[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 14:19:26 -0400 (EDT)
Dummy
A zionest is only someone who believes there should be an Israel, nothing
else. What do you think a
zionest is?
Comrade B
In a message dated 9/5/2014 1:06:25 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,
schalestock@xxxxxxxx writes:
RR
Too much sophistry. Gets to be boring.
JS
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Ron Ristad <ristad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 09:29:00 -0600 (GMT-06:00)
JS,
The theme is "Butchers Of The Islamic State". It all centers around
Zionism.
Is Zionism the new "N" word or something? Should I be politically correct
and say "Liberals" instead in order to confuse the issue for the mentally
disadvantaged?
Who makes the distinction between "evil" and "innocent human beings". The
innocent women and children of Gaza are evil? The innocent woman and
children murdered by U.S. drone strikes are evil? The people of Gaza are evil
because they desperately try to defend themselves?
I had a nightmare the other night. An overpowering force was about to
invade my position and the only thing I had to defend myself was my 40 S/W
handgun. I was faced with no good choices. I could shoot it out but that would
be a really stupid choice because I would certainly be killed by the
superior weapons of the enemy. I could try tio run but there was nowhere to
run.
I could try to hide but that would be a disgusting and shameful way to die.
I could surrender but chances are they would just shoot me. Which choice
would you have made?
-RR
-----Original Message-----
From: "schalestock@xxxxxxxx" <schalestock@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sep 5, 2014 8:52 AM
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State
RR
Sorry if I hit a nerve. I thought you were capable of an intelligent
discourse. But you always seem to cherry pick something out of context and
then
climb back on your soap box.
I was (obviously I thought) referring to the extermination of evil, not
innocent human beings.
I feel nothing but compassion and sorrow for the innocent victims -
Palestinians AND Israelis. I saw it first hand in Vietnam and it is gut
wrenching. But I must say, despite your protestation, all I get out of your
posts
is rant after rant about the Zionists. There is no handle of logic or
intellectual honesty to hang on to.
But to give you the benefit of the doubt, I will assume that yours is a
wail of rage against the injustices of this world. And with that I will agree.
JS
---------- Original Message ----------
From: Ron Ristad <ristad@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State
Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2014 10:30:31 -0400 (EDT)
JS,
Please take you Jew hater bullshit and peddle it someplace else. I don't
hate anybody. I order to hate somebody you must fear them. They disgust me
is all.
You write "And that someone is an evil that needs to be exterminated for
the good of the human race."
Needs to be exterminated for the good of the human race? Where have I
heard that before? You've got to be kidding.
You write "Then you only have the visceral reaction of revenge to work
with." You feel nothing for all the innocent women and children murdered by
Zionists in Gaza? You feel nothing for all the innocent women and children
murdered by drone attacks in other sovereign nations and by bombs in Iraq and
other countries the U.S. has invaded? How do you think those people feel
who have had their innocent family members killed by the U.S. and Israel?
Are they just supposed to sit there and not try to defend themselves anyway
they can?
-RR
-----Original Message-----
From: "schalestock@xxxxxxxx" <schalestock@xxxxxxxx>
Sent: Sep 5, 2014 7:58 AM
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State
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-successe
s.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:
