd know how dumb your post is. So go ahead and support the terrorists.

 

[daveman]

Cherry-picking is certainly one way to skew your results.

I'm talking world-wide. You've shown only what occurs in the US.

Try again.

Agree, waiting.

Don't like the answer? Tweak the question. I love it.

The question never mentioned the United States specifically. You tweaked your answer to make radical Islam look better.

They thank you for your mindless support, but want to kill you anyway.

While y'all are "waiting", that answer went by too. Post 57.

Wait, don't tell me-- you mean "intergalactically"...

I'll give you the answer in advance:

"42".

Yeah, Post #57 is bullshit, where you think you have the authority to decide what the terrorists' motivations were.

Dumbass.

 

[Pogo]

Agree, waiting.

Don't like the answer? Tweak the question. I love it.

The question never mentioned the United States specifically. You tweaked your answer to make radical Islam look better.

They thank you for your mindless support, but want to kill you anyway.

While y'all are "waiting", that answer went by too. Post 57.

Wait, don't tell me-- you mean "intergalactically"...

I'll give you the answer in advance:

"42".

Yeah, Post #57 is bullshit, where you think you have the authority to decide what the terrorists' motivations were.

Dumbass.

oooooh, appeal to emotion AND ad hominem. I'm impressed. Well, there goes my argument.

I didn't decide what anybody's motivations were. I read the histories of the events. And what did you do?
And where to you think you have the authority to decide what they were?

And no Einstein, I didn't "tweak" any answer-- I cut and pasted both of them from another time another thread where some other ignorant mythmonger was making the same fallacious case.

Anyway your actual question was this:

Maybe you could find websites that aggregate news stories and provide a running total of the number of deadly terror attacks carried out by Hindus, Buddhists, Atheists, and Christians.

So I did. Two of 'em.

Just remind me ---- where are your numbers posted again?

Oh .... I'm sorry. You don't have any.
Guess that's par for this course -- a thread based on an assertion that nobody has an iota of documentation for.

Give your tired myth all the CPR you like -- neither you nor your pathetic mythmonger little friend has refuted jack shit here.

Must suck.


I see you didn't even get the "42" joke. smh...

 

[Saigon]

Sushine -

Otherwise it didn't happen.

Historical events do not requite Wiki pages in order for them to have occured.

Put it this way - 3.85 million people lost their lives in the recent Congolese Wars, the greatest loss of life in a single conflict since WWII. Almost all of the 13 combatant armies utilised terror, and were at least nominally Christian. Most also used rape as a form of punishment.

And then there is Cote C'Ivore, Mozambique, Angola, Sierra Leone and Liberia - all wars which involved both terror and which involved religion as a key aspect of the conflict.

We do not see threads on these wars not because they "didn't happen" but because the combatants were black.

Historical events are documented. Academic honesty requires that you post that documentation along with your assertions. No student in my class would have gotten a passing grade on a research paper just on his/her say so.


ss

I don't understand your point here - do you you deny that the Congolese War happened?

 

[tjvh]

Why would one group be exempt from the scrutiny the rest of us must suffer from this arrogant and dishonest administration?

Because your claim is nonsense, that's why. Furthermore, I am sure you know that your claim is nonsense. It is just what you want to believe, not what you do believe.

Muslims are no more or less exempt from scrutiny than anyone else in society.

Do you really not think the FBI et al keep tabs on people they believe may be involved in Al Queda, Hamas or Hezbollah and who enter US territory?

Of course they do. You know they do.

That worked well for the Boston bombers didn't it...

 

[Osomir]

Historical events are documented. Academic honesty requires that you post that documentation along with your assertions. No student in my class would have gotten a passing grade on a research paper just on his/her say so.


ss

I can appreciate the desire for academic honesty and support for information. It is always nice to find posters with strong standards in such areas.

For your consideration:

The Congolese conflict has seen over 4 million dead (many from disease associated with the conflict), and you still have a lot of conflict in the eastern Kivu regions (an average of 6 people die every day). A vast majority of the population is Christian (for the most part). Christianity in the area just like Islam is often mixed to some degree with traditional tribal beliefs and superstitions. You see this both in the Lord's Resistance Army (which does operate in eastern Congo), and with the Mai Mai fighters who are still fairly active. Their motives aren't only religious (few group's are including Islamic sects), but they have utilized religious language when engaging in acts of violence. Mai Mai (or Mayi Mayi) fighters for example are required to be baptized. As a source, I would point to page 155 of Blood, Power and Bedlam: Violations of International Criminal Law in Post Colonial Africa by Christopher W. Mullins and Dawn Rothe. The book also extensively covers the aspect of rape as a weapon of war utilized by the rebels (same page and onward).

As far as Liberia and Sierra Leone go, Charles Taylor himself (the warlord) was a Baptist Deacon, and while the war clearly devolved into something absent of religion and while his true goals seemed to revolve around power in Liberia and resource exploitation in Sierra Leone, he initially riled support up around the idea of cleansing Liberia of Islam and promoting Christianity. As a reference I would cite: War to peace transition: Conflict intervention and peacebuilding in Liberia, by Kenneth Omeje. Page 126 covers Taylor's christian background, and page 127 covers the utilization of those beliefs within his Liberian politicking.

From page 126: "the government started sending out signals that most of the rebels were Christians and they were destroying Islamic institutions, especially mosques in the northern part of Liberia."

If you would like sources for, or specific information on anything else, please let me know.

 

[Osomir]

Also, just to be clear; Saigon was absolutely correct in disagreeing with the notion that most violence over the past 100 years has been related to Islamic populations. That simply isn't true, and even today a lot of conflict and violence in the world has nothing to do with Islamic populations. Conflict in general is something that many developing countries with weak institutions and problematic geography have to deal with. From the mountains of Nepal, to the forests of the DR Congo, and Colombia, to the desert regions of the Sahara and the Sahel. Religious groups simply have an advantage in terms of strength gathering and endurance over time due to being much more resistant to defection problems that usually do in more secular groups integrity earlier on in their movement.

When it's all said and done though, I tend to be of the school of thought that most organized violence in the world doesn't have anything to do with religion, even if it is sometimes utilized as a justification, usually under the shouting there are much more carnal and worldly motivating factors for the conflict, or even when religion is a part of it, it is only a part of it, rather than being the only, or even the primary driving force. this applies to Islamic and Christian groups alike.

It even applies to long lasting conflicts that revolve around any sort of political or ideological stance / grievance.

 

[Saigon]

I was in Sierra Leone and Liberia last year writing about Taylor's rebels.

I was fascinated to find that he had help prayer sessions in his home with both Jimmy Carter and Pat Robertson....both men who may not have approved of Taylor's tactic of cutting the hands off people who resisted his rule.

Colin Waugh's book on Taylor "Charles Tyalor and Liberia" covers this in some detail.

 

[TheGreatGatsby]

I'm not surprised. Terrorists aren't Obama's enemy. Americans are.

 

[Saigon]

I'm not surprised. Terrorists aren't Obama's enemy. Americans are.

Well, maybe America's real problem is people like you.