1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

  2. Click here to enter the drawing for your chance to win a Kizer 1034A1 Gingrich Bush Knife & Ka-Bar Dozier Folding Hunter, , Bladeforums.com swag or memberships!

    Be sure to read the rules before entering, then help us decide next week's giveaway by hitting the poll in that thread! Entries close at midnight, Saturday Sept 7!

    Once the entries close, we'll live stream the drawing on Sunday, Sept 8 at 5PM Eastern. Tune in to our YouTube channel TheRealBladeForums for a chance to win bonus prizes!

    Questions? Comments? Post in the discussion thread here

Pictures that the media didn't want us to see. (Very Graphic)

Discussion in 'Himalayan Imports' started by Broken Arrow, Apr 3, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Rusty

    Rusty Moderator Moderator

    Mar 8, 1999
    Well said, munk.

    Sleiman, hang around for a while and you'll see this is a very together forum. And very open if you'll be open to it. Welcome.

    As I said, my post above was a gut level one, and I noted it was inappropriate to Uncle Bill's forum. A measured response is undoubtedly in order, both here and from the troops.

    I've tried to let this thread die out. It hasn't co-operated. Maybe this should get shut down in about 24 hours. You're welcome to comment til then.
     
  2. Kismet

    Kismet

    Jan 30, 2002
    Sleiman?

    What munk said. (this most recent post.) :rolleyes:


    Kis
     
  3. sleiman

    sleiman

    18
    Apr 19, 2004
    I don't normally post on internet forums, let alone a forum on knives. I only know of the forum as a result of a friend of mine who sold me a khukhri. A damned nice blade it is too (thanks Big D :) ).

    My 'specialty' (for want of a better term) is Arabic and Islamic culture and history. Not knives. As a result, you'll probably see few posts from me. I only posted to try and counter the direction that this thread seemed to be taking. I felt that 'somebody had to...'

    Sorry for any hassles.
     
  4. Rusty

    Rusty Moderator Moderator

    Mar 8, 1999
    Fair enough.
     
  5. Yvsa

    Yvsa

    May 18, 1999
    I like what you said as well Sleiman. It's my opinion that if the regular people of the world were left alone without the political and religious BS that we could all get along just fine.:)
    You can put a bunch of kids together and no matter the difference in color they all do just great except for the usual kid stuff.:rolleyes:
     
  6. munk

    munk

    Mar 22, 2002
    Sleiman,

    I wasn't strongly interested in knives either when I found this forum. ( I think Rusty will quote the now infamous line....... )

    I hope you'll drop by. I am also assuming most of the 'shoot them down' sentiment is only expressed anger, not a plan these posters would actually do.

    There are many scientists, artists, craftsmen, linguists etc in HI forum. We could certainly use your expertise.

    welcome again,
    munk

    btw Kismet- yeppers- I doubt your world view and mine are the same.
     
  7. Mr.BadExample

    Mr.BadExample

    Sep 11, 2002
    Personally the whole usage of the word "mercenary" to dehumanize the dead is uncalled for. Most of them are ex-servicemen and not Rambo wanna-bes as the term implies.
    Of course I feel righteous anger toward the murderers cheering with burned bodies, but I feel no wrath toward the Iraqi people. Even the ones who resent our troops being there- but don't express this in violence. I think it was good to depose Saddam, even if all the WMD we find are chemicals, empty missiles, and stuff that isn't "ready in 45 minutes."
    However, I think the Iraq invasion was rushed, and we are overextended right now.
    The worst thing I think can happen is that we occupy any longer than absolutely necessary. The Vietnam "quagmire" comparisons are out of line, but I'd hate to see this resemble the Israel/Palestine mess any more than it does now.
    Long term, we must remember that Iraq is a post-WW2 construct of the British- there are Kurds, Shia, Sunni, and so on- who never wanted to live in a country together. Those who were loyal to Saddam have lost a lot, and they are fighting. Those that gained a lot- the Kurds for example- may not be peaceful (I haven't heard of much trouble in the north, but I'm not going to assume all is well) but they are at least not attacking coalition soldiers.
    Once we leave- relatively soon, hopefully- we can expect these groups to clash. The Iraqi government must be strong enough to withstand this. I also assume we will have a military base in Iraq even after we turn over the reins to this new gov't. Like Beirut and Riyadh, we can expect our presence on that soil to anger fanatics who do us harm.
     
  8. munk

    munk

    Mar 22, 2002
    I wish like hell the vast majority of Moslems would denounce the violence. I've looked through the Quran and find no place for the murder of civilians. Though I understand that to know Islam you must also know the writings around the Quran, I don't believe the current radical agenda has a place.

    These Wahhabis (sic?) used to be hated by nearly all. They were blowing up other Islamics for a hundred years. It's a shame their belief system has such sway now.



    munk
     
  9. sleiman

    sleiman

    18
    Apr 19, 2004
    Actually munk, the vast majority of Muslims DO denounce violence. I'm always somewhat curious as to why people inadvertantly assume that Muslims and Arabic people prefer 'violence' over 'peace'. There have been numerous statements from various Islamic and Arabic organisations that have denounced violence. Unfortunately, few people from the West like to report it. Usually when such statements are reported, they are buried within another report that actually focuses on violence. There is always an intermingling of violence and culture when reporting on Islam and Arabs. As if the two are somehow linked. Personally, I don't know of any other religion or culture that is so systematically reported upon in this way. If anybody is interested, I would suggest reading the late Edward Said's book, 'Covering Islam' for a greater understanding of the 'relationship' between the Western media and Islam.

    I guess munk, that the important question that needs to be asked is which violence are you talking about? As I stated earlier, there is no justification for the mutilation of dead bodies. However, the mutilations WERE denounced. Were their deaths denounced? As far as I'm aware, no they weren't but seeing as we don't know the details of the situation leading up to their deaths I'm not sure if such a 'denunciation' is even justified. Given that they were ostensibly 'military men', their deaths are not, to put it bluntly, surprising.

    One must also remember that whatever else is said, the Anglo-American coalition is the aggressor in Iraq. The coalition is also an occupying power and under international law, it is considered a basic right to resist occupation. Lofty words about bringing democracy and freedom to the Iraqi people may have some truth to them, but given the history of the West in the Middle East, surely it isn't too much of a stretch of the imagination to believe that there just may be some people in Iraq who don't believe the intent behind the words?

    If it is true that Arabs and Muslims do not wish to 'denounce violence', then perhaps this apparent 'acceptance of violence' by Arabic and Muslim people could be understood within this framework of supporting resistance.

    Just some food for thought.

    Sleiman Azizi

    PS: On a side note, one that is more appropriate to this forum, if anybody has any advice or leads on historical Arabic or 'Islamic' knives, this would be highly appreciated :)
     
  10. Ferrous Wheel

    Ferrous Wheel

    May 16, 2002
    true dat. I feel like the world left some loose ends, also when sectioning off land in Israel, Palestine. Dunno if more intervention is the answer.

    I'll concede that this is not one of those "let it clear itself up" scenarios, but how best to act? I dont' thik freedom and democracy can be forced on some folk and take...the Russians had the hardest time jiving with Capitalism in Russia...would take a generation to get it together...


    Sleiman, Welcome to the cantina. What sort of muslim blade are you looking for? The javanese Keris is essentially a Muslim knife from the Phillipines regions, and I know plenty of places to get those. Other arabic weapons can be found there as well.

    Some links:
    http://www.kriscutlery.com/sandata/Keris/index.html
    http://www.oriental-arms.com/coll.php?coll=2
    (The next link is broken, ut forumite Bill Marsh owns this business.)
    http://www.shahjahans.com/weaponry.html
    http://therionarms.com/links.shtml (check the antique and ethnographic)

    Hope this helps!

    Keith
     
  11. Yvsa

    Yvsa

    May 18, 1999
    Where's Manoucher? He hasn't been around for ages and was quite the collector as well as being very knowledgeable about Islamic Blades!!!!

    Edit:
    Sleiman, Manoucher can be found on the International Sword Forums.
    I'm not sure if this is a valid link or not but it's the one I have in my favorites file...
    http://forums.swordforum.com/forumdisplay.php?forumid=13
     
  12. munk

    munk

    Mar 22, 2002
    Sleiman; I don't inadvertantly assume Middle Eastern People's prefer violence over peace. This was your second sentence in your post to me, and though not addressed to me by name, should of perhaps been in another paragraph to prevent implication that I was one of these.

    Your statement that we are the occupying army and thus aggression towards us is justified by the people is too simple a model. Frankly, I can't think of an appropriate model. Most of Iraq is not attacking the US. What does this mean then? That those who choose to do so are justified, or should their minority status negate that? This aggression is also from outside fighters joining in from Syria and Iran. Are they justified in assisiting this minority fight the occupyers? Iran is controlled by the Ayatollas (forgive me for the spelling) there is a democratic movement in Iran, and the theocracy is in danger of being overturned. They have a vested interest in assuring there is no democracy in Iraq. Are they justified?

    Given that the world view of many in the Middle East is shaped by an extremely biased media and State aperatus, what kind of consideration towards minority public opinion in Iraq should there be?

    About our media- Recently, Bill O'Reilly has commented upon the fund rasing in US Islam mosques for radical wahhabi causes. He also alleges that mainstream Islam in the US has been largely silent about terrorist activities. Now, I have some reservations about Bill's depth into many subjects, but doesn't he have a point?

    What would you like to see in Iraq? I'd like the people to finish their own revolution and have their country back. I expect eventually both Royal families and Religious leaders to be overthrown in the Middle East and the "People" allowed to exploit themselves and their oil revenues as they see fit.

    munk
     
  13. sams

    sams

    Apr 21, 2001
    Hi sleiman, and welcome,

    In response to some very good subject matter there does need to be clarified. The Iraq war, deposing the ruler, Sadam Housein, and the people starting a new life. Unfortunately most tie the Muslim religion with political philosphy.

    The war as reported is being waged by some old guard, and many "Arabs" from neighboring countries. I guess the other countries do not want "free thinking people" making desecions for themselves. They do not want freedom for their women either. I can go on but this is a very complex issue.
     
  14. Ferrous Wheel

    Ferrous Wheel

    May 16, 2002
    complex issue indeed. I don't think Iraq has a separation of Chruch and State, and neither do other countries in the region (Israel, for ex.).

    Saddam Hussein wasn't even a Muslim. He was a socialist who admired Stalin and his "reforms."

    I too invite American Muslims to weigh in on this stuff. I'm sure like most immigrants that are 'maligned' with actions made by their previous place of residence, they've been keeping the heads down and waiting for the all clear.

    A Hindu buddy of mine from Kashmir said that the many of the Muslims there are terrorists/militants extrordinaire, and it is not safe to be out at night in the city, Especially in winter when Kashmir gets isolated by bad weather. He had a true dislike of them, and mentioned that most of India would be only too happy to remove the insurgents. (He also said that India is the sleeping giant. It takes a lot of poking, take many hits, then explodes on the scene fully committed to its actions). Developing, i'm sure...
     
  15. Dave K

    Dave K

    933
    Jul 5, 1999
    Welcome to the cantina, sleiman!

    While I of course don't agree with what you have said thus far, I must admit that I have been quite impressed by the way in which you have said it.

    You are truly the most highly literate terrorist sympathizer I have ever encountered, and I say that as a compliment.

    Please, stay and chat awhile.

    -Dave
     
  16. Ferrous Wheel

    Ferrous Wheel

    May 16, 2002
    On their own people. Terrorist bombing at police stations, school buses near blast in Basrah.

    http://apnews.myway.com/article/20040421/D8230BVO0.html

    Anybody willing to do this to their own darn sure ain't gonna care about foreigners much.

    Reminds me of the 'messages" the Maosits tried to send by attackin Nepali police stations...

    Keith
     
  17. hollowdweller

    hollowdweller

    Sep 22, 2003
    Our grocer is from Lebanon. He is a Christian. They moved to the US cause the Islamic militias in the 70's destroyed their farm and ran most of the Christians out of the area.

    All religions have their dark sides. The Dali Lama has said part of the persecution of Buddhists in Tibet was karma for the way they behaved. Of course in Christianity we had the Crusades.

    However it seems to me, and maybe it is just from the slanted reporting but that Islam for the most part has not integrated into the 20th Century.
    The Jews don't stone adulterers anymore and the Christians don't make the women set in the back of the church anymore, but it seems like a tremendous % age of Islamic thought is still back in the stone age.

    I believe this to be due to the fact that the majority of Imams are Arabs and the Arabs have the religion locked up. I know here locally the Arabs who run the mosque, which was on the ground before there were very many Islamic Arabs living here, consider muslims of difft. nationalities as not real muslims. That only the arabs can give true interpretation of Islam.

    Also an example of the stone age mentaility of Islam is the fact that when Khomeni issued the death sentence on Salmon Rushdie, our local paper interviewed worshippers at the local mosque, and the MAJORITY supported his death sentence.(Cat Stevens did too :( )These aren't illiterate camel drivers most of these guys are highly educated professionals.

    So while it may be true that the media slants coverage against Muslims and underreports positive things, in my personal observations in this area are that Islam as currently practiced has got to come a little more out of the Stone Age.
     
  18. sleiman

    sleiman

    18
    Apr 19, 2004
    Fair enough munk. My apologies. I should've taken more notice of your point about having looked through the Qur'an and discovered that there was no place for the murder of civilians. At least you looked :p


    I'm afraid that I will have to disagree with you on this one. The very fact that the Anglo-American coalition IS an OCCUPYING army means that there is going to be resistance. I'm not too sure as to how this can be "...too simple a model." By resistance, I am not referring to those Iraqis who attack their own people. I find that to be quite a...foolish thing to do. People have to live and not everybody is able to 'resist'. The phrase, "By any means necessary" doesn't necessarily have to translate into violence by everybody. In fact, it doesn't have to translate into violence at all. Unfortunately for the Iraqi people, there are some who believe (including some in the US administration) that violence is the only acceptable option. This is not too far removed from the violence inherent in the Bush doctrine of pre-emption...


    First of all, I'm not sure how you were able to infer from what I wrote that I was a 'terrorist sympathiser'. Going back over what I had written, I notice that there were some comments that denounced mutilations, praised democracy and freedom, recognised the inspiration that the political ideals of the US gave to most of the world and suggested that people had a right to resist an occupying power. I'd be interested to find out how you felt that this was in support of terrorism.

    Secondly, you said that you 'of course' didn't agree with what I wrote. Fair enough, but given what I had just wrote, I'd like to know what it was that you didn't agree with and why 'of course' you wouldn't agree with it.

    Finally, to everybody else who has commented on or read my posts, it seems that I have created a stir of sorts. To be honest, I actually feel like I've intruded onto someone else's turf. After all, this is a forum about knives and not international relations. If you would like this thread to die off and return to the topic of knives, then by all means feel free to PM me instead.

    Sleiman

    PS: Thanks for the leads on Arabic and Islamic knives. Much appreciated :)
     
  19. munk

    munk

    Mar 22, 2002
    Sleiman, you haven't intruded or hijacked anything. This forum is not like other forums. I urge you to stick around and find out why.

    Though you do not think those that today blew up kindergartners in Iraq rational, or probably their intended targets, Iraqi police, what violence towards the Coalition is rational in your estimatioin? I still hold 'occupying army and resistance too simple a model. You haven't answered this question- if 85% of Iraq is pleased we're there (but wants us to go home soon) why should the minority be allowed to undermine the progress the majority of Iraqis see in our 'occupation"?

    Technically, of course, you are correct. A foriegn army uninvited are 'occupyers" Lets make an example removed from this. Let's make a nation with atomic weapons that wishes to destroy the Earth. The people of the nation are frightened and coerced into going along with the brutal Government, but really do not wish to die in nuclear catastrophy. The World does not wish to die in a nuclear catastrophy either, and sends in an army of 'occupyiers' The majority of the population is pleased the government is overthrown, happy their nation is getting much needed help, but wary of the occupyiers because of the controlled media prior to the the 'invasion'. A small number of people fight the occupiers. Are they justified?

    In Iraq today I don't know of many 'justified' attacks against the coalition. Read the first hand account in another thread. Your Patriots are using civilian shields, bombing their own people, and are aided by foreign interests.

    munk
     
  20. hollowdweller

    hollowdweller

    Sep 22, 2003
    In response to the recent Saudi blast:

    "‘A dastardly criminal act’
    In an interview with the Saudi TV station Al-Ekhbaria, a leading Saudi cleric denounced the bombing.

    “How can they make these dastardly acts bring them closer to God?” Sheik Abdullah Al-Mutlaq said, apparently alluding to Islamic militants who are blamed for terrorist attacks in the kingdom.
    "

    So there's somebody Islamic condemning the violence.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page