At a funeral. This attack was no doubt intended to make the Sunnis "victorious with terror" (as Muhammad himself put it -- see Bukhari, book 4, vol. 52, no. 220).
From AP, with thanks to all who sent this in:
BAQOUBA, Iraq - A suicide bomber killed at least 30 people Wednesday at the funeral for the nephew of a Shiite politician, and 13 people were killed in other violence in Iraq, making Wednesday the deadliest day since the Dec. 15 parliamentary elections....The bombing in Muqdadiyah left tombstones covered in blood. Police said more than 100 mourners were at the cemetery for the burial of a nephew of the director of the local hospital.
Thirty-six people were wounded along with the 30 killed, said Firas al-Nida, a doctor at hospital. Muqdadiyah is about 60 miles north of Baghdad.
The director of the hospital had survived an assassination attempt on Tuesday, when his nephew was fatally wounded.
The director is also the head of the local al-Dawa party, a junior partner in the country's largest Shiite political coalition, the United Iraqi Alliance, police said.
Iraqi Prime Minister Ibrahim al-Jaafari is the head of the Dawa party.
Police Lt. Salam Hussine said the bombing was aimed at igniting a Shiite-Sunni civil war.
How will these people ever learn to settle differences if it is written in their holy book to blow each other up if they disagree on issues?
I guess you have to look no further than Palestine for your answer...
Moose
Simply amazing. (and for whom are funerals to be held ?)
One can imagine David Letterman and other fool denyers, like the denizen in Clockwork Orange having his (their) eyes taped open, held open with toothpicks, so they cannot ignore or look away from the horror, and actually commit to recognizing and doing something about it.
Like you say .....absolutely amazing that someone would want to pile agony upon agony for your enemy...this is the sunni-shite divide showing up in reality terms
These are not civilized people. These are not human beings. They are a cancer. A dead-end on the evolutionary chart. Animals don't act like this. Apes, pigs, and monkeys? They should hope they evolve so far. They prove time and again that they are incapable of joining the civilized world, despite the fervent yet tragically misguided wishes of the dhimmi West.
Once again, I pose the question that haunts my waking hours;
What is the answer to an absolutist threat, other than an absolutist solution?
"All that is required for evil to prevail is for good men to do nothing" Edmund Burke
It's not that we're doing "nothing", (the collective)we just haven't suffered enough yet to bring ourselves to accept the reality, implications, and consequences of doing the RIGHT "something".
May we find the clarity and strength in time.
Although there is ovbiously a distinction in intention between those on this website who are calling for a swift withdrawel and, say, Michael Moore, in the final analysis a swift withdrawl, regardless of intentions, would be tantamount to a defeat in the perception of the worlds Jihadists and a betrayel, not only to Britain, Poland, Italy, South Korea and other allies, but also to those in the Middle East that are putting their faith in this policy. And that includes the millions who are fighting Jihadists in Egypt, Israel, Turkey, Indonesia, and Malaysia.
The withdrawl from Vietnam is instructive regarding possible unintended consequences. After the American defeat there, communists were emboldend and took power in Afghanistan, Cambodia, and Central America. Even the Iranian revolution, which has proved disasterous for the West, might have not happened if American resolve would have been demonstrated in Vietnam.
Many on this website argue the democratization of Iraq will not protect the West. To the extent that there will always be those who follow the true teachings of the Koran and go on jihad offenses against infidels, this is true. However nationbuilding in Iraq is essential because it goes counter, and even undermines the Wahhabi system of government that Zarqawi and Zawahiri are fighting for. This is another point many on this website do not mention: the distinction between the type of Islam practiced by Zarqawi types and most others in Iraq. This does not suggest the "moderate" and "extremist" distinction but rather that some forms of Islam are more dangerous than others, and it is imperative that the less dangerous Muslims have a chance to build their country with the Wests help.
Lets say there was a war between the West and Kim Sung il in North Korea because of his weapons program. After his defeat what would be the right thing to do? First and formost it would be to prevent China from propping up another communist stooge that will enslave his people. And that means the West would have to spend money and resources to democratize the entire Korean penninsula, regardless of whether there was a well funded and bloodthirsty communist insurgency. Would a free North Korea be safer for the West than a communist North Korea? Maybe, maybe not. But the point is it would be the right thing to do, lest China step in and create another hostile communist sattelite. For similar reasons, nationbuilding in Iraq is essential.
As for those on this website that say there are more pressing problems the West should be concerned with, such as Iran and the Islamization of Europe, these are matters that can be dealt with in conjunction with the Iraq project. The West will require, to some extent, international support to deal with Iran, and confidence in American resolve will erode if the Iraq project utterly fails. In this sense Iran will be easier to deal with if Iraq becomes a reasonably stable country.
As for the threat of Eurabia, I do not see how this problem can be better addressed with an Iraqi withdrawl, as some on this website suggest, especially with the huge numbers of anti American leftists in France, Italy, and Britain. It is probably more likely that an American defeat in Iraq would legitimize those anti American leftists in Europe whose actions are helping the Islamization of Europe
Blame such mass murder on Mohamed. Mohamed advocated assassination as a tool of war, he had his followers assassinate three of his enemies. These mass murders via bombing are very cowardly and are mass assassinations. Used to be a Muhammadan assassin could only kill one at a time with a dagger in the back. With modern explosives he can kill 30 and more at a time
Question for Professors Spencer & Fitzgerald:
I've often seen things attributed to "Tabari." E.g., Tabari IX 113: “Allah permits you to shut them in separate rooms and to beat them, but not severely. If they abstain, they have the right to food and clothing. Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur’an.”
Is Tabari considered a Hadith? A Sira? Are such references made to a particular book he wrote? Is it available online (or off) in English?
There is no need to ignite a Sunni- Shiite civil war, that has been going on for over thirty years. It simply occurred away from the media. This is actually progress. Under Bathist rule, the Sunnis murdered hundreds of thousands of Shiites. Millions died in the IRan-Iraq war.
OT, but: wanted to show the kind of thing we're up against.
This link is to a site where I post my artwork. There are quite a few people there who unfortunately think like this....
Uhm. The pic was previously deleted by the staff of the site. Apologies if the link doesn't work, just in case they delete it again:
http://www.deviantart.com/deviation/27250069/
Tabari, both historian and theologian, lived in the ninth century (838-923), and was the author of a History of the Prophets and Kings (muluk), essentially a history of the world from its beginings to his, Tabari's, present (i.e., 915 A.D.), and of a Qur'anic commentary in 30 volumes (just like, yet so unlike, the llth edition of the Encyclopedia Britannica, with its 29 volumes and Index). He is regarded by Muslims as the greatest historian of the period of early Islam. Robert owns a few dozen volumes of Tabari but then he's a glutton for punishment. I'm not. So perhaps he'll see the above query and add much more.
C'mon folks, let's try to temper our approach to our Mortalist Murdering Moslem friends with some reason here.
Islam is a cult of death. To the Jihadis goes pubescent poontang upon passing. Islamic funerals are the equivalent of a Western cocktail party, but with some would-be pedophilia thrown into the mix.
So then, the Baqouba Boyz we're just livening up a death cult party with some powerful fireworks, is all.
It's party-time, like Friday afternoon in a Tehran cemetery.
This act of terrorism is brought to by the followers of the "religion of peace"!!! This is how civilized men act in a civilized world, by blowing up the ones that don't comform to your opinion/s. And here we're called pigs and monkeys by the followers of that "religion of peace". Coming from them, I'll take that as a compliment. Thanks. The fact that it was the Sunnis that carried out this terrorist act is no surprise. Besides, aren't the insurgents Sunnis? At first they wanted no part of the electorial process. Now not only are they involving themselves in the voting process, but they're using the democratic election playbook to foul up the process. By claiming voter fraud. Shades of Elections 2000 and 2004!!! And if all else fails, blow it all to Islamic hell. The Shites and the Kurds are playing by the rules. The Sunni are not. I wonder who's the political roll models for the Sunni in America? The party of Bill and Hill maybe?
t-ham says "It's not that we're doing "nothing", (the collective)we just haven't suffered enough yet to bring ourselves to accept the reality, implications, and consequences of doing the RIGHT "something"."
The trouble is, by the time we get round to doing the right "something", there won't be enough of us left to do the right "something".
And Muslims pine for a worldwide caliphate, thinking this will result in peace and bliss. LOL! You can just picture it, The Much Vaunted Worldwide Caliphate ... ta da! Except there's all these factions and groups killing the other guy because they're not Muslim enough, or they're not descended from the right Muslim, or whatever (they'd find some excuse to start killing each other). What a pathetic, hopeless, embarrassing culture. There's just nothing decent about it at all. Look at the way they're acting in their precious Gaza. Like feral gorillas on acid.
Peace ... in Islam? ROTFLMAO!
Dhimmiwatch in Canada, you say... This does not suggest the "moderate" and "extremist" distinction but rather that some forms of Islam are more dangerous than others, and it is imperative that the less dangerous Muslims have a chance to build their country with the Wests help.
Dhimmiwatch, how on earth can anyone say that there are some more dangerious than others, is that like saying one nuclear bomb only kills ten thousand and the other kills a billion, they are both made of the same stuff and they both kill.
When the Quran says the same thing to the moderates, the dangerious and the terrorist, I cannot see how you can say that some are worse than the others.. The fact is that Mohammad showed the way with his terrorising, plundering, taking of slaves, horrors and slaughterings, the quran says to honor and obey Mohammad and to follow his example, and the quran says to kill all infidel until they submit, in verse after verse in many places in the quran thus it cannot be denied that we are to be terminated.
We must stay in Iraq, if the Hamas terrorist group get into government in palastine, they intend to destroy Israel, and can you see the west letting that happen???.. no race has the right to destroy another...