Got a tip for us?
Let us know
A Remorseless Rudolph Gets Life Sentence for Bombing at Clinic
- Thread starter zimv20
- Start date
most sites are carrying the AP story, which doesn't use "terror" or "terrorist," but i'm mildly surprised to see it in the CNN story:
i'll note that it's from a victim's quote, and not from that of an official or the reporter's word.
At least there's one reference.
I wonder how most people who define terrorist or terrorism if you asked them.
I wonder how most people who define terrorist or terrorism if you asked them.
I know I'm going to regret venturing in here again...mactastic said:
...but as a Christian, I, and most I know, would disavow Rudolph and his methods. I may have strong beliefs, but I don't advocate such barbarism.
There are extremists in every group that give the majority a bad name.
Woof, Woof - Dawg
No, really? I wonder if all Muslims agree with bin Laden...MacDawg said:I know I'm going to regret venturing in here again...
...but as a Christian, I, and most I know, would disavow Rudolph and his methods. I may have strong beliefs, but I don't advocate such barbarism.
There are extremists in every group that give the majority a bad name.
Woof, Woof - Dawg
I mean, they could have strong beliefs different from ours and still not want to kill us.
I wonder if Rudolph hates us for our freedoms too.
Maybe radical Christianity's just an evil ideology...
Exactly right. The problem is that no one really gets to define what it means to be a Chirstian or what it means to be a Muslim. Not even the Pope gets to define what it means to be a Catholic (at least for plenty of Catholics that I've met).MacDawg said:I know I'm going to regret venturing in here again...
...but as a Christian, I, and most I know, would disavow Rudolph and his methods. I may have strong beliefs, but I don't advocate such barbarism.
There are extremists in every group that give the majority a bad name.
Woof, Woof - Dawg
Still, the issue is that Americans (and the media) seem unwilling to recognize that terrorism is a tactic, not an -ism in the general sense of the word. A war on terrorism makes as much sense as a war on general warfare, or a war on hit-and-run.
I would agree to thatmactastic said:
Any ideology taken to extreme can be "evil" depending on the standards of good and evil. I see little in Rudolph that can be traced to even a casual understanding of the Bible.mactastic said:
Woof, Woof - Dawg
Absolutelyzimv20 said:
For that matter I would call McVeigh and his buddy, what's his name, terrorists as well
I agree that terrorism is a method, and is not limited to any one ideology
Woof, Woof - Dawg
me too.MacDawg said:
shoddy terrorists, imo, 'cuz to me the whole point is to effect political and/or governmental policy change, and w/o pushing one's agenda, blowing stuff up is nothing more than fulfilling a pedestrian, adolescent fantasy.
"Of course, the whole point of a Doomsday Machine is lost, if you *keep* it a *secret*!"
I hear ya... But people can pull quotes out of the Bible to justify the twisted, racist version of Christianity Rudolph adheres to, just as Pat Robertson and others can point to violent passages in the Koran.MacDawg said:
People here understand enough about the Bible to know Rudolph's off the deep end. But when Robertson tells us Islam is evil, we don't tell him to stuff a sock in it like you would if I tried to tell you that Christianity is evil.
You are assuming that you know how I would respond... careful, that has the seeds of extremism... projecting your preconceptions on others and not allowing them to express it themselves. You could be wrong.mactastic said:
I could tell you that Christianity is not evil, but the perversion of it most definitely can be. But I would be open to the argument that everyone has their own version of Christianity, so who is right.
And certainly to some, perhaps the homosexual or the abortionist, my version of Christianity might appear to be threatening, and perceived to be "evil" in their world view. So in that regard, "good" and "evil" become relative terms based on world view.
I, myself have read the Koran, and I have studied some of Islam and its ways. In fact, at one point in time I had designs on working in the Islamic world. Islam and Christianity both have bloodthirsty pasts. Both can be equally treacherous and heinous.
I happen to believe that both extremes are wrong. I also believe that Islam is fundamentally wrong in its beliefs and philosophy/world view, but not necessarily evil incarnate. But by the same token I would disagree fundamentally with Hinduism, Buddhism, Taoism, et. al. But I would not throw a blanket over all of their followers and call them evil, or even bad people. Most are good people, and some, maybe many, are better citizens, husbands, wives and parents than Christians. That is to Christianity's shame.
Woof, Woof - Dawg
I had no preconceptions of how you would answer, save that I know you would not call Christianity evil. Am I wrong?
Now, if only all Christians were as tolerant as you. But we've seen many even in this forum that are not, not to mention those running around in the political sphere, who spread something other than the tolerance you preach...
Now, if only all Christians were as tolerant as you. But we've seen many even in this forum that are not, not to mention those running around in the political sphere, who spread something other than the tolerance you preach...
I've boomed around a lot of the world. Lived in or travelled extensively in some 20 countries. Asia as well as Europe. I've wandered through some 40 of the US states.
I still take it for granted that 90% of all people are okay. I think that's a fair generalization, regardless of race or religion.
There's always gonna be some number of radicals and nutzoids. Rudolph falls right into this category. One thing I absolutely despise is the type who does his damage by way of the "to whom it may concern" bomb. I can at least understand somebody who goes after a specific target, but to blow up just anybody who happens to be around is absolutely evil.
'Rat
I still take it for granted that 90% of all people are okay. I think that's a fair generalization, regardless of race or religion.
There's always gonna be some number of radicals and nutzoids. Rudolph falls right into this category. One thing I absolutely despise is the type who does his damage by way of the "to whom it may concern" bomb. I can at least understand somebody who goes after a specific target, but to blow up just anybody who happens to be around is absolutely evil.
'Rat
The thing about Rudolph, and the one that generally escapes discussion, is that he remained uncaught for years because many in the area where he hid out sympathized with his cause, cold-blooded murderer though he may be. Now, does that sound familiar, or what? And is that not the single most chilling aspect of the entire Eric Rudolph story?
I hear you, but it might be for other reasons too.IJ Reilly said:
Our society has nut job supporters all around. Remember a few years back when people lined up on the Interstate to hold up "Go OJ" signs?
Xtremehkr said:
My two cents on those mentioned above
OJ... guilty
MJ.... two weird to know for sure
Blake....guilty
