Australian Police Arrest 15, Charge 2, For Alleged Islamic State Beheading Plot 165
The Washington Post reports (building on a short AP report they're also carrying) that "[Australian] police have arrested 15 people allegedly linked to the Islamic State, some who plotted a public beheading." According to the Sydney Morning Herald, of the arrestees, only two have been charged. From the Washington Post story: “Police said the planned attack was to be “random.” The killers were to behead a victim and then drape the body in the black Islamic State flag, according to the Sydney Morning Herald. ... Direct exhortations were coming from an Australian who is apparently quite senior in [the Islamic State] to networks of support back in Australia to conduct demonstration killings here in this country,” Australian Prime Minister Tony Abbott said at a press conference, as the BBC reported. “So this is not just suspicion, this is intent and that’s why the police and security agencies decided to act in the way they have.”
Eh. (Score:4, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
I just read about the Tim Mclean case. What's even more horrific is that PETA sought to gain publicity for animal rights by running an ad. Eeek!
Garbage Disposal (Score:3, Interesting)
Australia has a great garbage disposal system right off their west coast. Just toss these fuckers into the sea and the Great Whites will make them disappear.
All you have to worry about is PETA getting upset over feeding toxic wastes to the sharks.
Re:Garbage Disposal (Score:5, Insightful)
But that would play straight to their hand. "Islamic State" is doing things like this because they're trying to tell a story: that they're a Caliphate straight from the dark ages. Treat their agents any differently than a common crazy murderer, and you're saying that you agree they are different, thus putting them a little bit closer towards having their story commonly accepted.
Here, let Littlefinger explain it [youtube.com].
So, what we must do is counter their story with our own: that they're nothing more than a bunch of brutal criminals. And we do that by treating them exactly like any other criminal. Counter the fantasy with banality, don't let them draw us into it. That's the mistake we did with Al-Qaeda: we allowed them to define themselves as "terrorists" rather than "murderers".
Re: (Score:3)
Martyrdom? Nope, straight-jacketed and drugged and forced to talk about your feelings. No rewards of heaven for you.
Re:Garbage Disposal (Score:5, Insightful)
Like we don't do to common criminals? Gee, you must be thinking of them as something else then, such as a legitimate if hostile power.
An example that the Islamic State can point to and say: "See, even our enemies agree that we're not just another gang and are afraid of us!"
"Our brave fighters are willing to face not only death but humiliation and torture before it! Truly, they shall be blessed and rewarded in Heaven!"
Seriously, stop helping the Islamic State. Stop supporting their story. Every time you suggest a "clever" punishment for them you're supporting their claim of being a Caliphate rather than a criminal gang, thus bringing them closer to victory.
You win a war like this by deciding on what view of reality you want to be commonly accepted, then behaving consistently as if it was. By doing this you're constantly telling a story to everyone you interact with, some of whom will accept it and start repeating it in turn. As the number of converts increases, it eventually reaches the tipping point and becomes the new "default" consensus reality, sweeping even those who originally rejected it in. That's what classic nation-building is about: storytelling. Islamic State is trying to short-circuit the process by baiting foreign powers into lashing out against them, effectively recruiting their enemies to testify for them. Such impatience is a serious weakness, since those foreign powers can as well deny the story. However, given how clumsily Al-Qaeda was handled, they probably thought the risk was worth it.
You know, this kind of basic mechanism should really be covered in elementary education. All our technological and economic might won't help us any more than their muscles and armor helped the dinosaurs if our situational awareness continues being that of a brain the size of a peanut.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Why would you think that they could not twist being treated like "normal" criminals as something special? In the US, Muslim recruiting is prisons is very effective.
Liars are gonna lie, nothing you do is going stop that.
Re: (Score:2)
They can try and probably will. Think of it as attacking a heavily fortified bunker rather than open field; sure, it can be done, but it's a lot harder.
But this is only a problem if you buy Islamic State's claim of being a Caliphate and thus representing all Muslims. Otherwise we're just looking at criminals finding religion and straightening up
Re: (Score:2)
I got a better idea:
Let's get off oil, then they will have no power, no funding, and thus, no threat.
They can go back to pounding sand like they were 100 years ago.
Re: (Score:2)
I'd love to, especially since that would also force Russia to ditch dictatorship and start developing or become irrelevant. However, it's easier said than done, as oil happens to be near-ideal power source. The only technologically realistic alternative is nuclear, but that has political problems.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Do murderers usually get bombed into the stone age?
'Using' the criminal justice system against international groups like Al-Qaeda was Clinton's mistake. Or more correctly saying you were using the criminal justice system while if fact ignoring them unless you need something to push a story off the front page was Clinton's mistake.
Re: (Score:3)
The reason a person from Islamic State is different than a run of the mill murderer or crazy person is that they are a large organized group with military grade weapons, rule over a sizable area of land, and revenue streams derived from the population they control.
Ignoring them and hoping the problem goes away is just ludicrous. We tried it with the Taliban, and they harbored and supported al Qaeda.
Re: (Score:2)
Treating them as their own "special" category of evil people only strengthens their cause. If they are just another convict up for murder in max lockup in either a civilian prison or Leavenworth, all their "magic" is gone, compared to being stashed in a special offshore prison, called a "terrorist", and not given a trial.
Who will get more recruits. Someone on Lockup showing their gang signs, or someone stashed in a special prison because they are "terrorists". Lets be real here. The murderers locked in
Re: (Score:2)
People not from Australia may not realise that we already do this with criminal gangs that also happen to like motorcycles.
Re: (Score:2)
The mistake we made (and continue to make) with Al-Qaeda is that we did treat them like murderers. We captured them, gave them lawyers, rights, etc. They should have been and should be exterminated on the spot. Pissing on the bodies optional.
Wars seldom end through peaceful negotiations. They end because one side completely and utterly destroys the other.
Re: (Score:2)
Well, no. A war most often ends in a negotiated truce. Otherwise most still-existing nations would have no lost ones in their history.
Then again, I can see you're working through some personal issues here, so I guess facts are of little importance. But perhaps you could choose some topic where you won't cause actual damage by venting?
News for nerds (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:1)
Agreed, this is not the place for normal news.
I specifically do not bother with general news as it has entirely wrong priorities and serves more to scare people than giving a balanced picture of what is going on. General news is of no interest to me. Which is why I frequent places such as Slashdot. At least until now.
Re: (Score:3)
While the IS stuff is rather a hot news item, I do not agree that slashdot is really the place for it.
One of the reasons I look at Slashdot is to get a nice newsfeed without 5 items per day about wild muslims.
The problem is that the Slashdot geek seems increasingly resistant to any story outside his comfort zone.
You see this most clearly when a story cuts close to the bone on issues of race and class and gender in tech --- but it comes through elsewhere as well.
Re: (Score:2)
Great for you, why don't you buy Slashdot from Dice or set up your own blog where you can control things?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: News for nerds (Score:2)
800 hundred coppers involved in an operation that arrested one person for a phone call made months ago - and found one more with an unlicensed weapon.
If they weren't trying to prop up a government failing in the polls and gain their own extra powers - they could have done this with two coppers and not sensationalised the issue.
Seriously - the new laws due to be voted next week give asio the power to torture with impunity. Obviously they were jealous of the cia.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:2)
While the IS stuff is rather a hot news item, I do not agree that slashdot is really the place for it. One of the reasons I look at Slashdot is to get a nice newsfeed without 5 items per day about wild muslims.
Damn! There goes my new article about about "Emacs or Vi? Which do wild Muslims prefer?"
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And if Slashdot become (e.g.) 90% articles about Justin Bieber and other teen heart-throbs, would you respond similarly to people expressing their discontent?
It seems only reasonable and useful to the news site for readers to express their opinion about the type of articles being shown.
Re: (Score:2)
And if Slashdot become (e.g.) 90% articles about Justin Bieber and other teen heart-throbs, would you respond similarly to people expressing their discontent?
Not unless they also switch to Beta. I have my priorities straight.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Nonsense. It's entirely reasonable to comment regarding what you do/do not want Slashdot to cover/discuss/become.
Look, over there! (Score:3, Insightful)
Of course the poor polls, the terrible budget, the scandals, the deaths in custody, the lies of the Abbott government have absolutely nothing to do with the Prime Sinister's current attempts to take us to war.
Nothing at all. Nope. Nu uh.
Oh look, a shiny!
nihilists - In the Dust? (Score:1)
Human nature? Yes. People naturally tune out to the horrible and try to move on.
RadioLab had a nice piece on the topic called "In The Dust Of This Planet"
http://www.radiolab.org/story/... [radiolab.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Of course the poor polls, the terrible budget, the scandals, the deaths in custody, the lies of the Abbott government have absolutely nothing to do with the Prime Sinister's current attempts to take us to war.
Nothing at all. Nope. Nu uh.
Oh look, a shiny!
Pretty much this.
Its classic misdirection to keep people distracted from the increasing unemployment, worsening economy, political infighting and other Abbott government failures. Seeing as shouting "boats, boats, boaty boat boat boat" stopped working a while ago they need a new plan to keep people from seeing the horror of the current government.
At least we only have two more years of this fool to go.
Re: (Score:2)
How does that make racism?
Not really. Not finding enough evidence does not always equate to innocent. However, incarcerating them without evidence is immoral and I do agree there. I guess a serious question needs to be answered about their threat to society and the people in it.
Re: (Score:2)
My last year there I was blocked from voting for not being a member of an xian church
Um, what? Can you explain that?
I'm not; I know a bunch of folk who aren't and none of us have a problem voting.
At least they were arrested (Score:2, Insightful)
No matter what anyone thinks about surveillance, etc., these asshats were arrested and prevented from doing their thing. Were I the leader of Australia, I'd turn them over to the law of their original country of origin, stating they have lost their Australian citizenship (if they began citizens) by dint of plotting against Australians. If the countries of origin will not take them, line them up and shoot them for conspiracy. Most governments would dearly love to just shoot the extremists but shy away becaus
Re: (Score:3)
In this case, I believe, for one or more of them is Afghanistan. i.e. they were child refugees from the post 9/11 conflict whose homeland we bombed to smithereens.
Now grown up, they've become radicalised in Sydney by foreign born clerics.
We don't have the death penalty here.
Re:At least they were arrested (Score:4, Insightful)
I doubt very many would-be martyrs have been deterred by death penalties.
Re: (Score:2)
You'd be wrong. Of course the death penalties are typically met out by Israeli soldiers/citizens/EMP bomb detonators.
Re: (Score:2)
Very droll, but by that definition, being a paranoid schizophrenic in my town carries the "death penalty".
Because it seems like every time one freaks out in public, the cops shoot him/her on the spot.
Re: (Score:1)
It isn't rare for would-be "martyrs" to disapprove of dying when it isn't under their control, and they don't get to take large numbers of people with them to "earn" their spot in paradise.
Re: (Score:1)
in other news, every one on 4chan was arrested... o wait thats coming.
Re: (Score:1)
Devil's advocate here (thus posting as AC), but isn't this exactly what surveillance and police work is supposed to prevent? The Aussie police did their work and saved a number of lives.
The ironic thing is that here in the US, this would make a great plot for a blockbuster movie.
If this happened in the US, I'm sure the press here would take interviews of all the arrestees and do a multi-day story of each and every one's biography as well as their IS sentiments, with their manifestos published and read mult
Re: (Score:1)
And what if Australia *is* their country of origin?
An Insightful Quote (Score:3, Interesting)
From the Sydney Morning Herald article:
"I dunno, I got a lot of anger," he said. "It's a war on Islam just because we grow our beards. They want to label us as a terrorist, or supporters of IS, whatever, that's up to you."
As long as the more stable regional powers refuse to directly confront the extremists, it becomes very easy for this view to continue.
Re:An Insightful Quote (Score:5, Informative)
Context:
It's a quote from the brother of one of the arrested men:
Raban Alou said police were targeting his brother Kawa because he hung around a "bunch of hotheads" who were being investigated by the Australian Security Intelligence Organisation.
He said police were searching for any material that could link his family to al-Qaeda or Islamic State.
"I dunno, I got a lot of anger," he said. "It's a war on Islam just because we grow our beards. They want to label us as a terrorist, or supporters of IS, whatever, that's up to you."
I'm not sure it's all that insightful, though.
Re: (Score:3)
The point is that if disaffected Islamic youth in Australia are buying the "war on Islam" propaganda, what chance does the U.S. and their allies have in Iraq and Syria?
Anything they do there will only amplify the view that they are modern day Crusaders.
The additional context only bolsters that opinion.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Just short of warrants. They say what they think, and that's not allowed in PC America.
Re: (Score:2)
What they said appears to have made them _more_ popular. So they will be forced off the air.
news for ___? stories that ___? (Score:1)
I can't make any connection between this story and Slashdot's niche. Maybe I should go to the Drudge Report for technology news?
Re: (Score:1)
Hacking not in Slashdot's niche? Puhleeze.
And this is hacking on an industrial, major-state-actor scale.
hey everyone (Score:5, Insightful)
just remember.. we need to reserve these blissful over-reactions for only 'threats' that involve the terrorist-boogey-man... if we reacted this way to comparable threat-per-capita non-terrorist criminals, we would run out of resources in about a week. (plus, the whole surveillance thing would be harder to jam down the masses throats)
Test (Score:1)
Hmmmmm...should I?
Ok, you have been warned.
Since it's in Australia, wouldn't it be a bebodying?
I have a nasty, cynical mind (Score:2)
If I was a member of a spy/security agency who wanted more than anything to wipe away the last, feeble laws protecting the privacy and freedom of my country's sheeple, this is precisely the kind of operation I'd set up. All it would take is a few words whispered in the right ear.
The most idiotic of the Muslim fanatics would jump on the idea with glad little cries, and the usual gang of fascists would gleefully portray the descent into a police state as the ultimate expression of First World freedom and sec
Re: (Score:1)
If I was a member of a spy/security agency who wanted more than anything to wipe away the last, feeble laws protecting the privacy and freedom of my country's sheeple, this is precisely the kind of operation I'd set up. All it would take is a few words whispered in the right ear.
The problem is that there is no shortage of extremists around the world that actually want to do this sort of thing, and they actually have caused enormous problems for many governments.
One of the problems with "cynicism" is not knowing where to stop, or when you've gone too far. Then you end up being a kook.
Re: (Score:2)
I don't think you're looking at the problem the right way. There was never any doubt terrorists exist, and that there's nothing they'd like better than to kill us. There isn't any doubt lightning exists, either. It can strike anywhere, any time. This doesn't mean I'm going to give up the right to go outside whenever I damn please to be "safe" from the small chance that I'll wind up falling victim to a lightning strike.
Actions like those described in TFA and what they say about us as a society are, as
Re: (Score:2)
I think it's pretty hard to deny that there's at least a modicum of truth in your statement. Frankly, I think there's more than that.
I wonder when people are going to wake up...or if.
Would anyone notice (Score:2)
Muslim claim *they* are the victims. (Score:2)
Muslims are infuriated, claiming that they are the true victims. Muslims are very upset about the arrests, saying they were dishonored. Muslims are protesting, carrying signs that say "Raids Terrorize Woman and Children."
Muslim community apprehension after raids leads to 'snap protest'
> Wassim Doureihi, a prominent member of the group, told the crowd that the community was deeply upset by the raids.
> "What would be your reaction if your home was raided and your women dishonoured?" he said.
http://www.s
Re: (Score:2)
Muslims are infuriated, claiming that they are the true victims. Muslims are very upset about the arrests, saying they were dishonored. Muslims are protesting, carrying signs that say "Raids Terrorize Woman and Children."
Muslim community apprehension after raids leads to 'snap protest'
> Wassim Doureihi, a prominent member of the group, told the crowd that the community was deeply upset by the raids.
> "What would be your reaction if your home was raided and your women dishonoured?" he said.
http://www.smh.com.au/national/muslim-community-apprehension-after-raids-leads-to-snap-protest-20140918-10iupz.html
In this case, they'd be right.
They were targeted by a government that is extremely unpopular at the moment to serve as a distraction from the other problems Australia has like increasing unemployment and a worsening economy (all the things that the previous Labor govt kept ticking along). This couldn't look more staged if Joe Hockey came out and said, "we staged this". Unfortunately there is a large wave of xenophobia in Australia and the xenophobes and racists are the LNP's (Liberal/National Party) most
Re: (Score:1)
Re: (Score:1)
There are no doubt a small minority of Muslims in Australia that just might commit violence. The sort of unreasonable, widespread and unjustifiable arrests and other attacks by the Federal Police might just be enough to push them off over the edge.
Remember, that terrorists do not just kill people "because they are evil" as we are told. It is because they are fighting for a (mad) cause which they are willing to die for. With this sort of action the police might just push a few of them over the edge. Plus
Finfisher licenses (Score:2)
Re:Thought crime (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
From what I can tell, there is no evidence of a conspiracy yet. Just communications with someone who gave an order to start randomly killing people that had not been prepared for or carried out.
So I'm not even sure it's a bono fide conspiracy. Hopefully they find some evidence and clear this up.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
They have only thought about it. So they are being prosecuted for a thought crime.
It's both a pity and a blessing that Orwell didn't live long enough to see the geek in full flight.
The organization and planning of a crime, the recruitment of others to assist you, is more than thought, it is action.
Re: (Score:2)
In college we plotted the death of Prof Reddenburg in detail. He taught electric fields. Nobody actually did anything and he retired shortly thereafter, leaving the class in the hands of a non senile teacher.
Re: (Score:2)
Just planning or speaking about heinous crimes is enough to get you nickes, again, as it should be.
No it will not. One person planning a crime, even bragging about it, is not conspiracy. It could just be a fantasy. Lots of people imagine ways of killing someone, but never do it. The crime is conspiracy, which means more than one person planning it together. To charge one person acting alone, he would have to have gone beyond planning, e.g. purchasing bomb ingredients.
Re: (Score:3)
Re:lets pump the brakes here and analyze. (Score:5, Informative)
The US had NOTHING to do with the formation of Israel. Absolutely nothing. Yes we recognized them AFTER they gained control but we even had an arms embargo against them up until that point. Israels creation and almost all of the worlds problems can be traced to EUROPEAN colonialism and direct action by the British and French.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
Yes it was, the dysfunction of the western hemisphere is the US's fault. We ran around exploiting and destroying the nations of the western hemisphere and as a result they continue to be tortured and dysfunctional governments because of what we did. Hell the US used to let the rich build private mercenary armies and invade these smaller countries and replace their governments. It was detestable conduct on the part of the US.
But the US, outside Liberia, had almost no involvement in Africa, the middle east or
Re: (Score:3)
The US didn't create Israel, the British and French did.
The Balfour Declaration [wikipedia.org] notwithstanding, the foundation of Israel was contrary to Britsh foreign policy at the time, hence this [wikipedia.org].
The perfect example of this is Rwanda where the Tutsi's were put in control under British rule and then subjugated the larger Hutu population.
Belgian, not British.
Since the start of the cold war the US has interfered in nations world wide
This makes for interesting reading: US foreign jaunts [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:3)
The problem with ISIS is that it rejects the political divisions
The problem with ISIS is that they are a brutal regime and no one likes them except themselves. Furthermore, one of their stated goals is that they want to destroy the US. Note that this is also the primary problem with Iran as well: I don't want anyone who has a holiday for "death to America" to get nuclear weapons (even if it's the fault of the US they have a holiday for that).
The reason Obama sent us to war in Iraq is because the Kurds have spent decades building up government lobbying programs around
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Learn to converse.....saying that someone's opinions are garnered from propaganda gets little done, especially if you don't know where the opinions came from. If you disagree with a specific point, now THAT would be interesting.
Re: (Score:2)
-your assertion that the 'kurd lobby' drives international geopolitics (not sure where you get this whopper from) - your assertion that the U.S. didnt get involved in syria - your assertion that assad used WMDs (debunked ages ago no less.. do you also think we found WMDs in iraq?) - your whole 'mainland attack' notion.
sigh.
Re: (Score:2)
-your assertion that the 'kurd lobby' drives international geopolitics
Start here [foreignpolicy.com]. Kurdistan doesn't drive international geopolitics, they lobby to get their little piece of it.
your assertion that the U.S. didnt get involved in syria
If you'd like me to clarify, it was a A reference to this event. I don't know if you remember those events. Putin managed to solve it without the US using violence. Obama very clearly did not want to get any more involved in Syria.
your whole 'mainland attack' notion.
What are you saying here, do you think both of the world trade center attacks were a conspiracy theory or something?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
you don't learn truth by hoping to find 'the one website/newspaper/person' to tell the truth. you arrive at the truth (or at least, closer to the truth) by asking questions and not accept
Re: (Score:2)
And finally, while i recognize that me mentioning this will probably result in you dismissing anything i say out of hand (if you haven't done so already), regarding your 'homeland' comments/questions... why is there a massive collection of architects and engineers that claim that the official 9/11 story is entirely logically inconsistent and requiring the believer to disregard things like basic laws of physics?
Ok, yeah, that's where you completely went of the rails lol....
"Cui Bono?" is a good place to begin.
A better place to begin is by gathering information. The more information you have, the easier it will be to draw good conclusions. Otherwise you are stuck asking questions like, "why else would they do it?"
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Furthermore, one of their stated goals is that they want to destroy the US.
You have that backwards. The US wants to destroy ISIS. Even if some ISIS spokesman was accurately translated as aiming to destroy the US, how could anyone possibly take it seriously? Similar absurd claims were made about Al Qaeda, when bin Laden just wanted Americans out of Saudi Arabia, and the middle east generally.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if some ISIS spokesman was accurately translated as aiming to destroy the US, how could anyone possibly take it seriously?
I think your point is that ISIS couldn't possibly reach their goal of destroying the US. Do you really think this matters? If a group is succeeding in attacking and killing people America, don't you consider that a problem?
Re: (Score:2)
It's as stupid as suggesting that giving support to homeless people encourages more people to be homeless.
Poor comparison. Homelessness is mostly involuntary. While hostage taking may be an act of desperation, it is a choice with an expected outcome. If you consistently refuse to negotiate with hostage takers, then only the most desperate will take hostages. If you consistently negotiate with hostage takers, you are as much as saying that hostage taking is a viable strategy - you just have to find the right target, demand something not too outrageous etc.
Perhaps you can explain how this reasoning is 'stupid'.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I have a couple of issues with your post - firstly you seem to think that there was never a communist threat. As a Western European I am quite glad that communism never came further west than it managed. Secondly, what you call "controversial" in your last paragraph I call stupid, and not too dissimilar to appeasement or Dane-Geld: (The following is not Kipling's best but the idea is important.)
It is always a temptation to an armed and agile nation
To call upon a neighbour and to say: --
"We in
Re: (Score:2)
you seem to think that there was never a communist threat. As a Western European I am quite glad that communism never came further west than it managed.
First of all, it wasn't "communism," it was Soviet expansionism. And the USSR wasn't even vaguely socialist, let alone communist.
Re: (Score:1)
Well, other than the state ownership of the means of production, being ruled by a Communist party, the mandatory classes on Marxism, trying to stamp out bourgeois values and religion, you almost have a point.
Re:lets pump the brakes here and analyze. (Score:4, Informative)
When the colonists rebelled against British rule in 1776, American ships lost British Royal Navy protection. A Revolutionary-War era alliance with France offered French protection to US ships, but it expired in 1783. Immediately US ships came under attack and in October 1784 the American trader “Betsey” was taken by Moroccan forces. This was followed with Algerians and Libyans (Tripolitans) capturing two more US ships in 1785.
Lacking the ability to project US naval force in the Mediterranean, America tried appeasement. In 1784, Congress agreed to fund tributes and ransoms in order to rescue US ships and buy the freedom of enslaved US sailors.
In 1786 Thomas Jefferson, then US ambassador to France, and John Adams, then US Ambassador to Britain, met in London with Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja, the Dey’s ambassador to Britain, in an attempt to negotiate a peace treaty based on Congress’ vote of funding. The two future Presidents asked Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja for the reason for the Muslims’ hostility towards America, a nation with which they had no previous contacts. They reported that Sidi Haji Abdul Rahman Adja responsed “that it was founded on the Laws of their Prophet, that it was written in their Koran, that all nations who should not have acknowledged their authority were sinners, that it was their right and duty to make war upon them wherever they could be found, and to make slaves of all they could take as Prisoners, and that every Musselman (Muslim) who should be slain in Battle was sure to go to Paradise.”
Sound familiar?
From the halls of Montezuu-uuu-uuma (Score:2)
Is this not what the line "to the shores of tripoliiiiiiii" in the song refers to? IIRC the US navy then went and kicked the towelheads' asses. And frankly, they were asking for it.
Re:lets pump the brakes here and analyze. (Score:4, Informative)
Not only is this incorrect, but you topped it off with a bigoted assault on religion. "Palestine" was administered by the UK, not the USA, and American Jews voluntarily moved to it mostly after the 1948 independence. At the time of independence, it had nearly indefensible borders after suffering additional partitions beyond what the UK had promised. See "Transjordan" had already been partitioned for settlement by Palestinian Arabs. The West Bank, Gaza strip, and some other small areas were snipped off after WWII. Israel mostly lived with what they were given until they were attacked, repeatedly, by the Arabs who hated them. Regardless, even if you don't think Israel should have occupied any territory gained in 1948 or 1967, you can't blame it on the USA.
Re: (Score:2)
And waterboard them ... with beer!