Prosecutors: Pete Seda was well aware he was helping fund Chechen jihadists

@Gravenimage: And yet he's funding Jihad. I'd like to know just what "Pete's" definition of "terrorism" and "evil" might be.
------------------------------------------------------------
Re Definition: "evil", "terrorism": Reference: Bill Clinton, "sex", "is".
Slippery Pete, meet Slick Willie.

Yeah.

"Peace activist" = 'Jihadist'.

Like those 'peace activists' on board the Mavi Marmara, waving iron bars and great big knives.

Spreading the 'peace' of Islam, which is submission/ enslavement.

http://www.jihadwatch.org/2006/07/islamic-dictionary-for-infidels.html

Islamic Dictionary for Infidels

Excerpt -

'"Peace" in Islam equals submission to the will of Allah through his divine and eternal law, sharia.

'The absence of sharia is the absence of peace.

'Bassam Tibi explains:

- "First, both sides should acknowledge candidly that although they might use identical terms these mean different things to each of them.

- "The word 'peace,' for example, implies to a Muslim the extension of the Dar al-Islam – or 'House of Islam' – to the entire world," explained Tibi...

'According to Tibi, the quest of converting the entire world to Islam is an immutable fixture of the Muslim worldview.

'Only if this task is accomplished, if the world has become a "Dar al-Islam," will it also be a "Dar a-Salam," or a house of peace."...

'According to scholar Bassam Tibi,

- "at its core, Islam is a religious mission to all humanity. Muslims are religiously obliged to disseminate the Islamic faith throughout the world. "We have sent you forth to all mankind" (Q. 34:28).

- 'If non-Muslims submit to conversion or subjugation, this call (da'wa) can be pursued peacefully.

- If they do not, Muslims are obliged to wage war against them.

- In Islam, peace requires that non-Muslims submit to the call of Islam, either by converting or by accepting the status of a religious minority (dhimmi) and paying the imposed poll tax, jizya."'...

'According to Tibi,

- "world peace, the final stage of the da'wa (call to embrace Islam), is reached only with the conversion or submission of all mankind to Islam…

- "Muslims believe that expansion through war is not aggression but a fulfillment of the Qur'anic command to spread Islam as a way to peace.

- The resort to force to disseminate Islam is not war (harb), a word that is used only to describe the use of force by non-Muslims.

- “Islamic wars are not hurub (the plural of harb) but rather futuhat, acts of "opening" the world to Islam and expressing Islamic jihad.

- “Relations between dar al-Islam, the home of peace, and dar al-harb, the world of unbelievers, nevertheless take place in a state of war, according to the Qur'an and to the authoritative commentaries of Islamic jurists.

- Unbelievers who stand in the way, creating obstacles for the da'wa, are blamed for this state of war,

- for the da'wa can be pursued peacefully if others submit to it.

- In other words, those who resist Islam cause wars and are responsible for them.

- Only when Muslim power is weak is "temporary truce" (hudna) allowed (Islamic jurists differ on the definition of "temporary")."

END EXCERPT.

Given that Islam defines 'peace' in the way that Bassam Tibi describes, this Chechen Muslim tax fraud, money launderer and supplier of arms for the Jihad against (secular and Christian) Russia, is indeed a 'peace activist'.

He is striving - i.e. waging jihad - to achieve the 'peace' of Islam for Chechnya, that is, he wishes, as a preliminary aim, to Islamise that chunk of territory, which will then in due time become a springboard for further attacks deeper into non-Muslim Russia.

I have prepared a brief history about Russia and Islam for you in our previous discussion, since you do not know much about Russia's dabbling in encouraging muslim uprisings in other countries.

Agreed. Anyone who supports the mass murderers at Beslan deserves nothing less than the max. They killed school children. Animals.

you insult animials when compare muslims to them. l would think islamists are monsters, human monsters that is! they are the worst kinds, animals usually only kill to eat, not for any other reason. weasels are one of the few who will kill for the thrill, so the pious muslims are closests to the weasel.

While I feel like I am wasting my time by replying to your Chinese propaganda, here are some points.

1.Cossacs raping Jewish woman doring the Tzars in the 1800??? Where? When? When did imperial troops EVER took part in the pogroms??? I can show you a lot of examples when Cossaks restored order and arrested pogromists on the other hand. Dispite strong antisemitism (that wasnt stronger among Orthodox then among Catholics but just lasted longer in Russia because secularisation came later and because of a low education of the masses (If we speak about pogroms we are speaking about "Ukrainian" or "Moldavian" (Romanian) masses here since there were very few Jews in what is now called the Russian federation)) among the elite no single historian could find one pogrom organized by the emperor or his government, often local oficials didnt protect the Jews, but this dosnt mean that it wasnt a crime to atack a Jew. The most brutal pogrom in the Imperial era was Kishenew 1903 (43 dead and 495 wonded (8 of them died from their wonds). Since the police of the city didnt interfere (a military unit ended the pogrom) the (clearly antisemitic) Emperor ordered the governeur of Bessarabia and the police chief of Kichenef fired. 800 people were arrested, 664 of them had to pay money for destroyed property or were subjected to imprisonment for up to a jear. 25 people were subjected to imprisoments from 4 to 7 years. Even the extremly antisemitic Alexander 3 (who according to memoires secretly (when he was drunk) said to a friend that he actualy likes it when Jews are beaten, proclaimed that thous who take part in pogroms must be punished and lifes and property protected. Most pogroms hapened in the unruly time of the revolution of 1905-1906, afterwards not a single pogrom hapened (after in 1911 prime minester Stolypin was assasinated by the socialist Mordehai Bogrov (who was ethnicly jewish). Nationalistic groups tryed to use this as a reason for a pogrom, but the new prime minister had Cossak regiments sent to the towns were pogroms had to hapen and no pogroms hapened.
The only situation were Cossaks raped Jewish woman was during the civil war (and in this time the majority of the killings in pogroms (70%) were from 50000 up to 200000 Jews were killed was done by barbaric Ukrainian peasants (despite the fact that the Ukrainian nationalist government under Petlura/Vinichenko) forbade it. Denikins Whites were responsible for around 18% of the pogrom dead and in this time Cossaks realy raped jewish woman (after Denikin (himself no frind of Jews) was told about it by his chief of staff Lt.General Romanovskiy he declared that "This animals rapists have to be hanged on the spot". Dispite orders from Denikin pogroms hapened because his limited controll over his field commanders and rampant anti semetism nourished by the fact that there were so many ethnical Jews among the Bolshevik leadership and in the Red army (there were seperate Jewish regiments in the Red army were up to 200000 Jews served). Even the very pro Jewish Bolsheviks couldnt prevent that the more independant peasent field commanders (like Budennyj and his 1st rider army and Chapaev and his 25 Riflemen Division) slaughtered Jews to the thousands and are responsible for 12% of the pogrom deaths. No government in Russia aproved the killing of Jews (like no Pope during the Middle ages did) it was the barbarity of superstitious and uneducated masses (who remained "medieval" in Russi much longer then in Europe, that created pogroms. (All numbers are from Jewish historians)

What you say about Russias policy in China and the Muslim world can be said about all European powers at this time.

And no, the USA was the most Jew friendly country in the world around 1900 and had a strong Jewish lobby.

And the Chinese Muslims are too weak (and will soon disapear in the Han ocean) to be a threat, China is in the long term a greater threat to the Christian world then even the Muslim hordes and I believe that China is using the Muslim hordes as a destabilizing factor to weaken the Christian world, since Chinese have the people to collonize land and no scruple whatsoever to use massive force, they will quickly gain controll over the Muslim world if no civilized great power stands in their way (since muslim armys are a joke on the field and Muslim leader will submitt to naked strength and will be willing to rewrite their Hadith a thousand times once faced with anihilation). Muslims are only barbaric forces without unity and organisation, the real "Great game" for the world (and if the World still remains dominated by Europeans or not) will be between the USA and China (since Russia is dying, India just cant compete with China and the EU is a Joke). If the Chinese will colonize Sibiria (and they most certenly will since Russia is running towards a civile war between Muslims and Christians). It WILL become stronger then the USA and this is bad news for all European countrys. So if we can turn the Muslim horde thowards China (for now it is avoiding it while rushing towards Europeans) it would be a good thing in my opinion.

Sorry but not only Orthodox Arab Christians are anti-Israel, but also the Catholic, Monophysite and Lutheran onec. It has much more to do with Arab nationalism then with a certain confession. And sorry some Arab "Christian" traitors (whous forfathers made the scourge of Islam possible by stabbing their brothers in Christ in the back at Jarmuk)dont negate the fact that before the 14th century 80% of all fighting of the Christian world against Islam was done by Orthodox Christians, who lost their once dominating position in the Christian world in this wars.

I am supporting thous Jews who have take the side of the European world against Islam now, but I dont accsept your primitive beliefs that whats godd for Israel is good for the European world. Sorry but when Islam emerged from Arabia it got massive support from the Jews of the middle East (I must say that I understand them, If I was a pios Jew I would like Islam much more then Christianity) In Spain there were even JEWISH MILITARY UNITS that fought for the Muslims. Sorry but todays war is not only waged for the Jews, but for the survival of Christian, European civilisation, the Jews are free to pick a side!

The Syrian policy against the Caucasians was a product of Arab nationalism (that was anti-Islamic at this time). This nationalism was directed against Israel but not against the Dar el Harb as such and so of no great concern. The problem now is that the Syrian and Egyptian masses now are infected with Islamic internationalism (and so now much more tollerant of their Caukasian "brothers"). I think it is only a matter of time until the nationalists in Cairo and Damascus fall. The Israelis in the 60-70 had nothing against Islam (not a big power at this time) but fought Arabs so their accseptance of the anti-Arab Caukasians was understandeble. I personaly try to distinguish the locale aspect of a Jihad front (like Chechen Nationalism against Russia or Arab Nationalism against Israel) from the global (Dar elIslam vs Dar el Harb). In bouth cases what began as a national war, turned into a Jihad with international goals (without the national factor disapearing compleetly).

I'd quibble with you about China being able to colonize and the threat it poses to Christianity.

China is self-weakened due to the one-child policy (which disproportionately affects urban people). Its population is aging, and many who have taken advantage of its exemptions for minorities are Muslim.

I agree with you that official China hates America and the West, and is very, very cynical in its ploys and alliances. I can actually read the editorials in their newspapers (Oh, the glories of a state-controlled press! You know exactly what the government wants its people to think!). It would certainly use a US war on Iran to seize Taiwan, support reunification of Korea under Pyongyang, and weaken Japan. It certainly loves America's problems with the Islamic world (which is why I give two cheers for the Uighurs and Hui dissidents in China itself), while fearing the speed with which US forces toppled Sodom Insane (one main impetus for China's massive arms program).

But Mainland China is also facing growing political dissent, labor unrest, and a spread of Christianity (mostly in underground circles outside government control). Much of this does not get reported in the MSM out of official fears of political instability, MSM fears of the revoking of reporters' credentials, and the business world's fears of losing a growing market. But Mainland China does indeed have its weaknesses, and may well implode before it has a chance to become a colonizing power (regardless of the noise of its ultra-nationalists, a breed whom the government does not reign in).

Thats the problem with such gigantic societys, they may "implode". But the one-child policy only artificialy halts population growth, most Chinese want more, if the state removes it, well.... They can populate the (now mostly empty) Sibiria and Kazachstan. I dont even say that they have to colonize the Muslim world, just that they can easily controll it through their ruthlesness and overwhelming force. Actualy the over aging of society is a reason for China to become agressive and get land for collonisation to remove the one child policy. (and the population situation in Russia is far worse then in China, so it will "implode" much erlier and the Chinese will get Sibiria, thus removing many of their population problems)
And their population problems are nothing in comparison with Indias problems of an exploding population, of regional identity (that is much stronger then in China) and of growing religious sentiments that let the Anglo-Indian elite lossing power. India may "implode" much earlier.....

But I think that with Chinas growth rates it will soon become the worlds greatest economic power which would allow it to enter world stage as a new super power (and in contrast to the USSR that was economicly much weaker then the USA and so couldnt hold out in a long competition, China could have the economic supperiority that the USA had in the cold war), especialy if they could somhow close the qualitative technological gap that now lies between them and the West (now Russia is supplying them with technology, but it is not so good at it itself), here of course they need Taiwan with its highly educated population, with Taiwans brains China will quickly become economicly stronger then the USA (History shows that the country with the strongest economy dominates the world, when arounnd 1900, the USA becane economicly stronger then the UK, the UK still held the central financial position and dominated world trade and comerce, but in just 40 years all of this was lost to the USA).

I dont even think that a domocratic China will do much diffrence. Most of Chinas population identifie themself as members of one nation and have a quiet strong sense of cultural and national supperiority, because national minoritys are minoritys in their own lands and so cant break away like the minoritys of the USSR did.
And the economic and military power of the country will bring a democratic government to an imperial course too (dont forget, the USA is democratic but is behaving quiet agressivly in its foreign policy, as did the democratic great powers UK and France in the 19th century), the extended influence of a recourse hungry economy plus a population that feels that it deservs a dominating role in the world but dont have it will make a democratic China a diffrent kind of nation then the social-democratic European fun-societys have. If China dont breaks in a civil war, the one polar world will soon disapear and there will be again two superpowers and China will have time playing for it.
Plus it will reunifie with Taiwan.

While inner collapses of promising world power candidats often happen (how many leading economists and politians have before the 1WW predicted Russias great rise, Russia had a very quickly growing population and the most fast growing economy in the world. Education and sience did advance very quickly. But it "imploded" march 1917, right
at the end of a war that was actualy allready won (Winston Cherchil said that fate wasnt more crual with any country in the world then with Russia, its ship sunk when the harbor was allready near). But still I wouldnt place to much hope that the potentialy greatest superpower the world has ever seen, modern China will just "implode" on itself. The USA could have easily "imploded" in the 1850-1860 itself, but it survived despite great inner problems....
Fact is that it is the only REAL competitor that the European world now has, it can not only destroy but also create very good and may soon become military stronger then all of Europe combined (when they begin to develop their military in ernest).

The Islamic threat on the other hand would be easily resolved with a little more brutality from the side of the Europeans (sending immegrants home and stop all immigration for example). The experience of the 19th century shows that if Muslims have to face between perishing fighting an undefeteble force and giving up true Islam, they will chouse the second option. The Europeans lost their empires in the islamic world just after they were no longer willing to shed much blood.
The Muslim world is unorganized, technicly hoplessly backward and economicly very weak. Its many militarys are a joke. Their peoples are mostly cowerdly, unproductive and brutal and so unwilling to develop the qualitys necesary to get true power in the modern world. The Confucian people on the other hand have the necesary qualitys to stay with the Europeans on an equal footing. The only reason the barbaric Muslim hordes are a threat to us is that we dont resist them, we because of the morality that is based in our religion dont want to shead much blood. The Chineses will have no problem with it.

So to remove its only real competition in the world, the Europeans have to do all that China "implodes". Bringing its Muslims against it and so direct the forces of Jihad to China would be one such mean.

So we have a cast system in Christianity???

How could I overloock it?

And Confucianism isnt even a religion.
And in my opinion Budhism isnt either (or can there be an "atheistic religion", Gautama himself never clearly crossed the line between Agnostecism and Atheism but I think that his whole philosophy has logicly no place for a creator)

And Christianity dosnt teach that the world is inherently evil or any kind of action useless and leading to suffering.

There are hundreds of other examples how diffrent religion shape the morale of their followers differently.

And if you look on the Lamaist version of Budhism and certain aspects of Hinduism (which is not a "religion" in the western sense anyway but more a world of religions....... well you will get the picture.

And isnt it surprising you while protestant countrys developed quicklier then Catholic or Orthodox? And why now Confucian countrys develop quicklier then Hindu once? (and why all of them develop faster then Muslim countrys)? Maybe diffrent Religions see difrent things as good or bad? And please read their books and not just listen to westernized followers of this religions.

"against a secondary non-primary enemy someone might have."

Weel see in 50 years how "non-primary" China will be. It shows again how smart the Chinese leadership was by not entering the stage of big world politics but behaving neutral and wait until "the corpse of the enemy floats on the river". They surly use (and I believe will even more use in the future) the mindless Muslim hordes for their aims. But fact is fact a strong and politicly agressive China could dominate the eastern part of the Muslim world much tighter then the hated USA could ever do (from talks with Kirgyz or Tajik students their countrys are under complete economic control from the Chinese, which is not surprising if one sees how lazy this people mostly are (many of them were nomads up until 100years or so)). So China is a great threat for the Muslims, but they still mindlessly run against Israel and America. So there are logical reasons why the Muslims could be turned against China.

"As a general principle it's a mistake to try to use Muslim jihad as a weapon"

Well it worked with Stalin and Hitler who bled each other dry...

So you want an alliance with the people Republic against Islam. Be my guest try to create one....

And sorry Islam is to weak to be of any real danger for the west as long the west stand up against it it will show itself for what it is, mostly a horde of cowerdly bullies.

And if your position is so clear please show me how the morality of Hinduism is equal to the morality of Christianity.

Well of course you first have to to define what "hinduism" actualy means.....

Sorry only that Hindus dont want to conquer us and impose their order on us, have mostly the same enemys and so are natural allies dosnt mean I have to give up my religion for some Theosofic mix that you follow.

Mock on, Mock on, 'tis all in vain.
You throw the sand against the wind,
And the wind blows it back again.
And every sand becomes a Gem
Reflected in the beams divine;
Blown back, they blind the mocking Eye,
But still in Israel's paths they shine.
[William Blake, 1800-08]

"Otherwise, you will be free to have any of the other religions or none at all"

Well if all of them are principly saying the same why chouse at all?

"when the time comes"

Now I am intrigued, What "time"???