But western actions in the middle east *are* responsible for terrorism. The west has corrupted and interfered with middle eastern sovereignty for decades...hell they even stole part of a coastal region and gave it to a foreign people...you can't beat that for interference. Installing and securing the interests of their dictators leaves the unarmed, poor people no choice but to resort to terrorism.

It's quite simple. Imagine our government was overthrown by France and a pro-France dictator was installed. Now imagine France gave a large part of the east coast of Australia to the disenfranchised New Zealand Maori population, who said it was theirs 5000 years ago. Now imagine...that generations of Australians would be oppressed by this dictator under a rigid system that had all kinds of capital punishments. I haven't described even half of what the west has achieved in the middle east.

This is a crude example of what the west (our democratic idealists/propagandists) did to various nations in the middle east. And it's easy to see how extremists (yes...created and funded by western nations) gain power.

All the crap we witness on our televisions and media is pure propaganda, when it comes down to it.

Hi Bugsy.

It seems you are unable to distinguish between the following:

1/ A peaceful faith, which asserts that the outcome of immersing one's self in it (i.e. in it's founder) is: (Galatians 5:22)
Love
Joy
Peace
Patience
Kindness
Goodness
Faithfulness
Gentleness
Self control

Yet....where some people apparently claim this faith as theirs, yet go directly against all these listed attributes of the faith itself.

2/ An Agressive faith which states in most unambiguous language:

"Fight those who do not believe" etc "Until they are subjected"
and where people not only claim this faith, but actually put the above into practice, and do so by firebombing a publisher of a book.

Failure to know/see/observe/recognize this fundamental difference and the nuances involved is sad evidence of a bigoted outlook today.

Bigotry can manifest in many areas of life. It can be either religious or secular. The nature of bigotry is "I don't care about facts, my mind is made up".

It is the 'facts' of the matter which delineate between "true followers" and "untrue" followers of a faith.

The 'facts' are not those selected examples from history which show contrary behavior to the core beliefs, which are then projected back ON those core beliefs and claimed to represent them..no..that is misrepresentation and bigotry. Pericles is frequently guilty of this.

The facts are:
"What are the core beliefs of any particular faith"
"What behavior is likely when those established beliefs are followed"

A lecture on bigotry Boazy? How interesting coming from you.

Freedom of expression must never be allowed to become subordinate to the will of the religious of any faith or denomination be it muslim fire bombers or christian fundamentalists complaining outside different movie theatres because they don't feel a movie should be allowed.

The decent thing for anyone who dislikes anyone elses creative efforts is to ignore it.

The indecent thing to to try to burn it or ban it.

Pericles,

You say >> “Given that 9/11 was seven years ago, this "massive impetus" has not been particularly evident”

Are you kidding? See

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2008
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2007
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2006
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2005
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2004
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2003
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_terrorist_incidents,_2002

There’s seven years of terrorist incidents, the vast majority carried out by Islamist groups. The fact that we haven’t seen a lot of attacks here in the west is directly linked to

1) heightened security here
2) the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq

you say >> “ ... guerrilla warfare would be a more accurate description.

Would you include murdering the police chief or mayor as guerrilla warfare? How about killing local landowners who refuse to pay the tithe the Taliban expect? What about the killing of families who send their girls to school. Is that guerrilla warfare? Throwing acid into the face of women who aren’t wearing the “tent”?

you say >> What did (terrorism in Spain) achieve ... ?

The election of a gov’t which had policies regarding Iraq which were acceptable to the terrorists. They achieved control of gov’t policy.

I said >> “democracy is not necessary ...<< you said >> “ OK, I'll bite. Where?

Iraq. Saddam showed that you could successfully rule a country through fear for decades.

You say >> “by taking the whack-a-mozzie line, ”

Sorry what? Whack a mozzie. Where exactly did I attack Muslims as a whole? I’d really like you to show me, because blaming all muslims for Islamo-Facism is NOT what I’m about.

You say >> “Now, that's the bit I don't understand. How is the transition made between blowing up civilians in crowded bars, and some form of control over them?

The Taliban have years of experience in it. They are currently in defacto control of a significant portion of the country. You seem to be having trouble understanding how a dictatorship works. You don’t need the support of all the people, you merely need to inculcate in them the belief that resistance is not only futile, but will be extremely costly to them and their family.

Interesting response, Paul.L

>>You say >> “Given that 9/11 was seven years ago, this "massive impetus" has not been particularly evident” Are you kidding? See...<<

And you copied out some URLs from wikipedia.

Well done

If you believe that i) that list is exhaustive and ii) that the results have not been skewed since 2001 by the heightened awareness of the public, rather than the heightened activity of terrorists, then you clearly do not understand how wikipedia works.

Tell me, do you personally today feel under threat from terrorists more, or less, than in any of the previous seven years?

Further, if "we haven’t seen a lot of attacks here in the west", what does that tell you about the terrorists objectives. Does it not strike you as significant, for example, that we are less important a target than undefended bazaars in Turkey?

You have problems categorizing the Afghan hostilities as guerrilla warfare. Have quick look at this

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/sep/28/afghanistan.defence

and tell me, how many times is the word "terrorist" used in the article.

And please, if you have any Spanish friends, don't repeat this to them. They will not be at all impressed:

>>[What did (terrorism in Spain) achieve ...?] The election of a gov’t which had policies regarding Iraq which were acceptable to the terrorists. They achieved control of gov’t policy<<

Control over government policy? That is an utter nonsense. They achieved a knee-jerk reaction, that's all.

And what were you thinking with this little gem?

>>Saddam showed that you could successfully rule a country through fear for decades.<<

The question, let me remind you, was not "how do dictators work". It was "where do Islamo-Fascists have the experience of the Middle East to show them that majority rules democracy is not necessary to rule a country?"

I strongly suggest you do some homework on Saddam. For all his faults, he ran a secular state.

And please...

>>Where exactly did I attack Muslims as a whole?<<

That is simply disingenuous.

You are reduced to channelling Boaz, if you believe that attacking Islam is somehow different from attacking Muslims.