CNN Presents God’s Warriors . Despite the all spin that CNN did put into the program the idea to compare Jewish, Christian and Muslim religious radicals is very productive. If we will go beyond what CNN is omitting in its program and we will compare side by side the Jewish, Christian and Muslims “ God warriors” few things will be obvious from that comparison :
- “ Muslim warriors” are only religious warriors who are supported by state ( Iran is an example)
- “ Muslim warriors” are only religious warriors who operate globally and have a goal of imposing its religion as religion on others
- “ Muslim warriors” are only religious warriors who operate in the countries and territories which are out of the historical borders of its religion ( Muslims terrorism in USA and Europe)
- “ Muslim warriors” are only religious warriors who are practicing strategy of intentional mass deliberate killing of civilians
- “ Muslim warriors” are only religious warriors who have own armies with rockets and artillery : Hezbollah
- “ Muslim warriors” are only religious warriors who control entire countries ( Afghanistan, Somalia until recently and Iran today )
- “ Muslim warriors” are only religious warriors who are attacking sovereign countries ( Hezbollah attacked Israel)
- “ Muslim warriors” are only religious warriors who have under military control entire territories (Gaza , Somalia)
So the whole idea to equalize Jewish, Christian and Muslims is disingenuous .
Filed under 2008 vote, 2008 voter, 9/11, Afghanistan, Al-qaida, Analysis, Christian, Christianity, CNN, Gaza, God’s Warriors, Gods warriors, Hezbollah, Iran, Islam, Islamic Republic, Islamic Republic of Iran, Israel, Lebanon war, London bombing, Madrid bombing, Muslims, Somalia
Carter’s position on the takeover by HAMAS in Gaza is obviously immoral because he praises killing of political opponents (Hamas did kill Fattah people, did it?). Besides, it is grossly illogical as well.
“Bush administration’s refusal to accept Hamas‘ 2006 election victory was ‘criminal’.”
Why is that Bush did refuse to accept Hamas’ 2006 election victory? He never did!
He made his choice to not collaborate with Hamas but he never refuse to accept Hamas‘ 2006 election victory. Nobody in the White House ever denied legitimacy of Hamas’ 2006 election victory. But it was Palestinians who elected Hamas. Palestinian voters have no power over White House decision making. May be Mr. Carter could be excellent Palestinian president, but so far Bush is the president of USA and he can choose with whom to collaborate and with whom to not collaborate. For Mr. Carter commitment of Hamas to destroy Israel is not an obstacle to collaboration, which is quite strange for such a peaceful person. For Bush it is an obstacle. Let us presume that a party committed to destroy France would win in German election. Would USA collaborate with such government ? I doubt it. So why Jews have to be inferior to Germans? Blunted anti-Semitism and liberal demagoguery are mixed in Carter head in very strange mixture. He failed to differentiate not collaborating with blood thirsty terrorists with refusing to accept the fact of Hamas‘ 2006 election victory. Hamas did win election , nobody denies that. But it imposes no obligation on USA to collaborate with party denying right to exists to state created by UN just because it wins its country election. Palestinians voted for Hamas and it means everything for Palestinians and nothing for anybody else.
“Carter said Hamas, besides winning a fair and democratic mandate that should have entitled it to lead the Palestinian government, had proven itself to be far more organized in its political and military showdowns with Abbas’ moderate Fatah movement.” Source :
“Winning a fair and Democratic mandate…that should have entitled HAMAS to lead the Palestinian government.” Abbas did win his election as well, as far as I understand winning election by Hamas gave Hamas only the majority of parliament, but did not override the power of the President, who won his “fair and Democratic” elections. Do Democrats in US by winning 2006 elections and getting majority in parliament got the right for military coup as Hamas did? What kind of logic is that ? How a politician ( even with such bad reputation, proven plagiarist and supporter of all anti American forces in the world dictatorship including open dictatorships as Cuba ) could justify killing of political opponents ? And this guy once won Peace Nobel Price? Hamas looted Garter’s partner for Nobel peace Arafat and stole his medal. Is that the sign of discipline of Hamas which so impressed Mr. Carter? Hamas did loot everything it could, is that in eyes of Carter a sign of discipline? Source
Let us say Hamas is as disciplined as Carter see it. So what ? Many gangs around the world are highly disciplined and proficient in what they do, does that make them morally right? Since when USA chooses to collaborate not with the most righteous but with most disciplined force? Colombian narco-cartels are very disciplined too. Are they appealing to Mr. Carter as potential political partners?