Cat Stevens

quote:

---

If he was responsible for the death of such officials, then it is an act of terrorism.

---

Fair enough. He abandoned peaceful protesting and took up arms - or at least his supporters did -, and eventually used those arms in the services of his aims. I believe that would - by your definition - make him a terrorist. Is this assumption correct?

quote:

---

Whatever you do, please please please pleeeaaasse do not get Arye started on Israel - especially when it has nothing to do with the topic of the thread!

---

Your concerns have been noted and understood. I didn't, however, get Ayre started on Israel, and I don't have any interest in discussing it with him. My interest lies in how one defines a terrorist, and, whilst it's only loosely connected with the thread topic, I'm sure Cat Stevens would like to know how you 'become a terrorist' too.

quote:

---

Originally posted by starbuck:
I didn't, however, get Ayre started on Israel, and I don't have any interest in discussing it with him.

---

Nobody needs to get Ayre started on Israel.

And its near impossible to have a discussion with him anyway, as he reads any query in a manner best suited to his purpose. It gets quite amusing after a while: I have no doubt that Ayre should be in the Knesset.

Regards

Mike

Spending money I don't have on things I don't need.

quote:

---

Originally posted by starbuck:
My interest lies in how one defines a terrorist, and, whilst it's only loosely connected with the thread topic, I'm sure Cat Stevens would like to know how you 'become a terrorist' too.

---

starbuck,

Surely a terrorist is someone who kills indiscriminately or who deliberately targets civilians or children. One could go further to include those who make use of 'human shields', particularly women and children, or who use similar tactics.

The UK, Israeli, Russian and even the US armies may kill or harm innocent civilians but, with very few exceptions, this is not their intention. In fact, they will normally go to considerable lengths to avoid civilian casualties. One can scarcely imagine the scale of the carnage that would result if this were not the case.

I'm afraid that I don't understand your comment above about Cat Stevens, or Yusuf Islam as I believe he's entitled to be known.

Steve

quote:

---

It gets quite amusing after a while

---

It was funny from the start. "The terror is hugging the world with a bear hug" - can you think of anything funnier than that? I have images of Winnie the Pooh smuggling semtex in his honey pot, how about you?

Hi Steve

Apologies if I've caused any confusion. My reference to Yusuf Islam, or Cat Stevens, was a slight joke which didn't really work, I'm afraid - I can only apologise for my poor sense of humour(and taste, possibly). Whilst he may have vocally supported a fatwa against Salman Rushdie, there are many officials in the country who recently refused him access who have signed actual death sentences, so it seems strange to me that the (alleged) peaceable should be feared for being (alledgedly) murderous by those who actually murder, if you see what I mean. This is, obviously, overlooking any connections which he may or may not have with Hamas - my knowledge of his connection to Hamas has only really come about through this thread, so I don't want to make any suggestions with regards to this.

quote:

---

Surely a terrorist is someone who kills indiscriminately or who deliberately targets civilians or children. One could go further to include those who make use of 'human shields', particularly women and children, or who use similar tactics.

---

This is something that I have trouble with. I understand what you're saying about the UK, Israeli, Russian and the US armies not deliberately targeting civilians, but I find it difficult to square that off with the knowledge of some of the actual weapons being used - Hellfire rockets, as you may well know, could hardly be described as being a particularly discriminate weapon: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/agm-114.htm

I'm not trying to suggest that just for using a weapon of this type, the military mentioned should be classed as terrorists - that would be a very naive and potentially dangerous thing to believe - but I do think that a little fairness is required in the reporting of violent events from both sides. It seems that - and I know I'm opening myself up to being shot down here - to be classed as a terrorist, you just need to oppose someone with a bigger gun and better control of reportage. Look how quickly Gaddafi (sp?) went from terrorist to ally - I can't explain my concerns in a better way than that, really.

As I said, apologies for any confusion - my communication skills aren't up to much but if I can clarify further please ask.

Chris

quote:

---

Originally posted by starbuck:

quote:

---

Surely a terrorist is someone who kills indiscriminately or who deliberately targets civilians or children. One could go further to include those who make use of 'human shields', particularly women and children, or who use similar tactics.

---

This is something that I have trouble with. I understand what you're saying about the UK, Israeli, Russian and the US armies not deliberately targeting civilians, but I find it difficult to square that off with the knowledge of some of the actual weapons being used - Hellfire rockets, as you may well know, could hardly be described as being a particularly discriminate weapon: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/agm-114.htm

I'm not trying to suggest that just for using a weapon of this type, the military mentioned should be classed as terrorists - that would be a very naive and potentially dangerous thing to believe - but I do think that a little fairness is required in the reporting of violent events from both sides. It seems that - and I know I'm opening myself up to being shot down here - to be classed as a terrorist, you just need to oppose someone with a bigger gun and better control of reportage. Look how quickly Gaddafi (sp?) went from terrorist to ally - I can't explain my concerns in a better way than that, really...

---

Chris, thanks for your reply.

I agree with what you have said about terrorist classification. There is a strong political component and now I understand why you were asking what defines a terrorist (which I had thought was clear).

Thankfully I don't know anything about Hellfire rockets or other weapons used and I admit that it's a difficult area. In the end however, politics notwithstanding, I still think that the definition of terrorist comes down to a question of intent.

Steve

After an argue with my girlfriend - it seems more complicated to me -
Government can act brutally against people in many ways. If for example, officials are arresting people of a group because of ideas, or a government wants for example to transfer a kind of population or violating their rights, even if the officials don't want to kill these unique group of people, when the group in reacting by killing the officials - this killing will not be an act of terror.

It puts a killing of officials in a "gray" color, and the question is where is the line between a brutal violation that permits killing and when it is not. Not easy to answer, I think, but I like to consider every killing that is not for a self defense as a murder.

Arye

Isn't one of Cat's parents Jewish ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by Berlin Fritz:
Isn't one of Cat's parents Jewish ?

---

I don't believe so. This from his Biography:

My father was a Greek Cypriot and my mother was Swedish, but for some reason they decided to send me to a Roman Catholic school. I suppose that was the first anomaly of my life. Born Steven Demetre Georgiou, I was brought up Greek Orthodox ... (etc.)

Strangely enough, when I saw him on German TV (which I reported earlier) I thought to myself that he looked and acted as if he was Jewish. However, he's not.

In retrospect, there were some other strange things about the interview ...

He originally stopped singing because his religious teacher advised him to. Now he said he would return to it and, indeed, I believe he's come out with a new single with someone.

I was left with impression that he had taken a decision to return to the 'mass media' after having been more or less away for some time. Now a few weeeks later, he's headline news. Did he know he would be prevented from entering the US and that this would generate publicity?

I think he's 'up to something' and I hope that it's something positive. As I originally said, after seeing his TV interview, I liked the guy.

Steve

He is a singer / songwriter - right?!
If his religous teacher says to give that up - and he does - then that strikes me as pretty serious stuff. If this religous teacher has that amount of influence on something so fundamental to him, what the hell else can he make him do? Bloody scary!!

quote:

---

when I saw him on German TV (which I reported earlier) I thought to myself that he looked and acted as if he was Jewish. However, he's not.

---

I must get an explanation for this sentence.

Arye

Hi Ayre, I'm keeping well clear of this one matey.

Graham George Von You'vegotaverygoodpointmyfriend

Hate cats!

quote:

---

Originally posted by Arye_Gur:

quote:

---

when I saw him on German TV (which I reported earlier) I thought to myself that he looked and acted as if he was Jewish. However, he's not.

---

I must get an explanation for this sentence.

---

Ayre,

I just meant that if I hadn't known he was Muslim I would have thought (from his way of speaking and mannerisms) that he was a nice, Jewish boy of the sort that my mother might have been happy to see my sister going out with.

Steve

quote:

---

Originally posted by Berlin Fritz:
Hi Ayre, I'm keeping well clear of this one matey.

---

As in light the fuse and stand well back...

Steve,

I'm relaxed now...

Arye

Shalom u'lehitraot, Ayre.

- That's about the limit of my Ivrit (Hebrew), I'm afraid.

Steve

's better than mine, Steve.

Here's a piece written by the man himself...

Cat Stevens speaks out...