This place sure goes in "spurts"

[Ignazio Palmisano]

Chan Chung Hang Christopher wrote:
>> Yes, all 27 of them. RADICAL is the adjective that will be forgot, and 
>> muslim has been the boogeyword for the recent years. There is about a 
>> billion of them, what's the radical confrontational percentage? Five 
>> percent would mean an army of fifty million berserker warriors attacking 
>> all and everything "west". The rest of the world wouldn't stand a chance.
>>
>> Guys with guns and in need of something to shoot at, that's a better 
>> description of the small small minority that you are describing. 
>> Unfortunately they are in command in some places, unfortunately again 
>> not all these places are "east", as the next point pictures perfectly.
>>
>>   
> I don't know...Indonesia has the highest proportion of Muslims in the 
> world and some really scary things have happened there recently. 
> Cannibalism and ethnic cleansing were easily carried out. Now if they 
> had the guns to take on the West...
> 
> Just keep hoping that Muslim countries keep getting secular minded 
> leaders that are not intent on getting the gun power.


But that's my point, we should hope for any leader to keep their head 
off their bibles/korans/torahs/whatever and leave the gunpowder for 
fireworks. Categorizing by Muslim/Christian/etc is the right way NOT to 
do that.

BTW cannibalism is not preached by any of the mentioned religions, so I 
would wait a minute before saying that it was done by any specific sect...

> 
>>   
>>> They'll use any excuse they
>>> can find. If they can't find any, they'll make them up.
>>>     
>> WMD anyone? (and the government of my country pretended to believe, so 
>> it's not like I'm taking the high ground and playing sanctimonious...)
>> I.
>>
>>
>>   
> 
> Recent incidents would lead me to take the stand that they are perfectly 
> capable of WMD'ing anyone should they have the firepower and a fanatic 
> leader.

THEY who? WMDs were a made up excuse to wage war on Iraq. MANY have the 
ability to use such weapons, e.g., all countries with nuclear 
capabilities. Some of them might have the recklessness to use them, or 
some other kind of forbidden weapon or technique (human shields? white 
phosphorus? poisonous gas? Anyone care to lengthen the list?), but it 
would be a naive generalization to think that the only ones who would 
use them would be in the "east", or be muslim, etc.
"Recent incidents" show that recklessness with civilian lives is not an 
exclusive of one faith or another, and neither are lies to convince 
people whoever is in command is right.
I.