[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 14:31:30 -0400

RR
Do you think Viet Nam is captilist or communist and is it successful?
 
Comrade B
 
 
In a message dated 9/5/2014 2:16:30 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time,  
ristad@xxxxxxxxxxx writes:

JS,
I  have a logical mind. I have an open mind. Give me facts that add up. I 
once  believed a lot of things that I'm not so sure about now. Now I am 
skeptical of  everything I'm told.  When I hear a story I try to understand it. 
 
Demonizing whole populations is one trademark of a lie.  I've never met a  
person who was that much different than me so whenever I hear one of these  
stories I try to put myself in their place and try to understand the  
motivation for their actions. People do things for a reason, even if it's just  
somebody suffering from drug withdrawal going on a shooting spree. In order to  
prove a crime one of the things you have to prove is motive. What's the  
motive? Who benefits? If a terrorist attacks it's for a reason. Nobody kills  
people just because they don't like them, unless it's for vengeance.

I  had to look up sophistry in the dictionary. It means.

1.   
a subtle, tricky, superficially plausible, but generally  fallacious method 
of reasoning. 

2.  
a false argument;  sophism. 


On that much  we agree.

-RR


-----Original  Message----- 
From: "schalestock@xxxxxxxx" <schalestock@xxxxxxxx>  
Sent: Sep 5, 2014 11:03 AM 
To: sparkscoffee@xxxxxxxxxxxxx  
Subject: [sparkscoffee] Re: Butchers Of The Islamic State  

<ZZZHT
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-
posing-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) 















</schalestock@xxxxxxxx>


Other related posts: