Laughable "Truce" Proposal

[ucrzymofo87]

Well well, ladies and gentlemen, it looks like Osama bin Laden wants to call it quits with the United States. Osama declares he will accept a truce if the United States offers him one, and then he will proceed to rebuild Afghanistan and Iraq. This truce comes after the United States killed three of Al Qaeda's top leaders in an airstrike in Pakistan. With the razor close call for Al Qaeda # 2, Ayman al Zawahiri, in Pakistan, this is undoubtedly a call by Osama to rally the troops in an attempt to reinvigorate Al Qaeda's flagging cause. However, using deductive reasoning, this message can be read showing that the United States is winning the war against Al Qaeda. The United States has refused to negotiate any truce with bin Laden or Al Qaeda.

Since the war on terrorism was declared on September 11, 2001, the United States government has taken extraordinary measures to liquidate Al Qaeda. The United States has gained valuable information from Abu Musab al-Zarqawi's laptop as well as disrupt terror cells in the United States, most notably in Buffalo, New York. The US government has also freezed more than $110 million in assets belonging to Al Qaeda.

Osama also says that he is planning more attacks on the United States, debunking Michael Moore's assertion that "there is no terrorist threat." Here is a quote by Osama I found amazingly interesting, "There is no defect in this solution other than preventing the flow of hundreds of billions to the influential people and war merchants in America, who supported Bush's election campaign with billions of dollars." Does this sound like a terrorist or the talking points of the Democrat party and the European socialists who oppose the war? Interesting question to ponder.

Text: 'Bin-Laden tape'
US on bin Laden tape: no negotiations
US at least seizes Zarqawi's laptop
Buffalo terror suspect admits al Qaeda training
Iraq war windfall for US companies
Bush and big business

edit: added another option (last one). read the thread for the reason why.

[Sortep]

oh jesus... here comes the can of worms... i'm gonna stay out of this one

[newbified]

Can we have a fourth option?

One where we send you?

[ucrzymofo87]

I won't go to negotiate a truce with Osama, sorry.

EDIT: Way to be open-minded, Sortep. Well done.

[Loeviz]

Well they could bring forth the white flag and then after 6 month´s Osama dies in a "random" robbery

[panasonic]

well, start negotiating, and track him down in the meantime. after that has been done....

[TheDarkness]

technically it would be better if this whole situation would be buried so i say truce. However there is a small chance that this will happen since the pride of Mr bush will not allow him to fall on his knees and offer a truce to the one man he's been hunting for all the time that he has been a president. So even though it would be better for all sides involved (in this case the whole world) i think the chances are rather small that this will become more then just wishful thinking

[Killfile]

Since I'm still waiting (along with most of the rest of this forum) for ucrzymofo to answer what he belives the agenda of "Radical Islam" to be -- I'll stay out of this for now.

Suffice it to say, once you understand two facts, first what Bin Laden's personal agenda is, and second that he is a very very very smart guy - the logic behind this offering becomes both clear, and astonishing in its well conveived brilliance.

For a terrorist asshole - this guy is one slick operator.

[ucrzymofo87]

Unless you were asleep on September 11, 2001, then you should know the goal of Radical Islam.

Edit: Osama is a genius in the sense that he knows liberal "intellectuals" will seriously consider his ridiculous proposal.

[psi29a]

Unless you were asleep on September 11, 2001, then you should know the goal of Radical Islam.

Edit: Osama is a genius in the sense that he knows liberal "intellectuals" will seriously consider his ridiculous proposal.

Your a nutter to think that.

The intellectuals know what is going on. Do you?

Killfile or vtwahoo, I think it is time to step up and explain the situation in which Osama puts the 'western world' in.

Sorry, I created a new poll option. The US government just can't call a truce to an 'movement' that has no national backing. If we do that, then it would open up a whole new can of worms. example: "Yes, we do negotiate with terrorists."

Edit by Killfile: I changed your phrasing on the second sentence, mostly to sooth my own Grammar Nazi leanings. Sorry, it was really bugging me.

[vtwahoo]

Unless you were asleep on September 11, 2001, then you should know the goal of Radical Islam.

You are REALLY good at not answering questions. I'll ask one more time: in your words what is the "cause" of Radical Islam?

You see, I know the answer. I want to see if you do.

Becuase if you think that the goal of Radical Islamists is the September 11th terrorist attacks, they've been there and done that and we have nothing left to worry about.

So...do not pass go, do not collect $200, and try again.

[Killfile]

Unless you were asleep on September 11, 2001, then you should know the goal of Radical Islam.

Edit: Osama is a genius in the sense that he knows liberal "intellectuals" will seriously consider his ridiculous proposal.

I note that - rather than answer vtwahoo's question, you chose to respond with a question that clearly demonstrates that you have no fucking clue what you're talking about. I don't mean to be harsh, but you were asked a direct question several times and were totally unable to answer it.

Since you're apparently unable to come up with a satisfactory answer, I'll tell you what it is.

It is the stated intention of Osama Bin Laden and the "nutcase" president of Iran to bring about an apocalyptic war with the Great Satan, which they believe to be the United States. They thus hope to usher in a series of "end times" events in which Islam reigns triumphant over the infidels.

The September 11th attacks were a fairly decent attempt at bringing about this war. Bush responded appropriately and with uncommon clarity by dethroning the Taliban in Afghanistan, but then he played right into Bin Laden's hands by invading Iraq.

Since then, Bin Laden has successfully manipulated the US into doing exactly what he wants. Isn't it interesting that in October of 2004, just a few weeks before the elections, Bin Laden released a tape that essentially endorsed John Kerry?

Remember - Bin Laden is a smart guy. He's not dumb enough to think that he can actually endorse a candidate and do them any good - so you've got to wonder why a guy who's being hunted by the US military stops long enough to make a campaign video... unless he thinks he can create OPPOSITION to a candidate.

Bin Laden essentially wanted to ensure that a war-hawk would stay in power because he thinks that Bush is just dumb enough to start World War III with him. By endorsing John Kerry, Bin Laden doubtless drove a HUGE number of votes to Bush.

This brings us to the present day. Bush's popularity is plummeting. Between the NSA scandal, the Abramhoff scandal, DeLay's indictment, Libby's indictment, and a host of other problems at home, Bin Laden sees a serious risk that the US will simply decide that now would be an excellent time to go home - or at least to curtail the expansion of the "War on Terror" into other Mid-East states.

Expansion and continued agitation of the US "crusade" will generate, in his opinion, a unified Islamic resistance movement; and, in a moment of Pan-Islamist glory, a single Religious Superpower will arise from the scattered and disparate states and factions that represent the modern day echoes of the Islamic Empire.

But all of this is dependent upon the United State's unwillingness to abate, compromise, or yield in the "War on Terror." Fearing such a movement within the US, Bin Laden has returned to the tactic he used in October of 2004 - endorsing the very option he most fears.

But unlike the 2004 gambit, Bin Laden has added an additional level of complexity just below the surface. While Bin Laden would surely welcome a new thrust in the War on Terror, he can also give to Al-Qaeda a pseudo-state status by assuming the ability to negotiate with the United States.

In the Grand Chess Match that is the "War on Terror," Bin Laden has begun his end game. Bush now has two choices evident to him. First, he can push back against Al Qaeda, which is exactly what Bin Laden wants, and will empower his cause further by driving recruits to his side. Secondly, Bush can take any other action and it will be interpreted as the result of an either public or private negotiation with Al Qaeda.

In either of those two cases, Bin Laden comes off stronger, more powerful, and more dangerous.

Really, the only option open to Bush is to LOUDLY state and restate that the US does not negotiate with terrorist organizations or terrorists. Unfortunately, this will serve to further push Iraqi Insurgents and strengthen both their cause and their resolve.

Bin Laden has successfully forced Bush's hand - and in doing so he's going to make the Iraq conflict even more bloody, more difficult, and more prolonged. This isn't evidence that we're winning the war - it's evidence that we're being manipulated, and by a master of propaganda, deceit, and war-craft.

It makes since that the tactic is working. After all, he was trained by the best in the business -- the American Central Intelligence Agency.

[ucrzymofo87]

I'll tell you what their goal is in their own words

"We should fully understand our religion. Fighting is a part of our religion and our Sharia [an Islamic legal code]. Those who love God and his Prophet and this religion cannot deny that. Whoever denies even a minor tenet of our religion commits the gravest sin in Islam."

"Every American man is an enemy to us."

"We are seeking to incite the (Islamic) nation to rise up to liberate its land and to (conduct) jihad (holy war) for the sake of God."

"I'm fighting so I can die a martyr and go to heaven to meet God. Our fight now is against the Americans."

"We declared jihad against the US government, because the US government is unjust, criminal and tyrannical. It has committed acts that are extremely unjust, hideous and criminal whether directly or through its support of the Israeli occupation."

"Acquiring weapons for the defense of Muslims is a religious duty. If I have indeed acquired these weapons, then I thank God for enabling me to do so. And if I seek to acquire these weapons, I am carrying out a duty. It would be a sin for Muslims not to try to possess the weapons that would prevent the infidels from inflicting harm on Muslims."

quotes curdosy of Osama bin Laden

source

From the Encyclopedia of Afghan Jihad (al-Qa'ida handbook):

"In order to gather enemy information, the Military Organization can use means such as magazines, publications, periodicals, and official printed matter. Through these means, it is possible to learn about major government events and about the news, meetings, and travel of Presidents, ministers, and commanders. Information may be:

* Names and photographs of important government personalities, police commanders, and security leaders.
* Published meetings. Through these, one can learn about major decisions and topics being discussed.
* Future meeting plans.
* Present and future enemy capabilities through current photographs of projects and strategic sites or through meetings with top officials.
* Beneficial news about the enemy's diplomacy and its present and future plans.
* Tourism news and the arrival times of foreign tourist groups.
* Advertisements about apartments for rent, vacant positions, or anything else that is useful.
* Advertisements about new and used car lots. These may be used in assassination, kidnaping, and overthrowing the government.
* Learning the enemy position on current Islamic issues (veil,beard, dedication, Jihad, ...)."

source

"If their economy is destroyed, they will be busy with their own affairs rather than enslaving the weak peoples. It is very important to concentrate on hitting the US economy through all possible means." -OBL

"The economic bleeding is continuing to date, but it requires further strikes. The young people should make an effort to look for the key pillars of the US economy. The key pillars of the enemy should be struck, God willing." - OBL

"We will also aim to continue, by the permission of Allah, the destruction of the American economy." - Ayman al-Zawahiri

"They shook America's throne and struck at the US economy in the heart, thanks to God the Almighty....Those blessed attacks, as they themselves admitted, have inflicted on the New York and other markets more than a trillion dollars in losses." - OBL

"If a Palestinian flies a plane and strikes the White House and kills Bush, his wife and his daughters, he will go to heaven. So will any Muslim who defends his faith." -Mohamed al Amir Atta

"This morning, the world heard news about the crash of the space shuttle. There is no doubt that Muslims were overjoyed because of the adversity that befell their greatest enemy. Upon hearing the news, my heart felt certain good omens that I liked to spread to my brothers." - Ali Al-Timimi, of Fairfax, VA, a primary lecturer at the Dar al Arqam Islamic Center in Falls Church, VA said upon hearing the news of the Columbia shuttle crash with an Israeli astronaut on board.

"Bush, reinforce your security measures. The Islamic nation which sent you the New York and Washington brigades has taken the firm decision to send you successive brigades to sow death and aspire to paradise." - Ayman al-Zawahiri

" "Oh, you Muslims everywhere, sever the ties of their nation, tear them apart, ruin their economy, instigate against their corporations, destroy their embassies, attack their interests, sink their ships, and shoot down their airplanes. Kill them in land, at sea, and in the air, kill them wherever you find them." -Sheikh Abdel Rahman from a US prison

You get the idea

source

Thirteen centuries ago the leaders of Byzantium and Western Europe understood the threat of militant Islam. They stopped Radical Islam by the narrowest of margins by force of arms, guaranteeing through cold steel the ascendancy of the West, at least until our time.

Can we can deal with our other enemies before they deal with us, in a world suddenly more reminiscent of the 8th Century than the 21st? We can fight and win, as Byzantium and the Franks did or we can do nothing and await the next blow. And the next.

Edit: And unless you're retarded, you know the cause of radical Islam is the prophet Mohammed and his teachings.

[Killfile]

You were asked "in your own words," though it's nice to see that you can use Google. Even so, try to go for quality over quantity next time.

Sadly, too little too late - I was trying to give you the opportunity to demonstrate that you could form ideas on your own rather than having to be led to them by someone else. Pity - I had such hopes for you as a worthy opponent.

Best of luck in your warmongering.

Edit: "Retarded?" What is this? The 4th grade?

[ucrzymofo87]

You obviously do not understand the meaning of my post. You should leave that small town of yours and go out into the real world sometime.

Here is the crux of what my previous post means:

I DO NOT NEED TO TELL YOU WHAT I THINK THEIR INTENTIONS ARE. THEY HAVE REPEATED THEIR INTENTIONS.

And your nonchalant attitude is danerous to our safety as a nation.

[vtwahoo]

However, using deductive reasoning, this message can be read showing that the United States is winning the war against Al Qaeda.

Aristotle would be rolling over in his grave. This is not deductive logic. In fact, it's not logical at all.

But it does indicate that, as I suspected, you DON'T know the "cause" Radical Islam.

You see, Osama's "cause" is to incite war between a unified Islamist front and the infidels (the US). Now, I ask you, why would someone determined to bring about war be asking for peace? Why would someone convinced that he is destined by the Almighty God to prevail be interested in a truce with the very people he believes that he has been sent to eradicate? The logical answer is simple: he doesn't want peace at all.

Osama is a lot like Hitler. He's not going to surrender even in the face of certain defeat. That's pretty much the textbook definition of a radical...in my profession we call it a "true believer" complex.

So the only logical conclusion is that he offered the truce knowing that we couldn't take it. And we can't for one very simple reason---under international law we can only agree to a truce with another nation-state. Al Qaeda is many things but it's not a state.

So we can't negotiate a truce. That doesn't mean that we can't listen to what Bin Laden has to say. One of the most dangerous mistakes that people make about Al Qaeda's actions against the United States is that they're grounded merely in religious radicalism. Religion merely the means by which Bin Laden is able to manipulate people to his cause. Bin Laden has, and has expressed numerous times BEFORE his attacks on US embassies, BEFORE his attack on the USS Cole, and BEFORE September 11th a list of very legitimate grievances against the United States---our military presence in Saudi Arabia, our aid to Israel, our support of the Russians in their conflict against Chechnyan nationals, our support of the Indians in their conflict against Kashmirian nationals, the US-led sanctions against Iraq in the interwar period...the list goes on and on in Bin Laden's Letter to America dated November 24, 2002.

These actions of the United States government have caused pain and suffering for the Muslim citizens of Saudi Arabia, Palestine, Chechnya, India, and Iraq. Bin Laden sees himself, and is seen by his followers, as a spokesman for the global Muslim population. While I abhor is tactics I acknowledge his complaints are legitimate and shared by millions of peopole (both Muslim and not) who are NOT flying planes into our buildings. They deserve to be heard. And it is time for a national debate about US foreign policy. You don't have to negotiate with terrorists to engage in that debate. You don't have to call a truce with Bin Laden to listen to the suffering of the millions he claims to represent. We need to sit down at the table with someone who is not a terrorist but who shares the aforementioned concerns or we're going to give Bin Laden exactly what he wants...war between the West and the rest.

Since the war on terrorism was declared on September 11, 2001...

To reiterate...there was no declaration of war.

And unless you're retarded, you know the cause of radical Islam is the prophet Mohammad and his teachings.

Wow. I graduated valedictorian of my university and I didn't realize I was mentally deficient until just then. Thanks for enlightening me or I might have wasted my life on the studies of history and politics. Guess I'll just tell the university that I don't deserve my full scholarship in Political Economy...

Are you out of your mind?

Have you read the Koran (not the excerpts parroted by war-mongering neo-cons so easily available on google for the eager consumption of people unable to think for themselves)? Have you read anything about the history of the Islamic Empire?

When the Spanish Catholics kicked the Jews out of Spain during the Inquisition, the Jews fled to the Muslim Empire. Why? Because that was the only place where they were allowed to practice their religion in peace. That's right...in peace. Because the Koran says that Muslims must respect and love the Jews and the Christians because---and here's the punchline---they all worship the same God.

There are 1.2 billion Muslims in the world. If they wanted us dead we'd be dead.

[ucrzymofo87]

I suggest you read these books, as I have...

The Spanish Inquisition : A Historical Revision

Infidels by Wheatcroft

In both books, it is clear that Islam was the aggressor and Chrisendom the antagonist. Also, the evil Spanish inquisition was not as bad as the popular culture makes it out to be. The Armenian genocide of WWI was worse than the Spanish Inquisition.

[Killfile]

You obviously do not understand the meaning of my post. You should leave that small town of yours and go out into the real world sometime.

You mean like Phoenix? Done much globetrotting lately? The real world? Have you looked around? We're alone. The world that once stood by our side and wept at the tragedy that was Sept 11 now mocks us and fears the actions of a super-power gone rogue.

The real world? You have no idea.

I DO NOT NEED TO TELL YOU WHAT I THINK THEIR INTENTIONS ARE. THEY HAVE REPEATED THEIR INTENTIONS.

I'll thank you to keep your tone in check. These forums are a privilege, not a right - and if you can not contain your temper then I would advise that you take some time to cool down before posting.

You were asked for your understanding of their intentions (politely) in your own words because, like so many things in this world, their own words can not necessarily be taken at face value. You would not be so daft as to assume that politicians always speak the truth. Why would you assume that Islamist Terrorist Politicians do?

And your nonchalant attitude is dangerous [sic] to our safety as a nation.

Bombs, bio-weapons, and hijacked aircraft are "dangerous to our safety as a nation." I personally am not. That you would trivialize the dangers that our men and women in uniform face every day shows only the shallowness of your so called "patriotism" and the brevity of your commitment to the ideals you profess.

Strike Two

Edit:

In both books, it is clear that Islam was the aggressor and Chrisendom the antagonist.

Antagonist. You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

[ucrzymofo87]

You mean like Phoenix? Done much globetrotting lately? The real world? Have you looked around? We're alone. The world that once stood by our side and wept at the tragedy that was Sept 11 now mocks us and fears the actions of a super-power gone rogue.

The real world? You have no idea.

Actually, I've been to Europe twice. The poverty there was a lot worse than the poverty in my home town. My church takes groups of us down to the "less affluent", shall we say, parts of town to pick up trash and feed the homeless, but the poverty in Europe was astronomical compared to Phoenix.

P.S. We're not rogue. Albania, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Dominican Rep, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Honduras, Hungary, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldova, Mongolia, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, United Kingdom, and Ukraine all have armed forces on the ground with us in Iraq. And many NATO countries are helping in Afghanistan as well.

I DO NOT NEED TO TELL YOU WHAT I THINK THEIR INTENTIONS ARE. THEY HAVE REPEATED THEIR INTENTIONS.

I'll thank you to keep your tone in check. These forums are a privilege, not a right - and if you can not contain your temper then I would advise that you take some time to cool down before posting.

Sorry. You're right. My tone was out of line.

You were asked for your understanding of their intentions (politely) in your own words because, like so many things in this world, their own words can not necessarily be taken at face value. You would not be so daft as to assume that politicians always speak the truth. Why would you assume that Islamist Terrorist Politicians do?

I would not be concerned accept for the fact that they keep repeating what they say. They wanted to destroy our economy and 9/11 sent the stock market tumbling, and only now has it reached pre-9/11 highs. They said they were going to attack us with airplanes and they did, so I would be cautious and alert to their intentions.

Bombs, bio-weapons, and hijacked aircraft are "dangerous to our safety as a nation." I personally am not. That you would trivialize the dangers that our men and women in uniform face every day shows only the shallowness of your so called "patriotism" and the brevity of your commitment to the ideals you profess.

I did not say you personally are dangerous, I said your attitude was. There is a difference. I also did not trivialize the armed forces, I criticized your attitude. Learn the difference.

Edit: I should have said respondent, not antagonist

[vtwahoo]

I suggest you read these books, as I have...

The Spanish Inquisition : A Historical Revision

Infidels by Wheatcroft

In both books, it is clear that Islam was the aggressor and Chrisendom the antagonist. Also, the evil Spanish inquisition was not as bad as the popular culture makes it out to be. The Armenian genocide of WWI was worse than the Spanish Inquisition.

As it turns out, I have read these books. And having read them I know several things:

1. The Spanish Inquisition : A Historical Revision is just what is sounds like---revisionist history. Holocaust deniers can publish books, too but that doesn't make them right. I would advise that YOU read Benjamin Netanyahu's The Origins of the Inquisition.

2. Having read Infidels I counter with Edward Said's Orientalism.

There are a lot of books out there that make Islam and Muslims the historical "bad guys" of a lot of things--the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades among them. It's interesting becuase in both instances they were the victims of European Christian aggression. It's necessary, I suppose, in the constant effort to make Americans hate Muslims so that they're more willing to indiscriminately kill them.

The points you're advancing and the sources you're citing indicate that you're on a dark path to the dehumanizaton of 1.2 billion people and all their ancestors. I find it increasingly important to remember in these times that it was the dehumanization of the Jews---perpetuated by revisionist history and an advanced propaganda machine---that led the Nazis to the gates of Auschwitz.

[ucrzymofo87]

The sources I'm citing show that these radical Islamists want to kill us! That is not dehumanization, it's the truth.

[psi29a]

The sources I'm citing show that these radical Islamists want to kill us! That is not dehumanization, it's the truth.

How many times do you have to type that, we know they want to kill us. But that isn't the main goal for 'radical islam'. To put it in that black & white of a phrase, you devalue my sense of security because you have not even once acknowledged what the real threat is.

Again, I iterate, yes they want to kill us... but for what reason.

[vtwahoo]

They wanted to destroy our economy and 9/11 sent the stock market tumbling, and only now has it reached pre-9/11 highs.

That's exactly why I wanted you to have to put their "cause" (as in goal) into your own words.

Your argument is that Radical Islam exists to destroy our economy.

As a political economist I can tell you that flying planes into our buildings is not the way to destroy the American economy. Here are just a few of the things that the Islamist movement could do that would work better:

1. Convince Saudi Arabia to stop selling us oil.

2. Buy US t-bills from the Japanese and Chinese governmnet. Call in the loans.

3. Invest in Australian manufacturing and technology industries thus making their current economic relationship with Japan unnecessary. Wait for the dominos to fall.

And the cool thing is that they could do those things without worrying about retaliatory bombings (well...maybe not the first one...).

So if their goal is to collapse the American economy why have they not done these things?

The answer: their goal is not to destroy the American economy.

You've spent a lot of time telling people that they don't understand "these people" (and I can only assume that you're referring to Radical Islamists). I think that your above post clearly shows that, in fact, it is YOU who lacks the basic understanding of what Radical Islamists want. Don't feel too bad---you're in good company. The administration doesn't get it either.

But all you have to do is stop talking long enough to LISTEN to what the other side has to say and you'll figure out two things:

1. You don't come off sounding like a ideologue when you actually know what you're talking about

2. Their goals reflect a valid critique of US foreign policy.

And once you've gotten that far you can engage in a debate about the issues. But you've got to know what the issues are to start.

Final Note: what's really interesting is that if you'd even read your OWN sources you'd have known that the goal of Radical Islam is NOT to destroy the US economy.

[panasonic]

so based on a book that talks about what did muslims many centuries back you say they want to kill americans huh? so based on your logic, if i read a book about america exterminating the natives, then i can say that americans are continuing the genicode in the present.

how can you categorize the whole of Islam as the enemy of americans? there are plenty of muslims that contribute to american society as well as the international community. it is your kind of attitude that starts debasing their existence as a human being. that is what Hitler did to Jews and look what happened.

[TheDarkness]

i do believe i am not the only one that currently is of the opinion that trying to convince ucrzymofo87 of the fact that he is missing the bigger picture is rather impossible. Thus i will try to spell it out.

The Islam has essentially the same goals as most of the other old religions. The christians the jews and even the budist. They all strive to get their people connected in some deeper way. To unite them. The Jews have always strived for a country of their own. Christianity had once succeeded in bringing all of it's followers together for a single cause but after that they lost in power gigantically.
Osama is currently trying (and even succeeding) in making the islamitic world reach the same state of unity. They now have a common enemy. The USA. True not all followers of the islam are against the USA but a large part of them is. Killfile stated in a previous post of his that he more or less engineered this whole thing and i really implore you to read that post again.

As for the role of the fanatics in this whole conversation. The goal of unity within the religion is mostly something that only the fanatics still aspire to. However in this case they are succeeding in also getting non-fanatic people to see things the way they want to.

There you have it. This is more or less what has been said in a nut shell. I do not intend to give a personal opinion on this whole matter but it would really help the discussion if you actually READ the comment of others.