[sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State

  • From: "" <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender "Sblumen123@xxxxxxx" for DMARC)
  • To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 14:14:44 -0400 (EDT)

JS
Use your head, does a picture tell you that the dead enemy soldier was  
cowardly or can he have been brave and consider yourself and  your comrades who 
maybe captured and does pissing on dead soldiers inflame  or frighten your 
enemies, think ahead. Be careful on being a demonizer, it can  backfire. 
Should all dead soldiers be pissed on? Do unto others what you would  have 
others do unto you. Think, think, think.
 
Comrade B, the thinker.
 
 
 
In a message dated 9/5/2014 1:56:22 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
schalestock@xxxxxxxx writes:

Stanley,
 
You are right. Pissing on a dead SOLDIER is dishonorable. Pissing on a  
dead, cowardly  thug who has butchered your comrade is not.
 
JS


---------- Original Message ----------
From: ""  <dmarc-noreply@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> (Redacted sender 
"Sblumen123@xxxxxxx" for  DMARC)
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re:  Butchers Of The Islamic State
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 13:28:53 -0400  (EDT)

JS
So is pissing on a dead enemy soldier.
 
Comrade B
 
 
In a message dated 9/5/2014 10:00:29 A.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
schalestock@xxxxxxxx writes:

RR
 
I think you read too much into it. And there is a difference between  
cutting someone's head off with a knife and killing them with a bomb. The  
intimacy of beheading someone with a knife requires a visceral hatred - or  
mental 
sickness. Even in combat when the circumstances dictate silent,  intimate 
killing for reasons of survival, that act is a far cry from  decapitation for 
ideological reasons. Beheading an enemy evokes such a  visceral revulsion 
in humans it has been used since time immemorial for that  very reason. It is 
the very definition of uncivilized, barbaric behavior  meant to terrorize 
the enemy.
 
Personally, I think you waste too much physic energy  in hating  Jews. Some 
of what you say may well be true. Some not. But either way, why  poison 
your own spiritual well? You are a wealthy, educated man with a  library of 
life experience to draw upon. You don't need to waste your energy  by allowing 
hatred to bleed off your life energy. Though of course it is  your perfect 
right to do so.
 
I grant you that videos and movies, even false ones, do move the  masses. 
Goebbels certainly proved that. They effectively meld fact, fiction  and 
emotion into a powerful witche's brew of passion and hatred. But  those things 
are separate from a logical, dispassionate analysis of what's  really going 
on behind the scenes.
 
9-11 and the beheadings were historical, horrific events. Who was  really 
behind them and why are legitimate questions.  But you have to  start with 
the basic events and work from there,  no matter what your  opinion is as to 
cause and motivation.  In the end, SOMEONE was  responsible. And that 
someone, is an evil that needs to be exterminated for  the good of the human 
race. 
 
Which brings us back to the eternal confrontation of good and evil. If  you 
don't believe in evil, further discourse is pointless.Then you only have  
the visceral reaction of revenge to work with. And that, at the end of the  
day, leaves you with nothing but a spiritual emptiness. But if you do  
recognize the eternal conflict that rages in men's souls, you are  responsible 
for 
choosing sides.
 
JS


---------- Original Message ----------
From: Ron Ristad  <ristad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:  [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014  06:41:56 -0600 (GMT-06:00)

JS,
Actually  it's anti-semitism since they are semites. 

Funny how nobody calls  you an anti-semite if you criticize semites but 
they do if you criticize  Zionists, the vast majority of whom are not semites. 
How much more proof  does one need that Americans have been trained to bark 
like Pavlov dogs by  the Zionist mainstream media?

As for cutting off heads: 
1. Dead  is dead. Is it your opinion that it's atrocious to cut off one or 
two heads  but it's OK to murders hundred's of thousands using bombs?

2. There's  something not right about the videos. Have you seen them? First 
they show  the victims calmly giving a long speech. Then they show his head 
on a  table.They are shot in multiple angle HD and only show two people, 
the  victim and the executioner. It looks like a stage set. They don't show 
the  actual cutting off of the head.

-RR



-----Original  Message----- 
From: "schalestock@xxxxxxxx" <schalestock@xxxxxxxx>  
Sent: Sep 5, 2014 4:28 AM 
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State 

RR
 
Racism?!  Come on Ron. That is "pure unadulterated"  hyperbole.
These scumbags cut off people's heads in the name of Allah. Why you  want 
to defend them is beyond me.
 
JS


---------- Original Message ----------
From: Ron Ristad  <ristad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:  [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014  12:24:50 -0600 (GMT-06:00)

JS,
That  is pure unadulterated rascism. 

Furthermore, despite what  government would like you to believe there are 
no Islamic terrorists,  freedom fighters or other militant groups in the 
U.S..Unlike the Zionists,  they do not control the government and mainstream 
media and are no threat  to the American way of life. They are not the ones who 
are trying to  destroy our Constitution and Bill of Rights.

The problem with  Muslims is that they are a very religious people and the 
communists who  run this country do not believe in God. I remember being in 
Egypt in 1978  and Egyptians telling me how much they loved Jimmy Carter. In 
my  experience Muslims are simple people who do not hate anybody. I would  
never be a Muslim myself because I find their lifestyle boring but I have  
never once felt intimidated being around them. In my life I have spent  time 
in over 100 countries and found people pretty much the same  everywhere.

Even in Israel Muslims and Jews lived together  peacefully for hundred's of 
years before the Zionists invaded and  slaughtered Muslims and threw them 
out of their homes.

If you want  to buy into all the BS propaganda the government is peddling 
and are  willing to die for it then be my guest but count me  out.

-RR



-----Original  Message----- 
From: "schalestock@xxxxxxxx"  <schalestock@xxxxxxxx> 
Sent: Sep 4, 2014 11:20 AM 
To:  sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of  The Islamic State 

RR
 
I'm sure you will agree that war and conflict has been with man  since the 
beginning.  The horror of killing and watching friends  being killed strikes 
a cord in the human psyche that scars and alters a  man irrevocably. It is 
antithical to the human spirit which, in  need of self preservation, allows 
itself to become deadened to the pain.  The result expresses itself in 
brutality. Which is just another face of  evil.
 
As with any conflict, you can argue cause and effect, aggression  and 
revenge. But I think what we have in the current situation goes  deeper. It is 
a 
clash of cultures that are fundamentally and  diametrically opposed to each 
other - the ethics of the 7th century  versus the morality of the 21st. 
 The Geneva Convention didn't come about because the war  mongers developed 
a conscience. What they did realize is that without  some semblance of 
rules, participants and societies would become insane  and self destructive -  
mutually assured destruction of the  temporal world we live in. It was 
grudgingly accepted that there would  always be winners sand losers.
 
Enter the current Sharia based bestiality of Islam, a true culture  of 
death, and all bets are off. Dealing with a rabid animal is a fair  analogy. It 
is either you or it and the only mode of communication  is violence.  This 
is a long way from Clausewitz's dictum that war  is simply a continuation of 
politics by other means.
 
What we are dealing with in ISIS is evil, pure and simple.  Explanations 
and analysis of it's motives is futile  redundancy. Or as my old Gunny Sargent 
was fond of saying, "Kill em all  and let God sort them out."
 
JS


---------- Original Message ----------
From: Ron Ristad  <ristad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject:  [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State
Date: Thu, 4 Sep  2014 10:20:47 -0600 (GMT-06:00)

JS,
What  the article is saying is that the U.S. is responsible for creating  
Islamic extremism in the first place, starting all the way back with  Osama 
Bin Laden. Al Queda was created by the CIA in order to fight  Russia in 
Afghanistan. The "war on terror" will never be won by invading  other countries 
and killing the local citizens.  What has the war  on terror accomplished? 
Nothing. It has been the cause of hundred's of  thousands of deaths, mostly of 
innocent civilians, and has created more  and more radical Muslims. All the 
killing and torture and deaths of  American soldiers did not bring back any 
of the people who died on 9/11.  Two wrongs never make a right.

-RR


-----Original  Message----- 
From: "schalestock@xxxxxxxx"  <schalestock@xxxxxxxx> 
Sent: Sep 4, 2014 9:57 AM 
To:  sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx 
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of  The Islamic State 

RR
 
Just wondering...is this supposed to represent some kind of moral  
equivalency?
 
I notice he didn't mention any details about why the Marine recon  team 
urinated on that dead Taliban.  Here's some genuine moral  equivalency. One of 
their team members had been captured, tortured  then mutilated. Penis cut 
off and stuffed in his mouth. (didn't see  any mention of that in the article.)
 
 When the team wiped them out in a firefight, pissing on the  corpse of one 
of these animals was pretty light payback in my opinion.  I would have 
joined in.
 
At any rate, this kind of "journalism" which is transparently  predicated 
on some kind of supposed "moral equivalency" is pathetic.  No one said war 
was a soccer game. Nor that atrocities are  not  committed.   But presenting 
this article as some kind of  "proof" that we are the cause of all the 
trouble over there is less  than convincing to say the least.
 
JS
 
 


---------- Original Message ----------
From: Ron  Ristad <ristad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To:  undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Butchers Of The  Islamic State
Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2014 08:35:12 -0600  (GMT-06:00)


by _Tom Engelhardt_ 
(http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/author/tom-engelhardt/)  • September 3,  
2014
In that largely Muslim part of the world, the U.S. left a grim  record that 
we in this country generally tend to discount or forget  when we decry the 
barbarism of others. We are now focused in horror on  ISIS’s video of the 
murder of journalist James Foley, a propaganda  document clearly designed to 
drive Washington over the edge and into  more active opposition to that 
group. 
We, however, ignore the virtual library of videos and other imagery  the 
U.S. generated, images widely viewed (or heard about and  discussed) with no 
less horror in the Muslim world than ISIS’s imagery  is in ours. As a start, 
there were the infamous “_screen saver_ 
(http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175836/tomgram:_karen_greenberg,_abu_ghraib_never_left_us/)
 ” images straight  
out of the Marquis de Sade from _Abu  Ghraib prison_ 
(http://www.antiwar.com/news/?articleid=8560) . There, Americans tortured and 
abused  Iraqi 
prisoners, while creating their own _iconic version_ 
(http://www.executedtoday.com/images/Abu_Ghraib_abuse.jpg)  of crucifixion  
imagery. Then there were the 
videos that no one (other than insiders)  saw, but that everyone heard about. 
These, the CIA took of the  repeated torture and abuse of al-Qaeda suspects 
in its “black sites.”  In 2005, they were _destroyed_ 
(http://www.newyorker.com/news/amy-davidson/jose-rodriguez-and-the-ninety-two-tapes)
  by an 
official of  that agency, lest they be screened in an American court someday. 
There  was also the Apache helicopter _video_ (http://collateralmurder.com/)  
released by WikiLeaks  in which American pilots gunned down Iraqi civilians 
on the streets of  Baghdad (including two Reuters correspondents), while on 
the sound  track the crew are heard wisecracking. There was the _video_ (
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/sep/24/us-marines-charged-dead-taliban)  
of U.S. troops  urinating on the bodies of dead Taliban fighters in 
Afghanistan. There  were the _trophy photos_ 
(http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-afghan-photos-20120418-story.html#page=1)  
of body parts  _brought home_ 
(http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/world_now/2012/04/afghans-revolted-by-us-troops-p
osing-with-dead-suicide-bombers.html)  by U.S.  soldiers. There were the 
_snuff  films_ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXgGCH36fzM) of the victims of 
Washington’s drone  assassination campaigns in the tribal backlands of the 
planet (or “_bug splat_ 
(http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/09/world/asia/pakistan-drones-not-a-bug-splat/) ,” 
as the drone  pilots came to call the dead from 
those attacks) and _similar footage_ 
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGYV3JirmyA)  from  helicopter gunships. There 
was the bin Laden snuff film video 
from the  raid on Abbottabad, Pakistan, of which President Obama _reportedly 
watched_ (http://www.cnn.com/2011/TECH/web/05/02/bin.laden.video/)  a live  
feed. And that’s _only to begin_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/31/opinion/sunday/stop-hiding-images-of-american-torture.html)
  to account for  some of 
the imagery produced by the U.S. since September 2001 from its  various 
adventures in the Greater Middle East. 
All in all, the invasions, the occupations, the drone campaigns in  several 
lands, the deaths that ran into the hundreds of thousands, the  _uprooting_ 
(http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/174892/michael_schwartz_the_iraqi_brain_dra
in)  of millions of  people sent into external or internal exile, the 
expending of _trillions_ 
(http://www.cnn.com/2014/08/27/opinion/iraq-opinion-united-states-cost-of-war/index.html)
  of dollars added up  to a bin Laden 
dreamscape. They would prove jihadist recruitment tools  par excellence. 
When the U.S. was done, when it had set off the process that led to  
insurgencies, civil wars, the growth of extremist militias, and the  collapse 
of 
state structures, it had also guaranteed the rise of  something new on Planet 
Earth: ISIS – as well as of other extremist  outfits ranging from the 
Pakistani Taliban, now challenging the state  in certain areas of that country, 
to Ansar al-Sharia in Libya and  al-Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula in Yemen. 
Though the militants of ISIS would undoubtedly be horrified to  think so, 
they are the spawn of Washington. Thirteen years of regional  war, 
occupation, and intervention played a major role in clearing the  ground for 
them. 
They may be our worst nightmare (thus far), but they  are also our legacy – and 
not just because so many of their leaders _came from_ 
(http://www.nytimes.com/2014/08/28/world/middleeast/army-know-how-seen-as-factor-in-isis-successes
.html)  the Iraqi army we  disbanded, had their beliefs and skills honed in 
the prisons we set up  (_Camp Bucca_ 
(http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2014/07/was-camp-bucca-pressure-cooker-extremism)
  seems to have been  the 
West Point of Iraqi extremism), and gained experience facing U.S.  
counterterror operations in the “surge” years of the occupation. In  fact, just 
about 
everything done in the war on terror has facilitated  their rise. After all, 
we dismantled the Iraqi army and rebuilt one  that would flee at the first 
signs of ISIS’s fighters, _abandoning_ 
(http://abcnews.go.com/International/iraqi-army-left-weapons-hands-terrorists-today/story?id=24070848)
  vast 
stores of  Washington’s weaponry to them. We essentially destroyed the Iraqi  
state, while fostering a Shia leader who would _oppress enough Sunnis_ 
(http://www.tomdispatch.com/blog/175869/tomgram:_dahr_jamail,_incinerating_iraq/)
  
in  enough ways to create a situation in which ISIS would be welcomed or  
tolerated throughout significant areas of the country. 
The Escalation Follies 
When you think about it, from the moment the first bombs began  falling on 
Afghanistan in October 2001 to the present, not a single  U.S. military 
intervention has had anything like its intended effect.  Each one has, in time, 
proven a disaster in its own special way,  providing breeding grounds for 
extremism and producing yet another set  of recruitment posters for yet 
another set of jihadist movements.  Looked at in a clear-eyed way, this is what 
any American military  intervention seems to offer such extremist outfits – 
and ISIS knows  it. 
And keep one thing in mind: if the U.S. were truly capable of  destroying 
or crushing ISIS, as our secretary of state and others are  urging, that 
might prove to be anything but a boon. After all, it was  easy enough to think, 
as Americans did after 9/11, that al-Qaeda was  the worst the world of 
Islamic extremism had to offer. Osama bin  Laden’s killing was presented to us 
as 
an ultimate triumph over  Islamic terror. But ISIS lives and breathes and 
grows, and across the  Greater Middle East Islamic extremist organizations 
are gaining  membership and traction in ways that should illuminate just what 
the  war on terror has really delivered. The fact that we can’t now imagine  
what might be worse than ISIS means nothing, given that no one in our  
world could imagine ISIS before it sprang into being. 
http://davidstockmanscontracorner.com/the-islamic-state-spawn-of-washingtons
-wars-of-terrror/ 
-RR


____________________________________________________________
_The #1 Worst Carb  Ever?
Click to Learn #1 Carb that  Kills Your Blood Sugar (Don't Eat This!)
_ (http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/54088c1b2d980c1a6491st04vuc) 
_FixYourBloodSugar.com_ 
(http://thirdpartyoffers.juno.com/TGL3132/54088c1b2d980c1a6491st04vuc) 













Other related posts: