Posted on 04/01/2011 10:46:43 AM PDT by kcvl
Ten United Nations staff were murdered - two by beheading - after extremists stormed their compound in northern Afghanistan today.
Protesters broke into UN offices in the northern city of Mazar-i-Sharif after a demonstration against Koran burnings in the America turned violent.
A small breakaway group attacked the UN compound, throwing stones and climbing on blast barriers to try to gain entry. They seized weapons from guards and opened fire before storming the site.
An Afghan police source, who asked not to be named, said the chief of the mission in the city was wounded but survived.
Among those murdered were Norwegian, Romanian, Swedish and Nepalese nationals. Two were decapitated, it is understood.
A UN spokesman confirmed that workers had been killed at the mission, but he said the situation on the ground was still confusing and it was difficult to 'ascertain facts'.
Staffan De Mistura, the top UN representative in Afghanistan, was heading to Mazar-i-Sharif to handle the matter personally, he added.
Over a thousand demonstrators had flooded into the streets of the normally peaceful city after Friday prayers, where they heard reports about the Koran burnings in America last month.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
As I understand it, if we burn korans then the muzzies will behead the UN commies for us. Hmmm, any downside here? Where’s my matches?
Lots of freepers know things the general population doesn’t know... we’re NOT a bunch of wishful dreamers...
That's very true, but even marginally informed Americans were aware that radical muslims were targeting us, before 9/11. Every major attack made the news. These were incidents of huge impact, and nearly every one of them dominated the news cycles of the time.
The real problem, is that the US federal government didn't take radical Islam seriously, until after 9/11.
The Clinton administration virtually ignored international (and domestic) terrorism during their eight years at the helm. Osama bin Laden was even offered to us on a silver platter at the time, and Clinton dithered and let him escape. Our people even had bin Laden in their crosshairs a few times, and Clinton WOULD NOT give the order to shoot.
Their lax response to terrorism emboldened bin Laden and Al Qaeda, which led directly to 9/11.
Just because we can legally do something doesn’t mean we should do it. Just because I can call you a bad nmae does that mean I should. With freedom comes resposibility. The fact that Rev. Scott feels no responsibility for the deaths in AQfghanistan tells me he has no love in his heart and his actions were premeditated. The equivalent to yelling fire in a crowded theater.
You have not studied the religion and its history sufficiently.
It *IS* the religion. It is *NOT* a “Religion of Peace”.
What it really is, is a totalitarian political system that hides behind the beard of religion.
Now that came a surprise. Went to the link expecting to hear some sort of apologist reasoning for this horrific act and didn’t find it. The more muslims that actually speak out in favor of living in a civil society the better. The more muslims who can find a way to stop the insanity of their lunatic blood thirsty freakshow population, even better.
The term “mosque” is so pre 9/11, the term now is terrorist training center. Of this particular TTC we need a high res sat photo and at least a 10 place cooridinate.
Ask a member of the MSM which is the larger threat - islamist or right wingers... you might be surprised.
“No, being a US citizen does not absolve
people of poor judgement and actions,
particularly those who lead to the deaths
of innocent people by those who claim to
be Christians and Christian leaders at
that.”
Sure it does. And who the hell made you judge over secondary and tertiary effects?
He’s no more to blame for those murders than America is for 911, and only a moral and physical coward, or willing dhimmi, would argue the point.
“if we want muslims to give us the
slightest bit of kindness, mercy or
consideration, then we better start giving
it.”
Are you utterly daft? “Turning the other cheek” to a jihadi muslim is as stupid as interpreting “love thy neighbor” as a invitation to sex!
That’s the problem with bible-only theology, when you can’t admit any other authority you wind up as foolish as the servant who buried his talent, because you apply what you “know” in ways it was never intended.
So, you fully support the pastor’s actions then? Yes or no?
In fact, if you’re so certain of the high moral ground on this issue, post right here and now that you fully support this fool’s actions including the results they produced and would gladly go on TV and burn a koran yourself, regardless of who might get hurt by it.
This preacher sits comfortably in the US, let him go to Afghanistan or Yeman and do this publically. At least he’d be walking the walk.
If you come back with only some reference to the 1st Amendment, that’s going to tell me a lot. So don’t.
Let’s see you put your endorsement out here for all to see.
If one accepts that violating the tenants of Islam is the “equivalent of yelling fire in a crowded theater” then one is already truly cowed and subjugated.
Rev. Scott has clearly shown that a great number of Americans are already living under a tyranny underpinned by an unholy alliance of savagery and Liberal Other Worship.
Gee...load the question much?
Yes, I support his actions. Simple as that.
And as far as I’m concerned, he’s “walking the walk” just by doing this right here in the peoples republic of Gainesville, due to the tender ministrations of state protected “critics” such as yourself.
You want to throw him into the pot by sending him to Afghanistan or Yemen...well let’s see you put up. Why don’t you just take a “mission trip” there yourself? Show those poor benighted muslims the virtue of Christian tolerance by turning the other cheek while you minister the Gospel to them!
Furthermore, who the hell are you to make 1st amendment arguments off limits? What would that “tell” you...that I’m an American, and you just live here?
The pride you take in castigating this minister is so obvious that it is clear your comments are for inflating your own self-image rather than expressing any kind of Christian concern, and that makes you the NASTIEST kind of hypocrite.
Nasty?? My, is that the best you can do? LOL!!
Your clap-trap General Armchair, tells me you’re the most foolish kind of hypocrite, without regard to the fact that we have troops fighting in that area. Bet you’d wave the 1st Amendment around for somebody who yelled FIRE in a crowded theater too.
And no, I still don’t give the preacher a pass. I suppose you condemn Petraeus’ opinion comments on this, “principled American” that you are.
I’m so damn glad he’s in charge of operations over there and not dingbats like you.
You want to know if “nasty” is the best i’ve got? How ‘bout the rest of the post Pharibreeze? Talk about “picking horsesh-t out of honey!”
I see you’ve had to whip up a batch of new bitches, because you have no answer for my last post.
Yeah, I can see Harry Truman calling his generals on the carpet for using the term “Japs,” now. Besides, what do you care about troops in the area? I thought you were wetting yourself over innocent UN personnel?
Oh well, when you’re getting your rhetorical butt kicked...change the subject, I guess.
And what do you think our troops are there for but to preserve our way of life? Cart home all that Afghan treasure?
When you get to the point you have to start bleating petulant little girl whines like “I bet you’d...,” it’s way past time to either concede and shut up, or move to France.
Personally, I have no concern over your craven cowardice. There have always been craven cowards, and there will always be craven cowards. Furthermore, I know no craven coward is EVER going to willingly admit he’s a craven coward, no matter how conclusively that craven cowardice is demonstrated. It’s your blaming it on Christianity that offends me of your very existence.
I could even respect you if you put forth a stern critique of the minister’s demonstration for nothing but utilitarian reasons. But for you to superciliously condemn him for nothing more than not going along with your “emperor’s new clothes” rationalization of why we should do what the muslims tell us, proves to me beyond any shadow of doubt that a general’s ability to play chess with “real pieces” says absolutely nothing about his ownership of “a pair.”
Talk about changing the subject. WoooooWeeeee! I see your head is exploding. Typical.
Yeah our troops are over there, defending us, defending muslims too. Think they are happy, hell, thrilled to death that Jones took it upon himself to make their job more difficult or even more dangerous? Think their families are happy? Well in your narrow scope of perception, perhaps you do..
The “preacher” and his actions do not represent Christianity as I follow it. Too bad we have those like him, I support you’re an ardent supporter of Fred Phelps too.
My posts have been quite clear on the subject of holding the muslims that committed the killings to 100% responsibility for their actions. But I understand you either have conveniently forgotten them or didn’t read them in the first place. They don’t state what you assert, but you obviously need to make up facts to fit your rants.
I do not condone the muslim murderers. Try to get that and this next part through your damnfool head. I do not condemn nor blame Christianity for this. What I cannot and will not do is turn my head aside and kiss the butt of this fool Jones simply because he PROFESSES to be a Christian and a Christian leader at that. He’s actually an attention whore, and he’s no Christian that I want to follow or listen to. I’m not sure what you follow.
But go ahead....pucker up. A craven coward eh? Well, I’ve been called worse and by better posters that you. I’m pretty sure there will always be craven damnfools around.
It is quite clear your problem is you don't understand that words mean things. If you are "holding the muslims that committed the killings to 100% responsibility for their actions," [sic] how much responsibility does that leave for the minister?
Idiot.
I’m not going to change your mind and you’re certainly not going to change mine. Frankly, I can live with that.
“Changing minds?”
Hell, you can’t even use the language well enough to express a cogent opinion; I see no reason to believe you have any better chance of forming one.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.