Taliban buying children to be suicide bombers

Sounds like propaganda (baby eaters) to me.

I think I'll wait for a little corroboration before I fall for this hook, line and sinker.
 
citizenzen said:
Sounds like propaganda (baby eaters) to me.

I think I'll wait for a little corroboration before I fall for this hook, line and sinker.
Click to expand...
One can only hope it is CZ. But then I think a lot of folks couldn't conceive of the Nazi death camps until they were liberated. earl
 
I have not bothered to check the link- I think it is irresponsible of you to post such a link, when it is evident from the title of the post exactly what the article suggests...

the evil Muslims at it again, are they?

In most conflicts children become involved. Child soldiers usually do not expect to be paid, but they do usually get fed and find some sense of community in a fractured world. Children are not immune from exploitation- indeed, it is easier to foster hatred in the mind of a child than it is in an adult. Sierra Leone, Mogadishu, Rwanda- children with guns...

Throwing rocks at the soldiers in Northern Ireland? Damn those catholic evildoers filling their childrens heads with hate... Marching around the streets with your flags, and your bands? damn those orange b'stards, filling their childrens heads with hate...

children being involved in armed conflicts is not new, and nor is is a Muslim only occupation...
 
I don't think it's an (only) Muslim issue, but such use of children (IMO) should be called out and resisted whenever possible. The fact that many peoples and religions have used children in warfare and hatred doesn't make it any less deplorable, or make it any less necessary to inform the global community so that some action can be taken to protect them. The campus I was at last year had an "Invisible Children" campaign and the stories were horrific.

I fail to see why it is irresponsible to inform people of crimes against children and incite global activism to protect young people. It's not like such information says only Muslims do this. You can find campaigns and articles about child soldiers from all over the world. People need to know this happens to kids. They need to understand that suicide bombers and so on are not always willing, but can be victims as well. In some ways, this promotes empathy for one's "enemy," demonstrating that it is not a clear good vs. evil and that children can be used, brainwashed, trained to do things that are actually abusive to themselves as well as dangerous to others.
 
Francis king said:
I have not bothered to check the link- I think it is irresponsible of you to post such a link, when it is evident from the title of the post exactly what the article suggests...

the evil Muslims at it again, are they?

In most conflicts children become involved. Child soldiers usually do not expect to be paid, but they do usually get fed and find some sense of community in a fractured world. Children are not immune from exploitation- indeed, it is easier to foster hatred in the mind of a child than it is in an adult. Sierra Leone, Mogadishu, Rwanda- children with guns...

Throwing rocks at the soldiers in Northern Ireland? Damn those catholic evildoers filling their childrens heads with hate... Marching around the streets with your flags, and your bands? damn those orange b'stards, filling their childrens heads with hate...

children being involved in armed conflicts is not new, and nor is is a Muslim only occupation...
Click to expand...
Francis you didn't check the link? How irresponsible of you;):) If you had you would find out that the title of the thread was reflected in the story it is linked to which is from the Washington Post, which isn't exactly the National Enquirer, (an American reference to a tabloid). earl
 
earl said:
Francis you didn't check the link? How irresponsible of you;):) If you had you would find out that the title of the thread was reflected in the story it is linked to which is from the Washington Post, which isn't exactly the National Enquirer, (an American reference to a tabloid). earl
Click to expand...

Actually earl, a search revealed the source as the Washington Times, which may not be the National Enquirer, but is certainly not the Washington Post.

path_of_one said:
I fail to see why it is irresponsible to inform people of crimes against children and incite global activism to protect young people.
Click to expand...

It certainly isn't irresponsible to inform people about crimes against children. But in these times of shoot first, ask questions later journalism, it's imperative that we not leap in a lathered frenzy over any report we hear. All I've asked for is independent corroboration. I think we should all be smart consumers of the "news" stories that we hear these days.
 
yes, I should have checked the link- and I've just given u bad rep, too, Earl, for promulgating anti-muslim propaganda...sorry... I can't take it back...

I fired off a quick response because currently in Interfaith I am seeing a lot of this- "ooh, look what the evil Muslims are doing" and I made the assumption that Earl was jumping on the bandwagon. Sorry Earl, if that was not your intention, but the title of the post is a sensationalist one and in my opinion designed to stir up hatred.

Every war and every hatred involves children in some way. We have seventeen year olds in our UK army fighting Afghanis, and getting paid for it but hey, that's different, somehow... Not cute little eight years olds with semtex strapped to their stomachs, admittedly, but they are still child mercenaries killing people for cash. Not mature enough to vote yet but old enough to kill. How does that work again?

How about... air cadets, army cadets, sea cadets? Is this not a form of pro-war propaganda and manipulation too? Isn't it immoral to encourage young teens to see war as a recreational pursuit? It's not about killing- it's about running around in a uniform, something to do on a dull Wednesday, all cammo creme'd faces and camraderie. Rubbish. The UK and US military acts like any cult or rabid band of fundamentalists does- catch them young and you will have them for life.

As for alerting people to such and encouraging global activism- yes, a noble principle, sure, but what is the point? Nobody is going to listen and nothing will change. We do it too, the supposedly civilised nations, but we do it in a more civilised way, hidden behind the acquisition of cap badges and lessons in knot-work. Let's not pretend its not the same thing. And lets not pretend its something new.
 
Anyone seen or read 'the kite runner'?

If that was an accurate depiction of the Taliban, I contend the Taliban is not Islam, but a warped political group focused on power and control and using radical interpretations of the hadiths and teachings to their end.
 
Perhaps that is why, Wil, I never think of negative reports about the Taliban being Muslim-bashing. None of the Muslims I know support the Taliban and most see them as heretical and going against the teachings of the Quran. So when I see "Taliban does XYZ" all I think of is a radical political group, only marginally or tangentially related to Islam. Apart from that, I'm not one to judge the many on the part of the few. Just as I don't judge all Catholics based on a few abusive priests, I don't judge the billion-plus Muslims in the world based on a relatively small group of suicide bombers.

I guess I could be pessimistic and think nothing can ever be done about the use of children in war, but I refuse to be so. I have hope that committed, caring people can change the world- at least individual lives, as I have seen with what has been done with the Invisible Children campaign. And I make no exceptions for the "civilized" nations. I'm pacifist and against the tactics used in my own country for recruiting young soldiers- especially that they have targeted lower-income neighborhoods, work within the high schools, and are allowed to test high school students as a whole without parental permission. I don't target only this or that group for abusing young people by brainwashing (aka training) them into combat. I am against it in all groups.

And CZZ, I'm not saying news sources should not be checked out, but rather that earl is not irresponsible for posting a news item to be discussed. How else are people supposed to check the information out and assess it? And if it is accurate, why would it be Muslim-bashing to point out facts (unsavory ones, but if true, facts) about the Taliban? Perhaps in much of the US, people mistakenly think Islam = Taliban, but I don't and I would wager that anyone who is marginally educated about Muslims doesn't. So then is the reporter or earl responsible for what others might think, given their ignorance?
 
citizenzen said:
Actually earl, a search revealed the source as the Washington Times, which may not be the National Enquirer, but is certainly not the Washington Post.



It certainly isn't irresponsible to inform people about crimes against children. But in these times of shoot first, ask questions later journalism, it's imperative that we not leap in a lathered frenzy over any report we hear. All I've asked for is independent corroboration. I think we should all be smart consumers of the "news" stories that we hear these days.
Click to expand...
Sorry for the typo. Washington Times nevertheless not a rag.;) Actually, I first became aware of the story as a headline crawling across the TV screen on CNN. Path's point is apt. The Nazi's were ostensibly Christian, but do we assume that Christians are inately "gassers?" The thought though of pulling children into any form of organized hatred is abhorrent, whether you are talking about wars or lining up kids with their hate-filled parents to hold up signs at funerals condemning "****."earl
 
path_of_one said:
And CZZ, I'm not saying news sources should not be checked out, but rather that earl is not irresponsible for posting a news item to be discussed. How else are people supposed to check the information out and assess it? And if it is accurate, why would it be Muslim-bashing to point out facts (unsavory ones, but if true, facts) about the Taliban? Perhaps in much of the US, people mistakenly think Islam = Taliban, but I don't and I would wager that anyone who is marginally educated about Muslims doesn't. So then is the reporter or earl responsible for what others might think, given their ignorance?
Click to expand...

Just for the record, I never said earl was irresponsible or that the item should not be discussed. I merely called for corroboration. Mankind has a long history of child exploitation and it is not unreasonable to believe this is yet another case. Mankind also has a long history of using propaganda and it is likewise not unreasonable to believe that to be the case here.
 
the Taliban are actually really nice people, its just the filthy western media out to get the muslims again :eek: :rolleyes:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top