Teen severely maimed, possibly by Orthodox Jews

Post Reply New Topic

Religion has brought a lot of good to this world, especially Christianity. You can be certain that it wasn't a Christian who mailed the package! Christians would never kill innocent people.

Which landmines are you referring to? Again, source please. And again, Israel does not set up Palestinian children to be killed --

A jury has ruled that a British activist shot while acting as a human shield in the Gaza Strip was "intentionally killed".

Tom Hurndall, from north London, was wearing an orange jacket to mark him out as a peace activist.

The 22-year-old had apparently been trying to move young Palestinian children from the line of fire when he was hit in the head. He was left in a coma and died nine months later.
.....

Ms Hurndall said she had received an email from Tom on April 11, just hours before the shooting. He reported being "shot at, gassed and chased" by soldiers during the five days he was in Rafah and described the danger that both he and the Palestinians were facing.

.....

Mr Hurndall's father, Anthony, told the hearing that his son and other activists from the ISM had gone out to try and block tanks that had been shooting into houses at random.

He said Tom had seen a group of ten to 15 children playing on a mound of sand, and noticed that bullets were hitting the ground between them. The children fled, but several were overcome with fear and could not move.

"Tom went to take one girl out of the line of fire, which he did successfully, but when he went back, as he knelt down [to collect another], he was shot."

Mr Hurndall said the Israelis had initially admitted someone had been shot, but claimed it had been a gunman who had opened fire first.

After photographs of Tom having been shot in the head emerged, the Israeli military later admitted that Hayb - a sentry who had won prizes for marksmanship - had shot him using telescopic sights.

"They just lied continuously," Mr Hurndall's father said. "It was a case of them shooting civilians and then making up a story. And they were not used to being challenged."

There had been a "general policy" for soldiers to be able to shoot civilians in that area without fear of reprisals, he added.

WTF!? Israeli troops use palestinian kids for target practice!

Read about this British peace activist who was killed for trying to save some of them


http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/apr/10/israel1

I've seen the same done to conservative news sources by liberals; I'd say it would be close to a generality that people only listen to what they agree with.

Except for the crusades. And all those abortion clinic bombings.

But I don't think religion is "bad;" I see religious intolerance as just an outlet for good 'ol fashioned human bigotry. If prejudice and hatred can't take the form of religion, it would just find some other form.

I wouldn't say that. Even in the "conservative" state of Minnesota you have such media outlets as MNPR, Pioneer Press, and Star Tribune, at least those. Except for KTIS and KTLK I haven't heard too many conservative radio stations.

So, if it isn't blatantly conservative like FOX, it must be liberal? NPR gives more air time to whatever administration is in office - for the last 7 years, that has been Republican. It also carries programming (like Market Place) that are pretty grounded in the ideas of mainstream economics.

The problem is that too many conservatives don't want a fair and balanced forum where a variety of voices are heard. They want TV news that is more like talk radio.

You missed the innocent part. Christians would never kill INNOCENT people.

Crusades - Based on what I've read, the crusades were justified. I read that Muslims conquered Christian lands and persecuted and murdered Christians who refused to convert so these weren't innocent people who were killed. If someone attacks you, then you have every right to defend yourself. There's also the sin of omission. If a bunch of people are murdering your family and you stand by and do nothing when you are able to protect them, then I think you would be at least partially responsible for their death.

Abortion clinic bombings - The idea is that by killing one doctor who butchers children, you save the lives of hundreds of future victims. It's similar to the US dropping an atom bomb on Japan. Thousands died, but many more thousands of lives may have been saved.

Abortion clinic bombings - The idea is that by killing one doctor who butchers children, you save the lives of hundreds of future victims. It's similar to the US dropping an atom bomb on Japan. Thousands died, but many more thousands of lives may have been saved.

Not all of the Crusades were that good though. I forgot the term but criminals were given forgiveness if they fought in them and that in some cases caused unnecessary incidents. Also, the fall of Constantinople shouldn't have been let happen.

I don't agree with sacrificial bombing. Abortions should be outlawed generally and not specifically terrorized.

You missed the innocent part. Christians would never kill INNOCENT people.

Crusades - Based on what I've read, the crusades were justified. I read that Muslims conquered Christian lands and persecuted and murdered Christians who refused to convert so these weren't innocent people who were killed. If someone attacks you, then you have every right to defend yourself. There's also the sin of omission. If a bunch of people are murdering your family and you stand by and do nothing when you are able to protect them, then I think you would be at least partially responsible for their death.

i think the term you're looking for is carte blanche.

Factually, that argument holds little water. While the first crusade was in fact a reaction to abuse of Christians in the Levant, many crusades were for other (less noble) reasons. There were crusades against Eastern Rite Christians (Greek Orthodox), against pagans, against Mongols, against Catholics that refused to offer tribute to Rome, against Slavs (Christian) and anyone else in Europe's reach. The crusades were a tool of foreign policy for the Holy Roman Emperor; they were a means of extending political, religious and economic control over the know world.

You also have to think of how scripturally ignorant the common people were then. Even after Gutenberg the Catholic Church didn't want people interpreting the Bible for themselves.

You also have to think of how scripturally ignorant the common people were then. Even after Gutenberg the Catholic Church didn't want people interpreting the Bible for themselves.