This page includes my commentary on religious terrorism, with associated links. It was prompted by the attack by religious terrorists on the World Trade Center in Manhattan, and the Pentagon on 11 Sep 01. It raises some fundamental -- and simple -- questions that should have already have had answers being implemented.
Why all of Islam -- not just the so-called extremist terrorists -- is a real threat to the world. See Why I Am Not a Muslim for a summary of reasons.
My writings are in black. Plagiarized text is in maroon, sometimes highlighted by me in red.
Go Home.
When the sacred months are over slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them. If they repent and take to prayer and pay the alms tax, let them go their way. Allah is forgiving and merciful. -- The Koran, 9.5
But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me. -- Jesus, Luke 19: 27
"The harm that theology has done is not to create cruel impulses, but to give them the sanction of what professes to be lofty ethic, and to confer an apparently sacred character upon practices which have come down from more ignorant and barbarous times." -- Bertrand Russell
It is usually when men are at their most religious that they behave with the least sense and the greatest cruelty. -- Ilka Chase
"The whole religious complexion of the modern world is due to the absence from Jerusalem of a lunatic asylum." -- Havelock Ellis
"I know of no book which has been a source of brutality and sadistic conduct, both public and private, that can compare with the Bible." -- Sir James Paget
Page contents for Religious terrorism
. . . Some simple questions about terrorism
. . . How real is religious terrorism, and is it religious?
. . . My beliefs about religion
. . . America, America, whose dagger has pierced your heart? A poem by Wayne Paulson.
. . . Prayers of the terrorists
. . . Archbishop offers a refreshing dissent re could religious terrorists go to heaven. Yes, but I might not!
. . . We need less prayer, not more
. . . The Age of Sacred Terror (RelTer25)
. . . Air India bombing ___ Anti-secular beliefs shared by terrorists and religions ___ Aviation attack
. . . Chemical and Biological Terrorism ___ Counter-terrorism organizations
. . . Countries ___ Establishing Islamic Shari'ah law worldwide ___ General links ___ Germ warfare
. . . How to build a nuclear bomb at home ___ International Criminal Court
. . . Islamic Mullahs and teachers preach murder ___ Links: Horrors
. . . Links, My religious beliefs ___ Peter Probst predicted WTC-type attack
. . . Quotes ___ Quotes about the Sep. 11 terrorism
. . . Religion is a threat to national security and sanity (FreRel20)
. . . Religion's Misguided Missiles (RelTer25)
. . . Religious claims ___ Religious terrorism ___ Religious terrorist groups ___ Rights ___ Travel warnings
. . . What If Islam Ruled America? ___ World Trade Center
Some simple questions about terrorism
In the following articles and links, I try to answer at least some of the questions that I raise below. Call me simple-minded, if you will, but some of these questions have simple and obvious answers -- answers that seem to have been overlooked by major security establishments and politicians, although some scholars in articles and books have warned about them for years, especially the major question of religious terrorism.
1. Should we pay any attention to the religious beliefs of individuals and political movements?
Yes -- if we wish to understand our potential enemies, and what motivates them.
2. Is religious belief potentially very dangerous?
Yes! Many people, especially those who are religious themselves, are reluctant to accept the obvious answer, which is a resounding yes. The reason is simple. Religious belief is, by definition, irrational. It can therefore be used to justify any action whatsoever, including good works, murder, and suicide -- especially if Paradise and martyrdom await, beckoning enticingly to the faithful.
3. Are the religious beliefs of terrorists genuine?
Yes, probably -- but that would be for a psychiatrist to answer! Why not? Who are we to decide whether someone's religious belief is genuine or not? And why would it matter? The proof is in the results: suicidal terrorism (thousands of cases of them, over many centuries), motivated in very large part by religious belief, not just political belief. I include in that list the Nazi Holocaust, which was made politically acceptable in Germany by four centuries of anti-Semitism inflicted upon Germany by Lutheran and Catholic religious leaders.
4. Are we to blame a particular religion for dangerous beliefs?
Yes! We can blame most major religions, including Christianity and Islam, for venerating sacred texts that exhort people or God to carry out murder and genocide. Their apologetics, claiming that they do not believe some of those supposedly sacred (and barbaric) sayings of Jesus or Mohammed, do not explain why we or they should believe any of them -- good or ill. See quotes atop this page.
Former heavyweight boxing champ Muhammad Ali visited the ruins of the World Trade Center on 27 Sep 01. When reporters asked how he felt about the suspects sharing his Islamic faith, Ali responded pleasantly, "How do you feel about Hitler sharing yours?" Hitler was a Roman Catholic, who was never excommunicated by the Church. He and his adoring public were greatly influenced by the virulently anti-Semitic ravings of Martin Luther and several popes, all based on the Bible.
That is not to say that we should hate Christians or Islamists in general -- only some of the beliefs of some of them. What is wrong with hating the major beliefs of Hitler and his officials, anyway? Is showing hatred toward that identifiable group a hate crime?
5. If Osama bin Laden has been known for years as being such a threat, why have we not kept track of at least where he is?
In this age, when we have the CIA, the NSA, FBI, CSIS, RCMP, ECHELON, and satellite imagery available with better than one-metre resolution (some of it on the Internet!), why have we not kept track of him and his far-scattered groups (El Qaeda)? Is it too simple to ask why we do not know his VISA card number? Maybe we should offer a reward for hackers to try to ferret it out!
6. Major security agencies in their annual reports have highlighted the danger of nuclear weapons and chemical and biological terrorism, but not suicidal plane highjacking. Why?
I thought of this possibility years ago. For a prediction from a report, which was not released to the public, see Peter Probst predicted WTC-type attack in 1994.
7. Why did not air-traffic control raise at least an alarm -- if not a request -- for immediate interception by military jet fighters? Was NORAD asleep?
8. Why is it that, on most* flights, the cockpit door is flimsy and usually unlocked?
* El Al Airlines of Israel is a welcome exception. It does not have cockpit doors -- just bullet-proof walls! It has not had a hijacking in thirty years!
9. If one can no longer carry on board a finger-nail file, can one still carry aboard one or two heavy bottles of wine (very dangerous weapons, indeed!), as we have been doing for years?
10. Why don't pilots have a video view of what is behind their cockpit door?
11. Why don't pilots carry pistols (loaded with special 'safe' bullets)?
12. Why is there not a system whereby a plane diverging dangerously off course, and without proper explanation, could be destroyed by a remote signal from air-traffic control?
One could use an on-board device (not necessarily explosive), but it would have to be well-insulated from pernicious access. That would get over the restriction of F-16 jets not being able to scramble in time for interception.
How real is religious terrorism, and is it religious?
The tragic day of 11 September 2001 will be remembered a century from now, nay -- for all centuries to come. On that day --as if I had to tell you -- planes loaded with passengers were skyjacked and were crashed into the World Trade Center in Manhattan, destroying its twin towers and nearby towers completely, and into the Pentagon in Washington, inflicting massive damage. The loss of life was horrendous -- exceeding that of the Day of Infamy at Pearl harbor by at least a factor of two. As of 18 Sep 01, there are about 4,972 missing. Even worse (or, better, from the terrorist' point of view), the attacks by the three planes were timed for maximum coverage by all major TV and radio networks. One can, even now, days later, still view again those images of horror -- in slow motion, and from every angle -- as if one had to remind oneself that it really did happen. As if it were but a surrealistic nightmare caught in an endless loop in slow motion, reflecting off the many mirrors aimed at us by the media.
Truly, a dagger has been struck at the heart of America -- and at the heart of the free world. Who unsheathed that dagger? What motivates them? What is the ultimate aim of such terrorism? How could it have been prevented?
My impression of this barbaric attack on Homeland USA is set out in my poem below --
America, America, whose dagger has pierced your heart?
Who are the terrorists?
I am not the one who can answer the first question. At least 4,000 agents of the FBI, and others in many organizations, are investigating as to who did it -- with unprecedented diligence and public support, I am sure. As of 15 Sep 01, at least one arrest has been made, and hundreds of leads -- spreading outward in many tangled connections -- are being investigated.
I cannot qualify to report on such progress, but might add a key update from time to time. My primary interest is in the remaining questions.
What motivates suicidal terrorists?
I present the following assumptions:
1. The attack on the WTC was carried out by one or more groups associated with Usama bin Laden, or some such similar group.
2. The organization for which they worked is located in a country or countries dominated by an Islamic religion and culture.
3. They were religious people holding beliefs based on the Koran.
4. A key impetus in their wish to commit suicide in this way was their belief that their deaths in this manner would be rewarded by their immediate entry into heaven.
5. The terrorists who took over control of the jet planes were motivated by their devout, and probably fanatic, religious faith that -- at least in their minds -- justified their suicides in the pursuit of what they considered to be a greater good for their own society, and possibly for the world as a whole.
6. They sought to help overthrow Western democratic society as a whole, with the ultimate aim of replacing its governance with theocratic control based on their interpretation that the Koran not only desires, but requires that, the governance of people requires the inextricable union of political and religious ideas and power, based on the Koran. In other words, they believe that all societies should be governed by Islamic theocratic dictatorships. They view Western democratic societies as declining in religious belief and observance, and declining in ethical behavior and standards in general.
For purposes of this article, it matters not whether the first assumption is true or not. Its truth or falsity is irrelevant to the remainder of this article. For now, I shall assume that the remaining assumptions 2 to 6 are true, and will provide some justification for them.
I am in a hurry to get at least some of this information onto my Web site, so the rest of this article is sketchy for now. I will flesh it out later.
I had better point out from the outset that I am not a religious believer, although I view the subject of religion to be very important and interesting. For want of a label, I hover somewhere between being an agnostic and an atheist. That is, I do not believe in any kind of a god. See My religious beliefs for details.
Can religious faith motivate bad actions as well as good ones?
Some people may have trouble with the concept that suicidal terrorists who kill innocent people could be motivated by sincere religious belief. If even a skeptic such as I am happy to acknowledge that the good works of a Good Samaritan are motivated by sincere religious belief, why are we so reluctant to admit that some bad works are also motivated by sincere religious beliefs?
In order to pursue this question, let us consider some quotations from sacred texts, major religious leaders, and some critics.
We may define "faith" as the firm belief in something for which there is no evidence. Where there is evidence, no one speaks of "faith." We do not speak of faith that two and two are four or that the earth is round. We only speak of faith when we wish to substitute emotion for evidence. The substitution of emotion for evidence is apt to lead to strife, since different groups substitute different emotions. -- Bertrand Russell
There is something feeble and a little contemptible about a man who cannot face the perils of life without the help of comfortable myths. Almost inevitably, some part of him is aware that they are myths, and that he believes them only because they are comforting. But he dares not face this thought! Moreover, since he is aware, however dimly, that his opinions are not rational, he becomes furious when they are disputed. -- Bertrand Russell
For purposes of discussing religious belief, we might as well assume that the following terms are all synonymous: faith, belief, irrational belief, and emotion. We already have a basis for people to disagree in the meaning of their faiths -- even on a fundamental issue.
The theory that you should always treat the religious convictions of other people with respect finds no support in the Gospels. -- Arnold Lunn
I would say, instead of the above (supported by hundreds of exhortations in the Bible and the Koran):
The Gospels state that not only should you not respect the convictions of those who believe differently, you should totally despise those people and their beliefs, and do as God would do -- murder them.
If you talk to God, you're praying; if God talks to you, you have schizophrenia. -- Thomas Szasz
Man is a credulous animal, and must believe something; in the absence of good grounds for belief, he will be satisfied with bad ones. -- Bertrand Russell
The Old Testament of the Bible reads like a horror story of a God who commits mass murder, racial discrimination, and genocide. We are told to abandon reason, and to believe arbitrary commandments of a cruel dictator. For many more of my comments to this effect, see Articles by Wayne. But, you do not have to take only my word for it. Consider the following:
The most heinous and the most cruel crimes of which history has record have been committed under the cover of religion or equally noble motives." -- Mohandas Gandhi
"The most detestable wickedness, the most horrid cruelties, and the greatest miseries that have afflicted the human race have had their origin in this thing called revelation, or revealed religion." -- Thomas Paine
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction." -- Blaise Pascal
"One is often told that it is a very wrong thing to attack religion, because religion makes men virtuous. So I am told; I have not noticed it. . . . You find this curious fact, that the more intense has been the religion of any period and the more profound has been the dogmatic belief, the greater has been the cruelty and the worse has been the state of affairs." -- Bertrand Russell
Further to the above, see churchgoing.
Let us now consider some statements by renowned leaders of several religions -- leaders who had the almost universal allegiance of the populations within their influence and control (sometimes dictatorial control!).
Martin Luther was the German leader of the Protestant Revolution, founder of Lutheranism, Protestant theologian, and was behind much of Protestant theology. An examination of some of his quotes makes it quite obvious that we are not looking at a rational man. However, religious belief is, by definition, not rational.
If I had to baptise a Jew, I would take him to the bridge of the Elbe, hang a stone around his neck and push him over with the words 'I baptise thee in the name of Abraham'. -- Martin Luther, Hitler's Spiritual Ancestor by Peter F. Weiner (1985, Gustav Broukal Press)
For other quotes by him, see Quotes by Luther.
Surely, I thought, such beliefs had since been repudiated by the Lutheran Church, So, about a year ago I visited the Web site of the following large, respected Lutheran divinity college in the Midwestern USA:
Concordia Theological Seminary, Fort Wayne: http://www.ctsfw.edu/
Their FAQ answer to that specific question was that, yes Luther had made such statements, but, although they were anti-Judaic, they were not anti-Semitic. Therefore, Luther could do no wrong. I was incredulous!
300 years of the state subsidization (continuing to today!) of such teachings in Germany laid a ready foundation for the ravings of Hitler. The Christian public loved it! I wonder why?
Hitler also benefited immensely from the following quote by a Pope and by its ramifications:
"I do further promise and declare, that I will, when opportunity presents, make and wage relentless war, secretly or openly, against all heretics, Protestants and Liberals, as I am directed to do and to extirpate and exterminate them from the face of the whole earth, and that I will spare neither sex, age nor condition and that I will hang, waste, boil, flay, strangle and bury alive these infamous heretics; rip up the stomachs and wombs of their women and crush their infants' heads against the wall, in order to annihilate forever their execrable race." -- Pope Paul III, 1576
For some justifications that have been given for religiously-motivated terrorism (including the justification for murdering innocent children) see some of the links in Religious claims below. These are not out of olden times: they are rationales being given today.
Are suicidal terrorists religious?
See Religious terrorism below.
What greater incentive could a true believer have than to act in accordance with his faith and sacrifice his life in what he believes to be a noble cause? In our tradition, we call them saints -- even if they too have murdered people in their only very slightly different cause?
The wars of religion have now landed firmly upon the shores of the USA -- a very natural target, given that it is the most secular state in the world. Several essayists have been warning of this for years, but to little avail, it appears. My thoughts -- rather dark ones -- now turn to a further study of Islam. For a start, I quote from its holy book: see slay the idolaters atop this page.
To apologists for Islam who do not agree with my criticisms (and more to follow), I offer no apologies -- just as I offer no apologies to the Christians and the Jews for the genocidal barbarities of the Bible. Do they have so little faith that they, themselves, do not believe in the Koran as written? Or, are they reading a Disneyland version of it? As for the Taliban, do they even know how to read?
In fact, it may be overly charitable to assume that murder, terrorism, and theocratic state dictatorship are not supported by the religion as a whole, called Islam, and its holy book, the Koran. See the following.
Ibn Warraq's Why I Am Not a Muslim book review: http://www.2think.org/hii/wianam.shtml 'Why I am not a Muslim' is a rare book. It is not often that one comes across Muslim apostates who are willing to openly share their views of Islam. As such, Warraq does an excellent job of demystifying Islam, and revealing it's very human origins. . . .
Warraq shows that the Koran evolved over several centuries (just like the Bible), and is filled with contradictions, absurdities and incomplete thoughts (again, just like the Bible). As for Islamic tradition and practice, Warraq shows how Muhammed simply incorporated a number of elements from Arabia's Pagan history into his 'new' religion.
But Warraq's best work is done in showing exactly how dangerous Islam really is. Beginning with Muhammed, violence, intolerance and human rights abuses have been part and parcel of Islam to this very day. This cannot be ascribed to isolated Fundamentalists, Warraq explains, but is built into the very core of the religion. Islam is Fundamentalism -- it cannot be otherwise.
This raises a thorny ethical dilemma. Freedom of religion is a part of every civilised country. Having learned their lesson from the horrors of the past, few First World governments are willing to legislate the practice of religion in any way. However, what do we do when one of these religions is antithetical to everything that Democracy stands for? Islam does not recognise the right of any other religion to exist. Murder of apostates is not only condoned, but encouraged by the Prophet. Women are treated shamefully, and accorded a status far inferior to that of Muslim men. If we are going to give Muslims the right to practise their religion free of interference, can we not expect them to accord others the same right? . . .
Lest we forget another holy book, see the quote slay them before me atop this page, by Jesus.
Another question to ask is this. Was Pope Paul III who made the dreadfully terroristic statement above (a) a leader of the Roman Catholic Church, and (b) a potential terrorist, and (c) motivated by religious belief? I say he was all three. Why should there be any controversy in stating this, and that he was a Roman Catholic? Why should there be any controversy in stating that militant Islamic fundamentalists are at least, in part, Islamic?
For more evidence of religiously motivated atrocities, see the following:
(a) Links: Horrors for a litany of 20 centuries of religiously imposed horror, against which the attack on Homeland USA pales in comparison (millions of lives vs about 6,000).
(b) Disciples of Destruction: The Religious Origins of War and Terrorism.
(c) Religion Page 80, for current atrocities underway around the world by true believers,involving the mureder and genocide of hundreds of thousands of people. That page includes the following introduction:
If you thought that the Holocaust could not happen again, think again. In 1994, in Rwanda, about 800,000 people were massacred in a genocide carried out at least in part by bishops, priests, and nuns of the Roman Catholic and other Churches, who directly helped murder people. The Church, as always, continues to shelter these accused members of the Church, and to hamper efforts to bring them to justice.
The Holocaust of Hitler occurred in the most Christian country of Europe. The genocide in Rwanda occurred in the most Christian country of Africa. About 93% of the people are Christian, of which about 63% are Roman Catholic. Coincidence? I think not! The sanctity of human life may be of paramount value to an atheist. To a Christian, the sanctity of human life is secondary to faith in an imaginary God. Is that not why the religionists worship their martyrs -- the very people who were willing to put human life (their own) forward to be desecrated, in favor of their so-called higher value: belief in God? It is for that reason that I find it almost obscene that we have so many cities named after saints. I would no more like to live in a city named Saint Paul than I would like to live in one named Saint Hitler!
See also my memo, written later: Prayers of the terrorists.
What is the ultimate aim?
The media sometimes refer to terrorists as being Islamic fundamentalists. What many experts seem to forget is that the fundamentalist views that triumphed in the Middle Ages are still in force in today's Muslim world. As the National Committee on American Foreign Policy (NCAFP) has pointed out, fundamentalism, far from being a new phenomenon, characterizes what had been called mainstream Islam since the twelfth century. Consequently, applying the adjective fundamentalist to describe "terrorist" movements may be misleading. That is why the NCAFP about fifteen years ago coined the phrase "militant Islamic fundamentalism" in order to characterize militant groups and to avoid any confusion about the necessity of distinguishing terrorism from Islam -- one of the three Abrahamic religions.
Militant Islamist organizations teach hatred of the West in general and the United States in particular. To them because Islam is the most recent and "final" message of God and because Muhammad is the "seal" (the ultimate) prophet, it supersedes both Judaism and Christianity and should rule the entire world; this verity constitutes the doctrinal basis of jihad (holy war) that allowed Arabia's Bedouins to conquer many lands, including Palestine.
It seems that the ultimate aim of militant Islamic fundamentalism is for the entire world to be ruled by a theocratic dictatorship based on the Koran and Islam. As one step toward that goal, is the desire on the part of Islam as a whole to have each Islamist work toward the goal of establishing Islamic religious law -- the Islamic Shari'ah -- to all lands, at least as applying to Muslims. See what appears to be a mainline Islamic site, and others, at: Establishing Islamic Shari'ah law worldwide. How would you like to be governed by the barbaric laws of the Koran, as set out by a serial murderer named Mohammed in the sixth century? Tolerate Islam too much, and you might be, some day! Islam and fundamentalist Islam are one and the same thing -- unchanged in their barbarism in fourteen centuries.
For very incisive articles detailing the above, see National Committee on American Foreign Policy and Religious terrorism.
It is not only some Islamists who decry their perceived depravity and wrong beliefs of the West, see Westboro Baptist Church for an example of similar forms of virulent hatred from some Christians -- including, in the latter case, a depraved hymn blaming America for the disaster at the World Trade Center -- saying that God did it, just as the Scriptures would have it!
Some of my first thoughts about the recent attack
I shall set out some of my first thoughts about the recent attack,
Some of my first thoughts about this horrific tragedy are available at the following:
(a) CBC letters to Cross-Country Checkup, CBC Radio 1, 16 Sep 01. (To: checkup@toronto.cbc.ca)
(b) ABC TV Nightline Message board (see Abcnews.com Message Boards: http://boards.go.com/cgi/abcnews/request.dll?LIST&room=nightline), under my alias, waynerp, in the following postings:
10:59 PM Sep 13 waynerp ... Re: The true enemy (http://boards.abcnews.go.com/cgi/abcnews/request.dll?MESSAGE&room=nightline&id=2299)
4:59 PM, Sep 12 waynerp ... Are skyjackers cowards? (http://boards.go.com/cgi/abcnews/request.dll?MESSAGE&room=nightline&id=2289)
8:14 PM, Sep 11 waynerp ... How did terrorists hijack? ...
Here are copies of the above, as they might not last forever on the Net.
Are skyjackers
cowards?
Although,of course, Tuesday's (9.11.01) act of terrorism is despicable,
it seems odd to me that political leaders (including Pres. Bush
and Prime Minister Chretien) have once again, categorized its
perpetrators as being 'cowardly'. The
American HeritageŽ Dictionary of the English Language:
Fourth Edition. 2000 provides the following definition:
'coward': One who
shows ignoble fear in the face of danger or pain.
As terrible as these terrorists and their actions are, it seems
to me to be a ridiculous perversion of language to categorize
their actions as cowardly. It might
seem more reasonable to call them brave,
and despicable -- albeit brave in their
fervent faith that they will soon be in Paradise.
As an added touch of irony, these same leaders call for -- or
imply the need for -- prayer. Do
they not yet realize that it is religious faith and prayers by
these terrorists that are at the heart of their fervent and
faithful dedication to their cause? It is the main
reason why terrorists are joyfully willing to commit suicide in
what they consider a good cause (or jihad),
especially as Heaven instantly awaits them. Lest non-Moslems
think that Heaven is too extreme a notion, check out the Bible,
as well as the Koran. It is mainline,
not extremist!
Unfortunately, religious wars are not yet over -- especially in
the Middle East and Nigeria, and Ireland, and . . . The world
needs a lot less prayer, not more. The world needs fewer gods. There
is no chance for world peace until the last god has died and
become but a perverse and pernicious myth, freeing up mankind
from ridiculous and dangerous bonds of mental slavery and
superstition.
How did terrorists hijack?
How did the terrorists manage
to hijack four planes? The major news media state or imply that
the terrorists required extensive financial resources, and
probably carried guns on board.
None seemed to have asked some very simple and important
questions. Was there a solid door behind the pilot? Was it shut
and locked? Could any passenger just wander into the cockpit, tie
a shoelace around the pilot's neck, and say "Do what I
demand of you, or else!". As to weapons, what is not
considered to be a weapon is a bottle of wine. It can be a very
dangerous weapon -- whether full, as a heavy club, or empty, and
broken off at one end.
These hijackings needed only a bit of timing as to which flights
to pick, and the desire to commit suicide and go to Heaven.
High-school students could have been capable of doing it. There
is very little sophistication or resources needed, contrary to
what some security experts claim.
As to How did terrorists hijack?, I realized, even at the time, that my message was a bit simplistic -- if for no other reason than to counter the idea being promoted by the media and some experts that it would have requred tremendous expertise and resources. The terrorists would have to also know a little bit about how to use the steering wheel and the gas pedal of a Boeing 747 or the like, and to bring up menus on the screens. But they could pick up that with a few minutes of practice with a flight simulator software package available at any video store, or by reading a book of the likes of How to Steer a 747 for Dummies, or by signing up at a flight school in Florida and asking for the bilingual option: Arabic and English. It is a wonder to me why they did not also hit the Capitol Building!
A friend was critical of my emphasis upon my opinion that religious faith is a very central cause of this latest terrorism. But, what greater incentive could a true believer have than to act in accordance with his faith and sacrifice his life in what he believes to be a noble cause? In our tradition, we call them saints -- even if they too have murdered people in their only very slightly different cause?
The wars of religion have now landed firmly upon the shores of the USA -- a very natural target, given that it is the most secular state in the world. Several essayists have been warning of this for years, but to little avail, it appears. My thoughts -- rather dark ones -- now turn to a further study of Islam. For a start, I quote from its holy book: see slay the idolaters.
To apologists for Islam who do not agree with my criticisms, I offer no apologies. Do they have so little faith that they, themselves, do not believe in the Koran as written? Or, are they reading a Disneyland version of it? As for the Taliban leaders, it is estimated that their average level of schooling amounts to the equivalent of Grade 6.
The following was e-mailed to a friend on 17 Sep 01. The only hope of overcoming such terrorist problems is for our societies to remain as totally secular as possible (at least in the realm of state-supported statements and funding). Many writers to the Ottawa Citizen complained that Canada's publicly-sponsored ceremonies in support of the USA on Parliament Hill a few days ago did not contain any prayer ** service (even though religious leaders of the major faiths were honored guests). I think that the fact that the Canadian government did not endorse, present (and thereby fund), a moment of prayer is a very good thing. Prayers of any kind help support irrationality -- and, in small part, irrational (religiously inspired) terrorism. Religious terrorists have one attribute in common: they pray -- fervently, and often.
** There is an irony here, in that even Jesus was quoted in the Bible as being against praying in public. His advice was to keep it private! Canada, to its credit, is not preventing anyone from praying -- even to the 'wrong' god (unlike Saudi Arabia, for example, in which that is punishable by death). Do not bring a Rosary into that country!
Canada, itself, however, continues to subsidize religious discrimination in the form of Catholic-only separate schools in Ontario. How pleasing is that to Muslims? Does Canada officially love Catholics, and dislike Muslims, Protestants, and Jews -- or does it hate them? It has ignored at least two official complaints by the UN of Canada's violation of the UN Declaration of Human Rights, of which Canada was a signatory years ago. I have not heard the Catholic Church complain about this violation of human rights, although several other religious groups have done so -- asking that they, too, should obtain such funding. In my view, any such funding is unwarranted in a secular democracy. Remember that states such as Germany, Iran, Iraq, and Afghanistan love such mandatory funding! Remember that the recent terrorist attack was primarily an attack against secularism and differing (non-Islamic) religious views. It was an attack against the very idea of democracy, in favor of the Islamic ideal -- a theocratic Islamic dictatorship preferably, one that covers all the world, not just the barbaric Middle East.
Breaking news today (17 Sep 01). Air Canada is to call for all cockpit doors to be locked during flight. What revolutionary news! I have been trying to convince people of this absolutely obvious need for years. There is an airline that has been doing it right for years -- El Al of Israel. They do not even have cockpit doors at all. Instead, they have a separate entrance for pilots, and a sturdy bullet-proof wall behind them, impervious to sledge-hammers and crow bars! Now, if we would stop worrying so much about plastic knives from Tim Horton's, and also ban heavy wine bottles, we might become even better off. It never did make much sense to me for someone to carry a bottle of wine from Montreal to Paris, given that the wine had already been flown from Paris to Montreal a week earlier. 600 bottles of wine in the passenger area of a jet not only calls for burning many litres of fuel, it also is a very handy source of weapons for terrorists and freaked-out malcontents. It is also an almost everyday risk encountered when they fall out of overhead bins during turbulence. Of course, some say, it could not be dangerous. After all, they believe that is not called a weapon.
The terrorism that we saw happen in the USA would not have happened had we been keeping cockpit doors locked -- such a simple and obvious measure. It was obvious 30 years ago, when a skyjacker sauntered up the aisle of a US passenger jet, shot a pilot, then was overcome by the other pilot, even though he had been shot twice too. Did anyone pay attention to that pilot's advice that the doors should be locked? Maybe a committee is still working on this absolutely intellectually sophisticated question somewhere. Is this decision more complex than an ABM system design? Maybe they will write a report in five or ten years. How many more World Trade Centers can we spare?
Efforts have been underway for several years to establish The International Criminal Court (ICC), so as to be able to try people for gross violations of human rights. As of 18 July 98, the ICC has been given a limited go-ahead (by a vote of 120 to 7), despite efforts by the USA and others to undermine it. The seven who voted against were USA, China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar and Yemen. All of USA's allies voted for the ICC, and some of the nations that the United States has branded as "rogue states" are on par with the USA on this issue.
The reluctance of the USA to endorse the ICC is uderstandable, but -- in my view -- not commendable. It appears that the USA does not want to ever be in a position whereby a US citizen could be charged and judged by a court that is not under the sole jurisdiction of the USA. That is further supported by what many prominent legal experts and lawyers (and I) consider to be war crimes by the USA and its NATO allies (including Canada) in NATO's war of aggrssion against Yugoslavia. See War crimes page for extensive and detailed charges.
RCMP - AIR INDIA BOMBING DISASTER HOME PAGE: http://www.airindia.istar.ca/www_airindia_istar_ca.html
Canada's Air Force... At Home - Defending Canada - NORAD Radar Coverage: http://www.airforce.dnd.ca/airforce/eng/athome_defend/athome1c.htm Defending North America. NORAD: Radar Coverage. A number of assets are used to give the complete picture of Canada's busy skies. Foremost is the North Warning System. Eleven long-range and 36 short-range radars, along with four coastal radars provide ongoing surveillance of all airspace across the Canadian Arctic and the coasts. . . . Airborne radar coverage is provided by the USAF E-3 AWACS aircraft which augment the perimeter radar system in times of alert. AWACS aircraft can detect targets out to ranges of about 350 miles . . .
In l991, NORAD was charged with carrying out the second line of defence: Counter-drug missions. In cooperation with the US drug law enforcement agencies and the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP), CANR monitors all air traffic approaching the coast of Canada. Any aircraft that has not filed a flight plan may be directed by Canadian NORAD assets to land and be inspected by the RCMP and Customs Canada. . . .
The surveillance and control of North American airspace is divided among three regions: in Canada, the continental US and Alaska. All three regions report to NORAD's headquarters, located at Peterson Air Force Base in Colorado Springs.
The Canadian NORAD Region (CANR), headquarted in Winnipeg, covers the entire country - Canada's 10-million-square km airspace and 240,000 kms of coastline. As part of the NORAD agreement, over 100 Canadian air force personnel serve in Cheyenne Mountain at NORAD Headquarters. Similarly, US air force personnel work at Canada's nerve centre, the Canadian Sector Air Operations Control Centre (SAOCC) located at 22 Wing. . . .
Jane's Online: http://online.janes.com/ Jane's defence, transportation and security information online. Updated daily, weekly and monthly.
Chemical and Biological Terrorism
Chemical and Biological Terrorism: http://www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/eng/miscdocs/purv_e.html Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS). Biological Terrorism. Toxicity. Perhaps the principal characteristic of biological agents that could make their use attractive to terrorists is their extreme toxicity, even compared to other weapons of mass destruction. This factor has been expressed in a number of different ways:
. . . a US Army general in 1960 is reported to have estimated that just two aircraft, each carrying 10,000 pounds of biological agents over the US, could kill or incapacitate some 60 million Americans . . .
. . . Theoretically, according to one source, a single ounce of BTX (botulinal toxin) is sufficient to kill 60 million people . . .
A group of C/B experts, appearing before a UN panel in 1969, estimated 'for a large-scale operation against a civilian population, casualties might cost about $2,000 per square kilometre with conventional weapons, $800 with nuclear weapons, $600 with nerve-gas weapons, and $1 with biological weapons.' . . .
. . . everything one needs to know to build a biological weapon can be found in a public library". . . . "Terrorists with the technical sophistication of college sophomore biology majors could steal (or even purchase from research supply houses) lethal germs and from them breed batches of disease able to kill millions of people"
Included are techniques of obtaining source material (some by mail order!), preparation, delivery, and dispersal. Scary stuff!
The Center for Civilian Biodefense Studies: http://www.hopkins-biodefense.org/pages/events/csis.html Biological Weapons: National Security Threat and Public Health Emergency. Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), The Johns Hopkins University. Aug 22, 2000. . . . I also think -- and I hate to say this because I am not a fan of classification -- but I think we need to think through what we want in the open literature in this realm of science. I am very uneasy reading about how to manipulate the flu virus in a fairly simple way. . . .
Counter-terrorism organizations
Current FBI Counter-Terrorism Authority: http://www.cdt.org/policy/terrorism/cnss.FBI.auth.html . . .
Calling something a church or a religious organization does not immunize it from investigation. In fact, a number of the white supremacist groups investigated by the FBI had assumed a religious mantle, under the "Christian Identity" philosophy. The FBI investigated under the terrorism guidelines the Yahweh Church, a militant black group in Miami, and other religious groups. . . .
Terrorist Information System
The FBI has a state of the art, on-line computer database known as the Terrorist Information System containing information on suspected terrorist groups and individuals. The system has over 200,000 individuals and over 3000 organizations or enterprises. The individuals indexed include not only subjects of investigations but also known or suspected members of terrorist groups, associates, contacts, victims and witnesses. The organizations or enterprises include not only terrorist groups but also affiliated organizations or enterprises. TIS allows the FBI to rapidly retrieve information and to make links between persons, groups or events. . . .
Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence: http://www.st-and.ac.uk/academic/intrel/research/cstpv/ Dept. of International Relations, University of St Andrews, St Andrews, SCOTLAND. Prof. Paul Wilkinson, Dr Magnus Ranstorp.
Czech Security Information Service web site: http://www.bis.cz/eng/a_ismy.html a substantial part of the world has been hit or is threatened with terrorism of political and religious nature, . . . Islamic-fundamentalist terrorism, stemming from Islamic extremism, is considered to be the most dangerous. Its ideology condemns the Western political principles and system of values, and recognizes a world order based strictly on the rule of Islam as the only correct one. In the name of this ideology, Islamic fundamentalists feel justified to use violence in confronting the Western world. They increasingly strive to infiltrate the life and societies of European states. It is known, for instance, that they have tried to recruit agents from among Muslims in Bosnian refugee camps. The Balkan peninsula apparently serves as one of their marshalling grounds from where different militant groups try to cast their information and intelligence nets into Central Europe.
A serious danger for Europe is represented by the activities of radical Islamic organizations. Examples include Algerian groups whose activities reflect the precarious situation in their homeland and proceed from Algeria's historical links with France. A proof to this effect is a series of terrorist attacks in France as well as the fact that strongholds of Muslim extremists from the Armed Islamic Group (GIA) have been repeatedly exposed in Belgium. A major threat is also posed by the activities of other Islamic radical organizations, such as the Islamic Resistance Movement - HAMAS, Hezbollah and Gamaa al Islamiya. . . .
Library of Congress - Federal Research Division - Country Studies - Area Handbook Series - Israel: http://memory.loc.gov/frd/cs/iltoc.html Includes Jewish Terrorist Organizations. Extremely detailed.
Establishing Islamic Shari'ah law worldwide
See also total lack of religious freedom in Islamic countries.
Islam A Religion of Peace?: http://www.frontpagemag.com/guestcolumnists/schwartz12-11-01.htm Islamophobia By Jack Schwartz. Frontpage Magazine FrontPageMagazine.com | December 11, 2001. . . . Since Sept. 11, I have been told repeatedly by the press and politicians that Islam is a religion of peace but what I see in the news belies these assurances. I would like to be convinced that the evidence before my eyes is an aberration, a distortion of the faith by a few fanatics. But sadly a candid assessment of reality leads me to an opposite conclusion: that a significant segment of the Muslim world wishes me, my values and my society harm and is prepared to undertake or condone violent means to achieve this. . . .
Islamism is the most serious totalitarian threat to challenge the world since the fall of Communism. Like communism, its cadres form an internationale of dedicated adherents with a global support group of fellow travelers supplying money, logistics, propaganda and muscle. It is fanatic, intolerant of dissent and contemptuous of the very societies whose principles it uses to undermine them. Unlike Communism, it does not have a single headquarters but is a supranational movement, taking advantage of various host entities as the occasion warrants. Its chief venue of organization is not the union hall but the mosque. . . .
What If Islam Ruled America?: http://www.americanfriends.org/nuclear/islamRule_US_N33.html The Maccabean-Online, November 1998. ABSTRACT - The prospectus for freedom of religion and freedom of speech in the United States if Muslim activists predominate in population and force Islam as both a religion and a state in the future is outlined and discussed. The Islamic way of life is prescribed specifically and strictly in the contents of the Quran and the Hadith. Various punishments for disagreeing with these prescriptions are listed, with attribution to the sources of Islamic religious authority. The conclusion is that the threat of Islam as a dominant trend in the United States is a reality that deserves serious consideration.
Islam is more than a religion; It is a comprehensive way of life. The Quran (believed by Muslims to be God's word), and the Hadith (Mohammed's sayings as recorded by Al Bukhari), prescribe numerous regulations governing every aspect of the social, political, economical, as well as religious life. The belief that "Islam is a religion and a state" is an integral part of the Islamic religion.
The United States was built on the Bill of Rights, established by the founding fathers who came here to escape religious oppression. The Constitution gives citizens the right to express themselves as they please, to criticize the president if they believe he is wrong, to worship in the way they want and to act in any way they see appropriate as long as they don't violate the rights of others. What would happen to this freedom in an Islamic state? Would the citizens be granted the right to choose the religion they want, or would they be forced into Islam according to the Quranic verse: "If any one desires a religion other than Islam, never will it be accepted of him, and in the hereafter he will be in the ranks of those who have lost." (Surah 3:85). How about the right of a Muslim to change his own religion? Would he be given this right or would he be punished according to the apostasy rule which states that such a person should be punished by death? Mohammed said "Whoever changes his religion, kill him." Al Bukhari Vol. 9:57. . . .
One important principle in this great system is the separation of church and state. Islam, however, is built on an opposing concept, for "Islam is a religion and a state." According to Islam, the Quran is the principal source of legislation: "We have sent down to thee the book in truth, that you might judge men as guided by God." (Surah 4:105). If the Quran is the law, what are some of the rules and regulations that will be imposed? Here are just a few examples:
___ Stealing: punished by hand amputation (Surah 5:38)
___ Adultery: punished by public flogging (Surah 24:2)
___ Drinking : punished by 40 or 80 lashes (Al Bukhari 8:770)
___ Resisting Islam : punished by death, crucifixion or the cutting off of the hands and feet (Surah 5:33)
Prisons in Muslim countries are known to be centers of torture rather than rehabilitation. . . .
Mohammed says that a Muslim may not be killed if he kills a non- Muslim. "No Muslim should be killed for killing a kafir (infidel or non- Muslim). "Al Bukhari Vol. 9:50. . . .
Islam is the fastest growing religion in America. Today, the number of followers of Islam in the United States has reached 4 to 6 million. Muslims project gaining an additional one million Americans every year. It is expected that Islam will be the second largest religion in America before the turn of the century, and, it is a matter of time before Islam will become the religion of the majority. America, then will be labeled an " Islamic country ", ruled by the "Quran" and the "Hadith" or what Muslims call Sharia (The Islamic code of ethics)
The threat of Islam is real. More so than communism ever was, because with Islam, Muslim activists are willing to kill and to die for the cause of spreading their religion. This is called "Jihad," a sacred duty for all Muslims to perform.
[You could kiss most freedoms -- especially religious freedom -- goodbye! I have no apologies to make to any Islamists, unless they are willing to denounce those passages (slay the idolaters) of the Koran which advise Muslims to murder innocent Kaffirs (Infidels like me!) and advises on methods of torturing them, including chopping off fingertips! It's just as cruel as what God is reported to have done to thousands of people in that other barbaric 'sacred' book, the Bible. Why do more than two billion Christians and Muslims continue to worship gods that are reported by their own sacred scriptures to be genocidal mass-murders and torturers? It is not enough to say that people are evil. Their sacred gods --as described in their own scriptures (not just my interpretation of them) -- are also evil! I challenge anyone to inform me of a god who is loving. Obviously, the gods of the Koran and the Bible (including Jesus, who threatens to murder people (see slay them before me)) fail that criterion miserably. Let us hasten the day when it will be at least as shameful to worship such gods as it is to smoke in hospital wards! That might give peace a chance. Look around you: it is not just a few thousands of Muslims who are celebrating the terrorist attack on America -- it is millions of the devout and their Mullahs!]
Observing local laws in a non Islamic country - www.ezboard.com: http://pub24.ezboard.com/fcyberislamfrm1.showMessage?topicID=6.topic
1. The Khilafah
The Khilafah is a common leadership for all the Muslims in the world. Its role is to establish the laws of the Islamic Shari'ah and to carry the da'wa of Islam to the world. The Khilafah is also known as the Imamah, both terms have the same meaning. Several sound ahadith mention them with the same meaning, neither of the two terms has ever differed in meaning in any Shari'ah text i.e. the Qur'an or the Sunnah of the Prophet (saw), these being the only Shari'ah sources. It is not compulsory to hold to the term of Khilafah or Imamah, but rather it is compulsory to hold to the meaning of the term.
The establishment of a Khaleefah is an obligation upon all Muslims in the world. Performing this duty, like any of the duties prescribed by Allah (swt) upon the Muslims, is an urgent obligation in which there can be no choice or complacency. Negligence in performing this duty is one of the greatest sins, for which Allah (swt) punishes severely. . . .
It is wrong to make democracy as a standard for the correctness of the thoughts, or to be influenced by its concepts. Since democracy has spread in the world to the extent that its name prevailed over all popularised nations as an ideal; the oriental countries began adopting it after the Western countries adopted it, despite the difference in its meaning. Muslims as a whole have been affected by it with no difference between those who believe that the Khilafah is established by Muslims or those who believe that Allah (swt) and His Prophet (saw) have assigned the Khaleefah. Both parties reconcile their opinions to the people in the name of democracy or in the name of some of its thoughts. Therefore, we repeat the warning not to take, while studying these thoughts, any other thoughts as a criterion, particularly the thoughts of democracy. . . .
American Friends Service Committee: http://www.afsc.org/ The American Friends Service Committee (AFSC) is a Quaker organization that includes people of various faiths who are committed to social justice, peace, and humanitarian service. Its work is based on the Religious Society of Friends (Quaker) belief in the worth of every person, and faith in the power of love to overcome violence and injustice.
Amnesty International On-line human rights website: http://www.amnesty.org/
CASIS - Canadian Association for Intelligence and Security Studies: http://www.sfu.ca/igs/CASIS/ CASIS is a nonpartisan, voluntary association established in 1985. Its principal purpose is to provide informed debate in Canada on security and intelligence issues. Membership is open and currently includes academics, concerned citizens, government officials, journalists, lawyers, students, as well as former intelligence officers.. . . CASIS provides you with over 7500 links to Internet material that will help you in your research on security and intelligence topics. . . . Search engines, directories, . . .
Central Intelligence Agency: http://www.odci.gov/
Welcome to CSIS-Bienvenue au SCRS: http://www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/ Canadian Security Intelligence Service (CSIS). CSIS is a government agency dedicated to protecting the national security interests of Canada . . .
Federal Aviation Administration: http://www.faa.gov/
Federal Bureau of Investigation: http://www.fbi.gov/
FEMA BACKGROUNDER - TERRORISM: http://www.fema.gov/old97/terror.html
Global Watch: http://www.zmag.org/GlobalWatch/index.html While many global issues appear to be separate, they interrelate in complex ways.
Human Rights Watch - Defending Human Rights Worldwide: http://www.hrw.org/
Airport Magazine: http://www.airportnet.org/depts/publications/airmags/am111292/security.htm The Science of Worldwide Security. . . . El Al, as a matter of policy, does not discuss the details of its security. . . . El Al does all its own security--something the airline regards as extremely important. "It's not just put out to a company, where it's a nine-to-five job,"
International Terrorism: http://www.ict.org.il/inter_ter/frame.htm Extensive databases and links.
National Security Threats: http://www.sfu.ca/igs/CASIS/links/intel_threats_national.html 442 links, in many categories.
Terrorism Research Center: http://www.terrorism.com/terrorism/June97c.shtml This has many links and articles.
Founded in 1996, the Terrorism Research Center, Inc. (TRC) is an independent institute dedicated to the research of terrorism, information warfare, critical infrastructure protection and other issues of low-intensity political violence and gray-area phenomena. The Terrorism Research Center represents a new generation of terrorism analysis combining expertise with technology to maximize the scope, depth and impact of our research.
The TRC maintains a network of terrorism and information warfare specialists drawn from industry, government, and academia in the United States, the United Kingdom, Sweden, Argentina, France, and Australia. . . .
As a public service, the TRC operates a public web site (http://www.terrorism.com) that receives over 700,000 hits per month and is used by researchers worldwide. It is linked to by over 1400 sites on the Internet and has been cited as a source by CNN, . . .
Terrorism Research Center, Inc. Home page: http://www.terrorism.com/index.html
US Department of State - Home Page: http://www.state.gov/
http://www.villagevoice.com/issues/0138/stern.php Take a Deep Breath: The Terror of Germ Warfare. The Worst That Could Happen. by Willy Stern, The Village Voice, Week of September 19 - 25, 2001. According to several antiterrorism experts, last Tuesday's events took five-plus years to plan. Intelligence analysts assume that the next terrorist attacks are already three to four years into the planning stages. These future attacks are being developed under the assumption that U.S. security efforts will focus on protecting airports and airplanes; hence, the next wave of terror will almost certainly hit elsewhere.
The greatest terrorist threats today are biological agents.
Biological agents are easily accessible, almost impossible to detect, and extremely deadly. Listen to the words of terrorism expert Peter Probst, from a mid-1990s speech: "Only a few grams of pulmonary anthrax, which has something on the order of a 95 percent lethality rate, could take out a major government complex. Similarly, a vial of such an agent dropped from the Senate gallery could take out much of this country's leadership."
Probst, an ex-CIA employee who has spent more than two decades developing antiterrorism plans for the U.S. Department of Defense and others, says that "the terrorist weapon of the future could, at first glance, appear to be an ordinary light bulb, which, in turn, is a preferred covert delivery method for biological agents. Terrorists could take several such devices filled with pulmonary anthrax and toss them onto the tracks of the Washington Metro. The bulbs would shatter, and lethal spores would be carried throughout the system by the convection currents of passing trains. They would cling to the clothing and shoes of the subway commuters who would track it into their homes and offices. Thousands would aspirate the deadly spores. Thousands would die." . . .
If you're in the market for germs, just place an order.
White supremacist Larry Wayne Harris recently had some official-looking letterheads made, and then ordered three vials of bubonic plague from a Rockville, Maryland, laboratory. The plague samples were delivered by Federal Express. Interestingly, it's not illegal to possess bubonic plague. Harris was nonetheless caught by law enforcement officials and convicted of mail fraud for ordering the samples with fake stationery. His sentence? Eighteen months' probation. If you don't want to order the stuff already made, you can get various recipes from easily obtainable sources. When the white supremacist group known as the "Patriot's Council" wanted to get the formula for recin, another deadly biological agent, it reportedly found what it needed in a Soldier of Fortune magazine advertisement. A Soldier of Fortune spokesman, however, does not recall the incident.
Numerous experts were predicting an event similar to the suicide bombings. But you won't hear that from the Pentagon.
In testimony before the U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee in 1996, another terrorism expert, Steve Emerson, predicted last Tuesday's events with deadly accuracy. "The United States will, in my opinion, increasingly serve as a lightning rod for international terrorists who perceive the U.S. as an enemy that must be destroyed because of its inherent evil nature," Emerson testified. He also told the senators that "terrorists will attempt to carry out attacks that will generate mass casualties and fatalities." He predicted that the terrorists "will most likely target office buildings or arenas housing large civilian populations." Owing in large measures to his views, Emerson has been branded a racist and an alarmist who relies on questionable sources and shoddy research techniques. Before the September 11 bombings, he was so hard up for cash that he was cold-calling would-be donors in an effort to keep open his antiterrorism outfit, Investigative Project on Religious Extremism. But now, because of the bombings, Emerson is so much in demand that he's lucky to get two hours' sleep a night.
In the early 1990s, terrorism expert Probst coauthored an extraordinary Pentagon report, "Terror 2000: The Future Face of Terrorism," which outlined and predicted the events of last week with alarming accuracy, according to those who've obtained copies. But you can't read the report. The Pentagon never released it to the public.
How to build a nuclear bomb at home
How to Make an H-Bomb: http://my.ohio.voyager.net/~dionisio/fun/make-your-own-h-bomb.html Making and owning an H-bomb is the kind of challenge real Americans seek. Who wants to be a passive victim of nuclear war when, with a little effort, you can be an active participant? . . . Food editor Barbara Ehrenreich, investigative reporter Peter Biskind, Photographer Jane Melnick and nuclear scientist Michio Kaku were given three days to cook up a workable H-bomb. They did and we have decided to share their culinary secrets with you. . . .
Step 2: Assembling the A-Bomb
Now that you've acquired the enriched uranium, all that's left is to assemble your A-bomb. Go find a couple of stainless steel salad bowls. You also want to separate your 10 pounds of U-235 into two hunks. (Keep them apart!) The idea is to push each half your uranium into the inside of a bowl.
Take one hunk of your uranium and beat it into the inside of the first bowl. Uranium is malleable, like gold, so you should have no trouble hammering it into the bowl to get a good fit . . .
PLANS AND KITS UNLIMITED: http://www.plans-kits.com/ Plans & Kits Unlimited is the largest online supplier of plans & kits for the controversial & high tech field of Electronic Weapons, Biological, Poison & Drug Sciences, Explosive Sciences (A-bombs) and many other controversial topics.
h1Atomic Bomb Designh1: http://www.accutek.com/~moistner/nuclear1.htm Atomic Bomb Design. . . . Below is an image of the Little boy bomb dropped on Hiroshima. It was basically a uranium gun where a barometric switch fired the explosive that sent the uranium bullet careening down the barrel to impact and weld to the target uranium rings creating the critical mass required for the chain reaction. . . .
There are several links, including one to The Outlaw Laboratory, but some appear to have died!
The Basic Principle of the Atomic Bomb: http://hiroshima.tomato.nu/English/park_ma/morgue_w12.html Includes diagrams of The Hiroshima Bomb (Little Boy) and The Nagasaki Bomb(Fat Man).
Atomic Bomb: http://geraldton.lakeheadu.ca/~bgates/abomb01.html How To Build An Atomic Bomb! for Dummies* Has very detailed plans and descriptions.
Global Watch: http://www.zmag.org/GlobalWatch/ICC.html Global Watch / Media. The International Criminal Court (ICC).
The idea of the ICC is to be able to try people for gross violations of human rights, such as those committed during military conflicts . . . or during regimes like that of former Chilean leader Augusto Pinochet and be used to guarantee, independently, human rights -- including children's rights.
As of July 18, 1998 the ICC has been given the go-ahead, despite efforts by USA and others to undermine it -- although the ICC hasn't got the full powers and jurisdiction that some people had hoped for...
A lot of criticism of the ICC seems to come from the United States, the upholders of democracy, freedom etc. Surely that is what the ICC is about too... Many fear that America is trying to become more of an isolationist by appearing to refuse to take part in, or undermine, yet another international treaty... President Clinton seems to face growing pressure from the Republicans to actually oppose the ICC!
It is even more ironic when you realise that the ICC was given the vote by 120 to 7. The Seven who voted against were USA, China, Iraq, Israel, Libya, Qatar and Yemen. All of USA's allies voted for the ICC and some of the nations that the United States has branded as "rogue states" are on par with the US on this issue... (This article also gives a new meaning to rogue states!)
Go Home. ___ Go up to Page contents for Religious terrorism. ___ Go up to Religious terrorism links.
You can e-mail me at waynerp@sympatico.ca