Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

The killers showed no mercy: They didn't spare women and children, or even a 4-day-old baby, from their machetes. On Monday, Nigerian women wailed in the streets as a dump truck carried dozens of bodies past burned-out homes toward a mass grave.

Rubber-gloved workers pulled ever-smaller bodies from the dump truck and tossed them into the mass grave. A crowd began singing a hymn with the refrain, "Jesus said I am the way to heaven." As the grave filled, the grieving crowd sang: "Jesus, show me the way."

At least 200 people, most of them Christians, were slaughtered on Sunday, according to residents, aid groups and journalists. The local government gave a figure more than twice that amount, but offered no casualty list or other information to substantiate it.

An Associated Press reporter counted 61 corpses, 32 of them children, being buried in the mass grave in the village of Dogo Nahawa on Monday. Other victims would be buried elsewhere. At a local morgue the bodies of children, including a diaper-clad toddler, were tangled together. One appeared to have been scalped. Others had severed hands and feet.

The horrific violence comes after sectarian killings in this region in January left more than 300 dead, most of them Muslim. Some victims were shoved into sewer pits and communal wells.

Sunday's bloodshed in three mostly Christian villages appeared to be reprisal attacks, said Red Cross spokesman Robin Waubo.

Nigeria is almost evenly split between Muslims in the north and the predominantly Christian south. The recent bloodshed has been happening in central Nigeria, in towns which lie along the country's religious fault line. It is Nigeria's "middle belt," where dozens of ethnic groups vie for control of fertile lands.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100308/ap_ ... a_violence" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;


:religionsofpeace:

If only God would put ALL of them out of their misery..........

Yawn.

Africans killing each other like crazed fiends. Religion is just the latest excuse.

CID1990 wrote:Yawn.

Africans killing each other like crazed fiends. Religion is just the latest excuse.

When ISN'T religion an excuse?

mainejeff wrote:

CID1990 wrote:Yawn.

Africans killing each other like crazed fiends. Religion is just the latest excuse.

When ISN'T religion an excuse?

The Holocaust?
The mass killings by Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Saddam Husseine, and Pol pot?

mainejeff wrote:

CID1990 wrote:Yawn.

Africans killing each other like crazed fiends. Religion is just the latest excuse.

When ISN'T religion an excuse?

77 million in the case of Mao, perhaps 55 million in the case of Stalin, and 20 million each for Hitler and Lenin, all in the name of "progress," not religion.

I guess Jesus was busy elsewhere at the time.

native wrote:

mainejeff wrote:
When ISN'T religion an excuse?

77 million in the case of Mao, perhaps 55 million in the case of Stalin, and 20 million each for Hitler and Lenin, all in the name of "progress," not religion.

notice the common factor that they were all oppressive governments....

youngterrier wrote:

native wrote:
77 million in the case of Mao, perhaps 55 million in the case of Stalin, and 20 million each for Hitler and Lenin, all in the name of "progress," not religion.

notice the common factor that they were all leftist oppressive governments....

FIFY

Baldy wrote:

youngterrier wrote: notice the common factor that they were all leftist oppressive governments....

FIFY

Define "Leftist".

CID1990 wrote:Yawn.

Africans killing each other like crazed fiends. Religion is just the latest excuse.

Europeans have killed each other like crazed fiends over the centuries.
Americans have killed each other like crazed fiends ("wars" against the Indians, the "Civil" War, etc.).

Not like this is something unique to Africa.

D1B wrote:

Baldy wrote:
FIFY

Define "Leftist".

Hitler was a socialist who hated the jews.

Stalin was an atheist and a communist.

Pol Pot, Lenin, Mao? All commies.

Saddam? Perhaps not a commie but he still hated the jews and was a jack muslim which means of course that all leftitsts are Jesus hating, socialistic, anti-semitic, murderous, possible muslims.

Git yer gun D1B, our countries is being led by one right now.

LOL @ kalm - who has successfully penetrated the conk mind.

kalm wrote:

D1B wrote:
Define "Leftist".

Hitler was a socialist who hated the jews.

Stalin was an atheist and a communist.

Pol Pot, Lenin, Mao? All commies.

Saddam? Perhaps not a commie but he still hated the jews and was a jack muslim which means of course that all leftitsts are Jesus hating, socialistic, anti-semitic, murderous, possible muslims.

Git yer gun D1B, our countries is being led by one right now.

really though Hitler, Stalin and Mao were very conservative leaders, they were not "leftest" or "liberals" at all.

dgreco wrote:

kalm wrote:
Hitler was a socialist who hated the jews.

Stalin was an atheist and a communist.

Pol Pot, Lenin, Mao? All commies.

Saddam? Perhaps not a commie but he still hated the jews and was a jack muslim which means of course that all leftitsts are Jesus hating, socialistic, anti-semitic, murderous, possible muslims.

Git yer gun D1B, our countries is being led by one right now.

really though Hitler, Stalin and Mao were very conservative leaders, they were not "leftest" or "liberals" at all.

You need to read more history. The Nazi's had "socialist" printed on their jerseys. Plus, the first thing they did upon being elected was to take away the guns - just like Hilary Clinton and Eric Holder wanted to do!

JayJ79 wrote:

CID1990 wrote:Yawn.

Africans killing each other like crazed fiends. Religion is just the latest excuse.

Europeans have killed each other like crazed fiends over the centuries.
Americans have killed each other like crazed fiends ("wars" against the Indians, the "Civil" War, etc.).

150+ years ago. So you're saying Africa is just behind.

kalm wrote: You need to read more history. The Nazi's had "socialist" printed on their jerseys.

And China calls itself a Republic. Doesn't make it so.

Read Hitler's thoughts on socialists, communists, and Bolsheviks. He hated them about as much as jews. Hitler and the Nazi's came to power in response to the Bolsheviks in Russia. They are completely antithetical ideologies. Only common thread is totalitarianism.

kalm wrote:Plus, the first thing they did upon being elected was to take away the guns - just like Hilary Clinton and Eric Holder wanted to do!

More totalitarian than leftist, imo.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

kalm wrote: You need to read more history. The Nazi's had "socialist" printed on their jerseys.

And China calls itself a Republic. Doesn't make it so.

Read Hitler's thoughts on socialists, communists, and Bolsheviks. He hated them about as much as jews. Hitler and the Nazi's came to power in response to the Bolsheviks in Russia. They are completely antithetical ideologies. Only common thread is totalitarianism.

kalm wrote:Plus, the first thing they did upon being elected was to take away the guns - just like Hilary Clinton and Eric Holder wanted to do!

More totalitarian than leftist, imo.

Just a few common threads between Hitler's National Socialism and Bolshevism:

-Centralized, state-planned economy
-Take away guns from private citizens
-Promise universal health care
-Promise universal employment
-Discriminate against minorities
-Utilize slave labor/prison camps
-Espouse progressive values

The only significant difference between National Socialism and Bolshevism is that Hitler, like modern day "progressives," was willing to allow corporations to exist and even make a profit, as long as they served the state and were controlled by the state.

There are not and have never been many long term differences between leftists and authoritarians. As time progresses there become fewer and fewer short term differences.

kalm wrote:You need to read more history. The Nazi's had "socialist" printed on their jerseys. Plus, the first thing they did upon being elected was to take away the guns - just like Hilary Clinton and Eric Holder wanted to do!

Republicans used to be Democrats.....what's your point?

Skjellyfetti wrote:

kalm wrote: You need to read more history. The Nazi's had "socialist" printed on their jerseys.

And China calls itself a Republic. Doesn't make it so.

Read Hitler's thoughts on socialists, communists, and Bolsheviks. He hated them about as much as jews. Hitler and the Nazi's came to power in response to the Bolsheviks in Russia. They are completely antithetical ideologies. Only common thread is totalitarianism.

kalm wrote:Plus, the first thing they did upon being elected was to take away the guns - just like Hilary Clinton and Eric Holder wanted to do!

More totalitarian than leftist, imo.

Come on.......don't you know that CONKS are obsessed with labels rather than REALITY?

mainejeff wrote:

Skjellyfetti wrote:
And China calls itself a Republic. Doesn't make it so.

Read Hitler's thoughts on socialists, communists, and Bolsheviks. He hated them about as much as jews. Hitler and the Nazi's came to power in response to the Bolsheviks in Russia. They are completely antithetical ideologies. Only common thread is totalitarianism.



More totalitarian than leftist, imo.

Come on.......don't you know that CONKS are obsessed with labels rather than REALITY?

The leftists are the ones who apply labels and fail to count bodies, Jeff.

native wrote:
Just a few common threads between Hitler's National Socialism and Bolshevism:

-Centralized, state-planned economy
-Take away guns from private citizens
-Promise universal health care
-Promise universal employment
-Discriminate against minorities
-Utilize slave labor/prison camps
-Espouse progressive values

The only significant difference between National Socialism and Bolshevism is that Hitler, like modern day "progressives," was willing to allow corporations to exist and even make a profit, as long as they served the state and were controlled by the state.

Again, your list mainly consists of characteristics of TOTALITARIAN regimes and vague claims like "express Progressive values" (whatever that means). I agree both the Nazi's and Soviets were totalitarian/authoritarian. I think we'd already established that...... and I'm not sure how anyone would argue against it.

native wrote: There are not and have never been many long term differences between leftists and authoritarians. As time progresses there become fewer and fewer short term differences.

Extremes of either political viewpoint can manifest themselves as totalitarian on one extreme or anarchist on the other. A "leftist" isn't necessarily authoritarian. Neither is a "rightist." Extreme authoritarian liberals have produced communism. Extreme authoritarian conservatives have produced fascism. Extreme anti-authoritarian liberals are those anarchists you see causing mayem at the WTO. Extreme anti-authoritarian conservatives are the ones you see blowing up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City.

Both sides have their lunatic fringe.

Think of it not as a left vs. right with one axis.... but, a left vs. right / authoritarian vs. anti-authoritarian with two axes:



Communists would be in the top left corner. Fascists would be in the top right. I'd be somewhere in the bottom left, you'd be somewhere in the bottom right.

Skjellyfetti wrote:

native wrote:
Just a few common threads between Hitler's National Socialism and Bolshevism:

-Centralized, state-planned economy
-Take away guns from private citizens
-Promise universal health care
-Promise universal employment
-Discriminate against minorities
-Utilize slave labor/prison camps
-Espouse progressive values

The only significant difference between National Socialism and Bolshevism is that Hitler, like modern day "progressives," was willing to allow corporations to exist and even make a profit, as long as they served the state and were controlled by the state.

Again, your list mainly consists of characteristics of TOTALITARIAN regimes and vague claims like "express Progressive values" (whatever that means). I agree both the Nazi's and Soviets were totalitarian/authoritarian. I think we'd already established that...... and I'm not sure how anyone would argue against it.

native wrote: There are not and have never been many long term differences between leftists and authoritarians. As time progresses there become fewer and fewer short term differences.

Extremes of either political viewpoint can manifest themselves as totalitarian on one extreme or anarchist on the other. A "leftist" isn't necessarily authoritarian. Neither is a "rightist." Extreme authoritarian liberals have produced communism. Extreme authoritarian conservatives have produced fascism. Extreme anti-authoritarian liberals are those anarchists you see causing mayem at the WTO. Extreme anti-authoritarian conservatives are the ones you see blowing up the Federal Building in Oklahoma City.

Both sides have their lunatic fringe.

Think of it not as a left vs. right with one axis.... but, a left vs. right / authoritarian vs. anti-authoritarian with two axes:



Communists would be in the top left corner. Fascists would be in the top right. I'd be somewhere in the bottom left, you'd be somewhere in the bottom right.

Your model is popular and useful, but it is not the only paradigm and not necessarily definitve, skelly. I have read Kuhn, too.

In your response, why do you gloss over the leftist promises of universal state-sponsored healthcare and employment? Either your model is defective or you do not understand it yourself.

native wrote:
Your model is popular and useful, but it is not the only paradigm and not necessarily definitve, skelly. I have read Kuhn, too.

In your response, why do you gloss over the leftist promises of universal state-sponsored healthcare and employment? Either your model is defective or you do not understand it yourself.

Germany had state healthcare long before the Nazi's and Hitler.
http://www.deutsche-sozialversicherung. ... story.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

That's why I gloss over your shitty list.

kalm wrote:

dgreco wrote:
really though Hitler, Stalin and Mao were very conservative leaders, they were not "leftest" or "liberals" at all.

You need to read more history. The Nazi's had "socialist" printed on their jerseys. Plus, the first thing they did upon being elected was to take away the guns - just like Hilary Clinton and Eric Holder wanted to do!

First, we are using leftist as meaning liberal and progressive, which I think is a dated and stupid term anyway. So my argument is against that these leaders were not progressive liberals.

I think you need to understand history more, maybe read a little less, to better understand it. No one would consider Hitler, Stalin or Mao liberators, liberals, or leftists. We call them that because the US had to combat against communist Russia. They were totalitarian leaders who controlled their people and gave them very little rights and abilities.

Taking away guns does not mean you are a leftist it means you are regressive and oppressive which is in no way "leftist" or "liberating" or "progressive" what we call the left.

Real atheist communism would be an actual progressive movement in that it takes away all governmental control and power and has the people work in the common good. Stalin, Mao, Hitler, Castro, and Chavez are not communist or socialists they are dictators, fascists, and totalitarian leaders. Read up on how Chavez has used a multipolar world view to help oppress his people and how unlike traditional fascists who make voters disappear he makes voters appear. They are in no way progressive and are in no way leftists.