indahnesia.com - Discover Indonesia Online

    
You are currently in > Forum > In the news > View topic

17-01-2015 18:16 · [news] Three more bodies of AirAsia victims to Surabaya hospital  (1 reaction)
17-01-2015 01:23 · [news] Fuel prices lowered, again  (2 reactions)
17-01-2015 00:14 · [news] President dismisses Sutarman as national police chief  (0 reactions)
16-01-2015 12:44 · [news] Alleged terrorists shot dead three villagers in Poso  (3 reactions)
16-01-2015 02:15 · [news] Indonesia to execute six drug convicts  (0 reactions)

sidia
User
User icon of sidia
spacer line
 


On 03-11-2005 22:15 sascha wrote:
Sidia
Balkan is a bad example.

So foreigners should be involved.


b. YES , sure , they are welcome .
Are you kidding ?? , a bad joke.
They can solve their own problem.
see A. Balkan .
The trouble begin with the involving of outstanders.
And If (BIG IF) , I am sure never, the Indonesian People let foreigners to solve the problems ., what kind of method will they use ?.
With only talking or with force . (read : Killing/ bombing people).

a.See example Irak : The so called civilzed countries (exc. D/F) will free the Iraks , because their leader torture and kill peoples.
And "guess the "liberators are throwing bombs etc. Also Killing people .





Bisa dicek mas . http://omsid.multiply.com/

sascha
User
User icon of sascha
spacer line
 

Its not an joke, just an idea.
and please u may know much about indonesia, but u better study some of the history of the balkan conflict.
Its a problem from within, it was a struggle for independence of the former parts of the yugoslavian republic. What have 'outstanders'?!?! to do with that??
Im talking about a peace keeping mission not a war
I think the for example the german troops in kosovo and bosnia do a good job.

the iraq war is a different matter, the colateral damage was used for propaganda. less people died because of the war then under saddams regime. and how many were killed by those sicko insurgents, most of them fellow muslims.



sidia
User
User icon of sidia
spacer line
 


On 04-11-2005 10:07 sascha wrote:

the iraq war is a different matter,

the colateral damage was used for propaganda.

less people died because of the war then under saddams regime. and how many were killed by those sicko insurgents, most of them fellow muslims.


Less people ?? , so be it .
But they throw (big) bombs in cities .Collateral damages , of course .
That is a normal way of going war ? , remember Dresden and other Deutsche Cities at W.W. II . ?? . Less died people , casualties of war .
Their own dead US soldiers etc etc. In name of democrasy ?


Bisa dicek mas . http://omsid.multiply.com/

sascha
User
User icon of sascha
spacer line
 

sidia iraq is totally off topic and has nothing to do with my idea.
i still dont like ur way of discussion. Emoticon: Nooo

i just put it as extra point but it was not the main topic we discussed.



sidia
User
User icon of sidia
spacer line
 

O.K.

Indonesia is a sovereign country .


Bisa dicek mas . http://omsid.multiply.com/

AnisJ
User
User icon of AnisJ
spacer line
 


On 01-11-2005 16:33 principe wrote:

...



I share your personal view. And although christians see their religion as monotheistic, non christians have a hard time grasping the notion of the holy trinity, suspecting this is exactly a polytheistic feature. As such this view cannot accomodate the notion of one and the same god of all the people of the book.


Principe yth. what do you mean by: "polytheistic feature" Emoticon: Confused Emoticon: Confused Emoticon: Confused
As we 'human beings' do not have a mobile phone with God we can not ask him why he has revealed him, as for christians, in this way .......
Some say that Jesus himself was a personifacation of God himself for us 'human beings', I myself I do not know ...... I better stick to believing, that is hard enough.

Christians do not divide God into three/3, you know.
I also do not accuse, as a christian, 'believers of Islam' that they believe into two/2 'Allah and Mohammed' ......


'Ahu kura ahia, mansia nia'

principe
User
spacer line
 


On 04-11-2005 18:46 AnisJ wrote:

...

AnisJ Yth
Principe yth. what do you mean by: "polytheistic feature" Emoticon: Confused Emoticon: Confused Emoticon: Confused


In Indonesia christianity is often "accused" by Indonesian Muslims for incorporating the notion of the Holy Trinity: The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost. This they often see or want to see as three seperate Gods, which would make christianity a Polytheistic religion.



Christians do not divide God into three/3, you know.


yes I know


I also do not accuse, as a christian, believers of Islam that they believe into two/2 Allah and Mohammed ......

I think that Muslims do not claim that Mohammad is the personification of GOD, but simply His messenger. But the fact that in the book of Mary (within the Koran, reference is made to Jezus, Mary AND THE HOLY GHOST, makes me wonder whether Indonesian Muslims can accuse or reject the Holy Trinity when the Koran itself makes reference to it without rejecting it . I invite evrybody to read the follwoing link. http://www.answering-islam.org(...)him/trustworthy1.htm


bst rgrds





AnisJ
User
User icon of AnisJ
spacer line
 

Principe yth.,

I do not understand you, you made a personal statement 'polytheÔstic' and then you answering back by citing somebody else !!! Emoticon: Confused Emoticon: Confused

So, silahkan ......


'Ahu kura ahia, mansia nia'

principe
User
spacer line
 

[quote] On 05-11-2005 13:10 AnisJ wrote:
Principe yth.,

I do not understand you, you made a personal statement polytheÔstic and then you answering back by citing somebody else !!! Emoticon: Confused Emoticon: Confused

So, silahkan ...... [/quote]
[quote] I am confused, did I really ? I thought I clearly mentioned that I observed a certain tendency amongst Indonesian Muslims and Christians about the subject. I never gave my personal opinion about the Holy Trinity. Did I give that impression? [/quote][/quote]


You may find far more on the issue in the following link as well...(quite interesting. http://www.answering-islam.org(...)fruit_inspection.htm



I stated to Mr sidia the following:

Mr Sidia, this is partly true. This is only true when it comes to the God of the Old Testament The God of Ibrahim (Abraham), Musa (Moses), Daud (David).

When it comes to the God of the New Testament Muslims and Christians differ in opinion. The New Testament God is emboldened in the holy trinity which Muslims explicitly reject.


And although christians see their religion as monotheistic, non christians have a hard time grasping the notion of the holy trinity, suspecting this is exactly a polytheistic feature. As such this view cannot accomodate the notion of one and the same god of all the people of the book.

to you I wrote:

In Indonesia christianity is often "accused" by Indonesian Muslims for incorporating the notion of the Holy Trinity: The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost. This they often see or want to see as three seperate Gods, which would make christianity a Polytheistic religion

I also expressed my curiosity about this Muslim Indonesian view suggesting some hypocrasy.

Where did I mention my personal view about the Holy Trinity ? I was expressing views form both camps. The only observation was that these views were opposing eachother and as such it is very debatable if we can talk about the same God (New Testament as this implicates the Holy Trinity) ) for both Muslims and Christians. I did not give my opinion about the Holy Trinity. Not even now.

I wonder, could it be my style of writing that may sidetrack some readers in this forum ? At the same time I notice often reactions by virtue of imminent emotions rather than accurate reading. In my experience emotions often tend to seriously effect accuracy in both reading, writing and debating.

That is why most of the time I notice we (all of us) keep repeating ourselves.

bst rgrds






[/quote]



sidia
User
User icon of sidia
spacer line
 

[quote] On 05-11-2005 15:18 principe wrote:

...


...
[/quote]



to you I wrote:

In Indonesia christianity is often "accused" by Indonesian Muslims for incorporating the notion of the Holy Trinity: The Father, The Son and The Holy Ghost. This they often see or want to see as three seperate Gods, which would make christianity a Polytheistic religion

I also expressed my curiosity about this Muslim Indonesian view suggesting some hypocrasy.

[/quote] [/quote]

To me , I see no diff. between The God of the O.T and The God of N.T
There is only one God (monotheism)
I think that The God (from O.T) is de the same God of Jesus.(the Father ).
To me is Jesus the Son .
To my logic a Son cannot be the same as the father.
About the Roh Kudus (?) , it is the gift of God to all his childeren .

That is the reason that I think the God of the Jews and The God of the Christians and the God of the Muslim is the same .

Of course I must read the bible carefully .
It is only an opinion , not important enough.



Bisa dicek mas . http://omsid.multiply.com/

principe
User
spacer line
 

[quote] On 05-11-2005 16:07 sidia wrote:

...


to mr Sidia

I[quote] As I said before I agree with your monotheistic view of christianity. But if you were asked to explain the following. "Jesus our Lord" "Mary mother of God" "Tuhan Yesus" , how would you reply ?

I asked around and some would argue that Jezus was GOD on earth. Through the holy Ghost Jezus was empowered with His will. Some would argue that the Trinity is one and the same as water, vapor and ice. Some would say that the Holy Ghost is the love of God and Jezus the will of God on earth....and many more.

This multi explanation and its less than clear and satisfactory meaning (because of its spiritual meaning I think) is often used by Indonesian Muslims and Muslims in general find prove of its polytheistic nature. [/quote]





sidia
User
User icon of sidia
spacer line
 

mr principe ;quote :
If you were asked to explain the foll. Jesus Our lord , Mary mother of God , Tuhan Jesus , how would yr reply.

First , I respect if the christian of a part of them If they believe in it .
I am an outstander .
To me , personal , there is only one .
If Jesus have the same God as ther Jews , then it is for me not logic if the followers of Jesus also say Jesus is God (Our Lord , Tuhan Jesus) .
IF so , you have 2 Gods at least .
Maybe because the greece influence ?

BUT that is not to me to judge .
I only have one God , the same of the Jews and the same as the christians .

To Anis : maybe this is my answer abt yr question (other topic) , the diff. between Mohamedaan , and Christenen.
The moslims are not followers of Mohammed.(not their lord).



Bisa dicek mas . http://omsid.multiply.com/

searching
User
spacer line
 

Principe I am back,

Thanks for the lecture. Since I am no researcher, I will try to conclude in a simpler sentences of your points:
This is what I found:


"Deductive reasoning" refers to the process of concluding that something must be true because it is a special case of a general principle that is known to be true. For example, if you know the general principle that the sum of the angles in any triangle is always 180 degrees, and you have a particular triangle in mind, you can then conclude that the sum of the angles in your triangle is 180 degrees.
Deductive reasoning is logically valid and it is the fundamental method in which mathematical facts are shown to be true.
"Inductive reasoning" (not to be confused with "mathematical induction" or and "inductive proof", which is something quite different) is the process of reasoning that a general principle is true because the special cases you've seen are true. [For example, if all the people you've ever met from a particular town have been very strange, you might then say "all the residents of this town are strange". That is inductive reasoning: constructing a general principle from special cases. It goes in the opposite direction from deductive reasoning.
b]Inductive reasoning is not logically valid. Just because all the people you happen to have met from a town were strange is no guarantee that all the people there are strange. Therefore, this form of reasoning has no part in a mathematical proof.
However, inductive reasoning does play a part in the discovery of mathematical truths. For example, the ancient geometers looked at triangles and noticed that their angle sums were all 180 degrees. After seeing that every triangle they tried to build, no matter what the shape, had an angle sum of 180 degrees, they would have come to the conclusion that this is something that is true of every triangle. Then they would have looked for a way to prove it using deductive reasoning; that is, deduce it as a consequence of other known general properties of triangles.
In summary, then: inductive reasoning is part of the discovery process whereby the observation of special cases leads one to suspect very strongly (though not know with absolute logical certainty) that some general principle is true. Deductive reasoning, on the other hand, is the method you would use to demonstrate with logical certainty that the principle is true.
Both are necessary parts of mathematical thinking. If you just started with the known properties of triangles and played around with them aimlessly using deductive reasoning, it is unlikely you would discover the fact that the angle sum is always 180 degrees (though if you did happen to discover it that way, you'd know it for certain). However, by noticing that it's true in all the examples you've ever seen, inductive reasoning leads you to suspect that this fact is true. Then, once your suspicions have given you a target and a direction for your deductive reasoning, you construct your rigorous logical proof using deductive reasoning.
The "inductive reasoning" mentioned above is nothing to do with the "principle of induction", which says that if you know something is true for the number 1, and if whenever it is true for one number it is also true for the next number, it is then true for every positive integer. Although this principle is a form of reasoning that gets you to a general principle from some individual cases (which is the reason for the name "induction" Emoticon: Wink , it does so in a precise and logically valid way that is really a form of deductive reasoning if viewed in the correct way. When people refer to an "inductive proof", they generally mean a proof that uses the (logically valid) principle of induction, rather than meaning a form of (logically invalid) inductive reasoning in the sense described above.


well, now we will try to make our own logic reasoning based on your facts (inductive approach):
FACTS:
(1) Some articles you read mentioned that COKER was behind the SOYA attack because of money.
(2) The COKER took back their cofession and said they were under pressure.
(3) The COKER are mostly Christians
(4) The SOYA villagers mostly are Christians.

Based on this facts, I wonder, why then you can conclude that the COKER was behind the Soya attacks.
I would love to see how you construct your inductive reasoning based on this. From what I know, since the inductive is not enough to have reasonably right conclusion (because it's from SPECIAL CASES ---> GENERAL ASSUMPTION), then you still need deductive reasoning.


I really thought that I answered that question more than once. Are you actually reading what I wrote ? Please make an attempt in finding it in all my earlier postings. All possible links in http://www.malra.org/posko/, All newspapers and TV programs I already mentioned daily life experience, talks with several concerned people and others and a lot more.

Are you asking me a specific quote of some articles where it is stated that Coker was behind the Soya massacre for a fact? the answer is "in several articles". And NO, you can never know for sure whether it is true espescially when they retracted their first police statement. And yes it is my assumption based on several accounts which I conclude are facts. And no you do not have to agree.

Would it have made any difference to you if all coker members had confessed and nobody would have doubted these confessions. What is your criteria of "truth" ?


Well, why you ask me. You are the first who claimed that IT WAS THE COKER WHO DID THE ATTACKS. And you stated it in this thread about the beheading of Three Christian Women. So it's your priviledge to assure me how you construct your "facts" and "truth". I am not the one stating that.

I stated that IT IS HIGHLY PROBABLE THAT THE MOSLEMS ARE BEHIND ALL THE ATTACKS TO CHRISTIANS BASED ON THIS LOGIC:
(1) The victims are Christians mostly.
(2) There are verses in Quran and the Hadits that encourage moslems to terrorize NON BELIEVERS.
And I can prove the facts that I mentioned, that: THE CHRISTIANS MOSTLY ARE VICTIMS OF THE ATTACKS and THERE ARE VERSES IN QURAN AND HADITS THAT ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO TERRORIZE NON BELIEVERS.

You said:


We ? I am sure I concluded that starting from my first posting.
But Boom, I am glad that you auto answered all your questions to me


But how do I conclude that IT'S YOUR OWN OPINION when you wrote like this:


The perpetrators wore masks and were clad in Ninja black outfits. Possibly they did not speak during the slayings.

When Desa Soya (maluku) was attacked the same tactics were used. They turned out to be christian gang members (coker) killing their own (including the elder and the very young).

They were collaborating with Kopassus units for the purpose of keeping the sectarian violence on going. The real reason is anyones guess.

It takes training, discipline, and maye a lot of drugs to carry out these sayings in such a cold blooded way. Above all it takes experience in killing this way.

NArrowing in on the possible perpetrators in my opinion you may be close when you look at certain units in military trained environments.

TNI might need again another hot spot to keep the money flowing is just one way of looking at it. But any scenario or combination of it may be valid.



You sounded like stating the facts to me, that's why I asked you until now and then suddenly I found out that IT'S YOUR OWN OPINION. Quite an enlightment!


And our capacity to analyse


Can't help to agree with that..with our own logic and not only using inductive approach.


Indeed they were there for a fact. Many analysts agree that Laskar Jihad was a military creation. A militia if you will. Other groups like Laskar Mujahiddin and Jundullah seemed to be in lesser connection with the military but far closer with political influential parties and persons. This however does not lesson the Coker involvement in Soya IN MY OPINION


You mean lessen COKER involvement? Please construct first how you make conclusion. The fact that COKER admitted then took back their confession seems very easy to be accepted in your opinion, then concluding that Laskar Jihad was behind it. Sounds nice. So if anyone confessed then took back their confession, you would still conclude that the someone was guilty. A good point!
And well, MANY ANALYSTS. Can you name them so I can see their credibility?


Mainstream press are overall seen in Indonesia to be reporting according to the journalistic ethics and standard. Some however still have no grasp of ethics and remain writing in any kind of flavor for money.


Agree with it. That's why I ask you to provide RELIABLE SOURCES. I told you earlier, I would not take SABILI or else as a reliable source.


Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

searching
User
spacer line
 

Anis,


I also do not accuse, as a christian, believers of Islam that they believe into two/2 Allah and Mohammed ......


Emoticon: Worship

Principe,

Good that you read www.answeringislam.org as well.

Sidia,

You can ask many things at the site or www.faithfreedom.org






Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

sidia
User
User icon of sidia
spacer line
 

Searcher are you a repeater ?

Is only faithfreedom . com yr source ??
You told me 3 times and also to other people .

Theoritical bla bla is very nice (yr mssg to principe 11.28 ) , but What is yr own opinion ? Yr truth ?
Coba tell it to Sidia with simple words and examples.

(teorie sih boleh , tapi prakteknya mas )



Bisa dicek mas . http://omsid.multiply.com/

AnisJ
User
User icon of AnisJ
spacer line
 

I am still puzzled what kind of difference(s) people are wanting to see, .....
Principe I do not have to rely on an (supposed Muslim Emoticon: Confused ) to tell me how I must look at my christian religion; I think you are playing 'hide and seek' my friend, you are not tending to have an 'open discussion' like 'Sid'.
In the Bible there is a warning: "He who 'brings' faith wrongly or misinterptreted will be punished in the seventh prosterity, off course on "purpose" ...... so it is our responsibilty to judge Gods words in the right way .....
In the Christian view God is still God, Yesus is viewed as the representation of Gods son and 'Messiah' ( although some Christians say he was a personifacation of God on earth) the 'Holy Spirit' is the assignment to 'bring and inspire' religion, not more not less .......
Like I have said before I do not have a mobile phone with God to ask him why he has revealed himself in this way ...........
Mary was/is for Christian Protestants, a woman who gave birth to Jesus .... not more not less .......
There is no division of God of the Old Test. or New one ........
Yesus said that he was the last prophet, after him there will be no other ......
he will only come back to make the final closure: dealing with the devil and decide the 'goodies from the badddies' who will sit on Gods right hand .....


'Ahu kura ahia, mansia nia'

principe
User
spacer line
 

[quote] On 07-11-2005 11:28 searching wrote:
Principe I am back,

Hello Searching

Are we exchanging all kinds of versions of deduction and induction ?

[quote]well, now we will try to make our own logic reasoning based on your facts (inductive approach):
FACTS:
(1) Some articles you read mentioned that COKER was behind the SOYA attack because of money.
(2) The COKER took back their cofession and said they were under pressure.
(3) The COKER are mostly Christians
(4) The SOYA villagers mostly are Christians.

No not these facts alone. I already offered you an array of links. Take your time reading them all. Some are from political - , social -, strategic analysts like the CGI for instance (I like them very much. I think they do some very professional research). Some columnists in mainstream newspapers and magazines, some are police reports, wittness accounts, some are interviews, some are statements and far more.


[quote]Well, why you ask me. You are the first who claimed that IT WAS THE COKER WHO DID THE ATTACKS. And you stated it in this thread about the beheading of Three Christian Women. So its your priviledge to assure me how you construct your "facts" and "truth". I am not the one stating that[/quote].


It is hardly my privilege and I do not think I want to assure you. I already told you that It was my opinion based on different sources (some facts and supporting statements and my capacity to analyze ) by which I came to my own conclusion that FOR ME Coker was defenitely involved in the attack. I already to you that I could be wrong and that you certainly do not have to agree. I wonder what more you want me to say, really.

[quote]I stated that IT IS HIGHLY PROBABLE THAT THE MOSLEMS ARE BEHIND ALL THE ATTACKS TO CHRISTIANS BASED ON THIS LOGIC:
(1) The victims are Christians mostly.
(2) There are verses in Quran and the Hadits that encourage moslems to terrorize NON BELIEVERS.
And I can prove the facts that I mentioned, that: THE CHRISTIANS MOSTLY ARE VICTIMS OF THE ATTACKS and THERE ARE VERSES IN QURAN AND HADITS THAT ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO TERRORIZE NON BELIEVERS[/quote].

Victims are christians and therefore the attackers are Muslims
Verses in the Quran encourage muslims to terrorize non believers and therefore the attackers of Soya were Muslims.

Now you lost it searching. Indeed it sounds very much like your model of deduction.



[quote]You sounded like stating the facts to me, thats why I asked you until now and then suddenly I found out that ITS YOUR OWN OPINION. Quite an enlightment!
[/quote]

What can I say. Maybe it just takes some accurate reading

[quote]You mean lessen COKER involvement?[/quote]

Yes, typo error, sorry

[quote]Please construct first how you make conclusion. The fact that COKER admitted then took back their confession seems very easy to be accepted in your opinion, then concluding that Laskar Jihad was behind it.[/quote]


Where did I conclude that Laskar Jihad was behind the Soya attack. So much for accurate reading.

[quote]Sounds nice. So if anyone confessed then took back their confession, you would still conclude that the someone was guilty. A good point!
And well, MANY ANALYSTS. Can you name them so I can see their credibility[/quote]?

see the above

[quote]Agree with it. Thats why I ask you to provide RELIABLE SOURCES. I told you earlier, I would not take SABILI or else as a reliable source. [/quote][/quote]


Searching I have no idea what SABILI is. I am not going to repeat to you for the upteenth time what my sources are. And I simply do not know your definition of reliable sources




principe
User
spacer line
 

[quote][quote] On 07-11-2005 16:13 AnisJ wrote:
I am still puzzled what kind of difference(s) people are wanting to see, .....
[/quote]

I will keep it simple. In Indonesia very often Muslims tend to question the montheisticity of christianity. That is because they do not understand or want to understand the Holy Trinity. They think in terms of God the holy son, God the holy ghost and God himself...sounds like several Gods and thus polytheistic. Is ithis misperception that hard to understand this ?




quote]Principe I do not have to rely on an (supposed Muslim Emoticon: Confused ) to tell me how I must look at my christian religion;[[/quote]

No you do'nt. Who says you are ?



[quote] I think you are playing hide and seek my friend, you are not tending to have an open discussion like Sid.[/quote]

I don't understand. I think I was just offering some mainstream views in Indonesian Muslim society regarding the Holy Trinity

[quote][quote]Like I have said before I do not have a mobile phone with God to ask him why he has revealed himself in this way ...........
Mary was/is for Christian Protestants, a woman who gave birth to Jesus .... not more not less .......
There is no division of God of the Old Test. or New one ........
Yesus said that he was the last prophet, after him there will be no other ......
he will only come back to make the final closure: dealing with the devil and decide the goodies from the badddies who will sit on Gods right hand ..... [/quote]

Thank you for giving me your christian view about the issue. Wasn't I talking about the Indonesian Muslim view ?



searching
User
spacer line
 

Principe,


No not these facts alone. I already offered you an array of links. Take your time reading them all. Some are from political - , social -, strategic analysts like the CGI for instance (I like them very much. I think they do some very professional research). Some columnists in mainstream newspapers and magazines, some are police reports, wittness accounts, some are interviews, some are statements and far more.


Names and links will be helpful. so far you only gave me links from that maltra. Is it hard for you to state your opinion like a real researcher. Or do you always present your analysis that way?: by saying SOME RESEARCHERS, SOME COMLUMNISTS, SOME PROFESSIONAL RESEARCHERS. Please. You can say GUS DUR, DAI BACHTIAR, and it will be more helpful and clear.


Victims are christians and therefore the attackers are Muslims
Verses in the Quran encourage muslims to terrorize non believers and therefore the attackers of Soya were Muslims.

Now you lost it searching. Indeed it sounds very much like your model of deduction.


Well, my logic is like that. And ok, let's see your logic: THE VICTIMS ARE THE CHRISTIANS AND THE ATTACKERS ARE CHRISTIANS. I believe the readers can decide who has more logic in his head.


What can I say. Maybe it just takes some accurate reading


Accurate reading of what? Of this?


When Desa Soya (maluku) was attacked the same tactics were used. They turned out to be christian gang members (coker) killing their own (including the elder and the very young).

They were collaborating with Kopassus units for the purpose of keeping the sectarian violence on going. The real reason is anyones guess


I dont see any statement: IN MY OPINION or anything that states IT'S YOUR OWN OPINION BASED ON YOUR INDUCTIVE APPROACH. I don't know if I am the one who misread you or you're the one who forgot to state that it's your opinion.


Where did I conclude that Laskar Jihad was behind the Soya attack. So much for accurate reading.


I am the one who state about LASKAR JIHAD. And I wonder that with your great inductive reasoning ability, you don't even calculate the possibility of LASKAR JIHAD who went to Ambon to fight (Remember, that Gus Dur even condemned them).
Your only statement sofar was that The CHRISTIANS COKER WAS BEHIND THE ATTACT TO THE CHRISTIAN VILLAGE (SOYA). Please read my statements carefully.


Searching I have no idea what SABILI is. I am not going to repeat to you for the upteenth time what my sources are. And I simply do not know your definition of reliable sources


If you make a reference, you will put a link to the real reading, not the full website. If you read a book you will find that the reference wil be writen with THE PAGE where the reference is taken. But so far you gave me the full websites and want me to read all of them. Thank you, I have my own job to do than just reading all the sites from A to Z.
I only mention that I WILL ONLY CONSIDER RELIABLE SOURCES, not gossips, speculations, etc. And my last words are only to emphasize this.

I BELIEVE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS IN YOUR HAND, because you are the one who stated SOYA ATTACKERS ARE CHRISTIAN GROUP (COKER). So I need to see HOW YOU CONSTRUCT THE CONCLUSION. And please make it clear like this:

(1) I have an information from Kompas...dated......when Dai Bachtiar said......

I believe it will help more to us, the readers to understand you, than your saying about SOME RESEARCHERS, SOME SOURCES, SOME THIS AND THAT.

One thing about research and data is that IT HAS TO BE VERIVIABLE BY OTHER PEOPLE. So far you only succeed in make the readers confused.





Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

Jeroen
Administrator
User icon of Jeroen
spacer line
 

Quite a lot of shouting you got there. Emoticon:



principe
User
spacer line
 

I agree with the moderator. Please keep your composure. I have the feeling that I am trying to have a discussion with a pretty touchy personality if I may say so

Here again the first part of my first posting which seems to be quite something to digest for you:

QUOTE

The perpetrators wore masks and were clad in Ninja black outfits. Possibly they did not speak during the slayings.

When Desa Soya (maluku) was attacked the same tactics were used. They turned out to be christian gang members (coker) killing their own (including the elder and the very young

They were collaborating with Kopassus units for the purpose of keeping the sectarian violence on going. The real reason is anyones guess

It takes training, discipline, and maye a lot of drugs to carry out these sayings in such a cold blooded way. Above all it takes experience in killing this way.

Narrowing in on the possible perpetrators in my opinion you may be close when you look at certain units in military trained environments.

TNI might need again another hot spot to keep the money flowing is just one way of looking at it. But any scenario or combination of it may be valid


UNQUOTE

Source: The New York Times ran an article on October 30, 2005 with the title "masked men decapitate 3 schoolgirls in Indonesia". The story was taken form Reuters news desk (I already told you that)

The words: possibly, the real reasons maybe anyone's guess, in my opinion, any scenario or combination of it may be valid are all very clear statements of subjectivity. It is my personal view. Again you do not need to agree and I may be wrong in the end when the truth is finally known to us all..

[quote]quote]Names and links will be helpful. so far you only gave me links from that maltra.[[/quote]

Most of my information regarding the subject came from that website. Most of the links contribute to a larger picture of a long period of time concerning foremost the riots in Maluku. Other sources are many newspaper articles, magazines, TV programs and a big chunk my personal involvement in Maluku up till today

If you spare the time to read most of them you may form your own opinion of the happenings in Maluku based on a broader spectrum, of information. I already told you follow the link Coker on the left of the site and espescially the link Berthy Loupatti, CGI, Laskar Jihad for support and any link you may find of use regarding the subject of Coker

Is it hard for you to state your opinion like a real researcher. Or do you always present your analysis that way?: by saying SOME RESEARCHERS, SOME COMLUMNISTS, SOME PROFESSIONAL RESEARCHERS. Please. You can say GUS DUR, DAI BACHTIAR, and it will be more helpful and clear.

You clearly said that you needed reliable sources. But it seems to me that you need reliable source quotes rather. If I say Gus Dur said A and you do not belief him, is the source reliable to you? Is this A of Gus than a gossip, his illusion, the gospel truth?


[quote]Well, my logic is like that. And ok, lets see your logic: THE VICTIMS ARE THE CHRISTIANS AND THE ATTACKERS ARE CHRISTIANS. I believe the readers can decide who has more logic in his head

When militias in the former east Timor were terrorizing the east Timorese it involved definitely Catholics on both sides. When you look at the militias in Aceh, fighting GAM, again they are both Muslim. If Serbs wage war against Croats the are both Christian, look at Iraq and you see Muslims fighting Muslims all over the place


If you focus too much on religious motives you only cover a portion of the truth, I think. Those who pull the strings of the fighters in the field are the ones with far larger motives. It maybe political, it maybe social, it may be religious, it may be ideological etc. Indeed the readers can decide. The more input they have the better they come to a judgment.

[quote]Accurate reading of what? Of this?[/quote]<

Yes, and of all my earlier postings addressing you

[quote]I dont see any statement: IN MY OPINION or anything that states ITS YOUR OWN OPINION BASED ON YOUR INDUCTIVE APPROACH. I dont know if I am the one who misread you or youre the one who forgot to state that its your opinion


Look again above

[quote]I am the one who state about LASKAR JIHAD. [/quote

OK, the word then should have read than with an "aĒ: instead. Ok I did not get that one.

[quote]And I wonder that with your great inductive reasoning ability, you dont even calculate the possibility of LASKAR JIHAD who went to Ambon to fight (Remember, that Gus Dur even condemned them).[/quote

In fact I did. I ruled them out instantly as an organized militia run by the TNI in this particular case. But I did suspect some specifically trained Kopassus members blending in with Laskar Jihad forces to be among the perpetrators. LAskar Jihad forces were loud and always attacking in numbers wearing white Muslim robs and shouting Allah is great most of the time. The were unruly as a bunch but far more organized when elements of the army (Kopassus units) steered them. This is my personal suspicion based on witnessesí accounts and my personal observations during several attacks in Maluku).

The Soya guys were trained. They did not want to leave a mark judging from the masks and black outfits. They were silent. The perpetrators were not large in numbers. Laskar Jihad would have bragged about their success in attacking a village in the hart of the Christian territory. In fact they would have used it as a PR story of their success. They would have shouted Allah u Akhbar" all over the place. They would have attacked in large numbers (hundreds if not thousands) as they usually did

[quote]Your only statement sofar was that The CHRISTIANS COKER WAS BEHIND THE ATTACT TO THE CHRISTIAN VILLAGE (SOYA). Please read my statements carefully[/quote

Not only them, I also pointed my finger at Kopassus and the military in general (and who knows possible political parties and/or influential people (politicians, ex and current generals and religious leaders) as the players behind the scene. with the larger scenarios

[quote]If you make a reference, you will put a link to the real reading, not the full website.[/quote

I will do as I please. The website as a whole including links and sub links paint the larger picture

. [quote]If you read a book you will find that the reference wil be writen with THE PAGE where the reference is taken. But so far you gave me the full websites and want me to read all of them. Thank you, I have my own job to do than just reading all the sites from A to Z[/quote

So do I and that is exactly my job

[quote]I only mention that I WILL ONLY CONSIDER RELIABLE SOURCES, not gossips, speculations, etc. And my last words are only to emphasize this

Do what ever you like. But Here we go again ....reliable sources or reliable source quotes...? If newsweek reports Tony Blair having dinner with Prince Charles today is the source (newsweek and his reporter reporting the story ) reliably or is the story itself or both a lie. Is it a gossip that the reporter picked up. Is it a fact confirmed by other sources (are those other sources reliable and how about the reporter of the story) and so on and so on and so on. You tell me

[/quote][quote]I BELIEVE THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS IN YOUR HAND, because you are the one who stated SOYA ATTACKERS ARE CHRISTIAN GROUP (COKER). [/quote

No it not, it is in the hands of the police and prosecutors office

[quote]So I need to see HOW YOU CONSTRUCT THE CONCLUSION. And please make it clear like this:

(1) I have an information from Kompas...dated......when Dai Bachtiar said

I believe it will help more to us, the readers to understand you, than your saying about SOME RESEARCHERS, SOME SOURCES, SOME THIS AND THAT

I am not here to write a scientific thesis for you to scrutinize. I already did that twice for several professors who DID deserve my effort. I am not writing to proof my right but give my views on certain subjects. For you or not to agree is not relevant to me. And as mentioned before many many times already, I may be wrong or partly wrong or even right.

[quote]So far you only succeed in make the readers confused[/quote].[/quote

So do you




AnisJ
User
User icon of AnisJ
spacer line
 

S.lmat s.mua yth.,

After all these 'talking' we must conclude that two/2 cases(?) are mixed up in
this subject: 'the Coker Gang' the case of: 'the two/2 schoolgirls and, I forgot, christian-Islamatic contriversaries ; if somebody saw more 'cases', silahkan ...
As for the 'Coker Gang' case I want to remark that a very friend of Berty Loupatty, one of the main 'Coker Gang' members, said/stated that he was forced to join the Gang by the army (some say Kopasus), but .... he refused after that his house was contstanly being shot ......
So the 'Coker Gang' was christain, but what about the 'masterminds' ....,
second remark I want to make concerning the 'Soya village'attack is:
'No Moluccan, be it Muslim neither Christain would ever attack this important
village in Moluccan adat ....... this fact showed us, Moluccans, that the 'masterminds' are non-Moluccans ......'
The mosque of Ambon was build on the territory of the raja of Soya, it was given to Muslims although the Soya village was of Roman-Catholic Christian
believe ....
The raja of Soya played a very important role in establishing an oecomene Moluccan style by using 'adat elements' to combine Christians ...... Roman-Catholics and protestants ..... when I was on holiday in the late '90's in the Moluccas I saw a "baileo agama": a Moluccan (adat) custums house; but in this case for religious purposes.
After asking my relatives they explained me that this house was a oecomene
consept plan to join religion, afterward I was informed that it was the idea of the raja of Soya ..... I am sure that he already was planning to invite Moluccan
muslims to join in ...., but then the 'clash' occured, from what we know today ...


'Ahu kura ahia, mansia nia'

searching
User
spacer line
 

Jeroen and Principe,

I didn't mean to shout. Actually I use caps because I was lazy to use Bold. It takes time to make it bold, and easier to use caps to emphasize some things. Ok. I will not use the caps then, if both of you are disturbed. And both of you have my apology on that.


I agree with the moderator. Please keep your composure. I have the feeling that I am trying to have a discussion with a pretty touchy personality if I may say so

Here again the first part of my first posting which seems to be quite something to digest for you:


Thanks. I am a passionate person to discuss, but if you take it as touchy, then I wouldn't mind.


Source: The New York Times ran an article on October 30, 2005 with the title "masked men decapitate 3 schoolgirls in Indonesia". The story was taken form Reuters news desk (I already told you that)

The words: possibly, the real reasons maybe anyone's guess, in my opinion, any scenario or combination of it may be valid are all very clear statements of subjectivity. It is my personal view. Again you do not need to agree and I may be wrong in the end when the truth is finally known to us all..


You state about the Soya, but then your source (Reuter) tells about the beheading of those innocent girls. That's why I didn't consider it as a source about the Soya attack.


Most of my information regarding the subject came from that website. Most of the links contribute to a larger picture of a long period of time concerning foremost the riots in Maluku. Other sources are many newspaper articles, magazines, TV programs and a big chunk my personal involvement in Maluku up till today

If you spare the time to read most of them you may form your own opinion of the happenings in Maluku based on a broader spectrum, of information. I already told you follow the link Coker on the left of the site and espescially the link Berthy Loupatti, CGI, Laskar Jihad for support and any link you may find of use regarding the subject of Coker


In other forum, usually, when we state our opinion, we will make a link to the source directly to emphasize our point. It may be different with your style. But that's fine.


You clearly said that you needed reliable sources. But it seems to me that you need reliable source quotes rather. If I say Gus Dur said A and you do not belief him, is the source reliable to you? Is this A of Gus than a gossip, his illusion, the gospel truth?


At least I can verify their statements if you mentioned the names. But surely I cannot check the statements of some researchers or else.


When militias in the former east Timor were terrorizing the east Timorese it involved definitely Catholics on both sides. When you look at the militias in Aceh, fighting GAM, again they are both Muslim. If Serbs wage war against Croats the are both Christian, look at Iraq and you see Muslims fighting Muslims all over the place


Militia and civil. I always think that COKER is not a militia, but a civil group. So it's completely different if you want to compare about military who fought (and they have the same religion). Even you know that some US military, due to his Islamic background, killed his own friends because he didn't want his moslem brothers got killed by his own military friends.
Besides, comparing what happened in other area seems irrelevant to me.


If you focus too much on religious motives you only cover a portion of the truth, I think. Those who pull the strings of the fighters in the field are the ones with far larger motives. It maybe political, it maybe social, it may be religious, it may be ideological etc. Indeed the readers can decide. The more input they have the better they come to a judgment.


We may not know the whole truth, unles we are gods. It's good to listen to many sources. But which sources? You know, we can find sources with completely different stories for the same occurence. We need to have our logic too.


When Desa Soya (maluku) was attacked the same tactics were used. They turned out to be christian gang members (coker) killing their own (including the elder and the very young


This is not opinion, seems like stating a fact. True you said opinion, but it is about this:


Narrowing in on the possible perpetrators in my opinion you may be close when you look at certain units in military trained environments.


And not the above statements.


OK, the word then should have read than with an "aĒ: instead. Ok I did not get that one.


Correction accepted.


In fact I did. I ruled them out instantly as an organized militia run by the TNI in this particular case. But I did suspect some specifically trained Kopassus members blending in with Laskar Jihad forces to be among the perpetrators. LAskar Jihad forces were loud and always attacking in numbers wearing white Muslim robs and shouting Allah is great most of the time. The were unruly as a bunch but far more organized when elements of the army (Kopassus units) steered them. This is my personal suspicion based on witnessesí accounts and my personal observations during several attacks in Maluku).

The Soya guys were trained. They did not want to leave a mark judging from the masks and black outfits. They were silent. The perpetrators were not large in numbers. Laskar Jihad would have bragged about their success in attacking a village in the hart of the Christian territory. In fact they would have used it as a PR story of their success. They would have shouted Allah u Akhbar" all over the place. They would have attacked in large numbers (hundreds if not thousands) as they usually did


I have told you that Laskar Jihad has military training too. And I am sure that it's your judgment to rule the Laskar Jihad out. So in your mind it's impossible for them to do so. But remember, the moslem militants are much more clever nowadays. See the bombings everywhere.
With all the possibility of TNI and Laskar Jihad, then you'd rather rule out Laskar Jihad and pointed out Coker and TNI.


Do what ever you like. But Here we go again ....reliable sources or reliable source quotes...? If newsweek reports Tony Blair having dinner with Prince Charles today is the source (newsweek and his reporter reporting the story ) reliably or is the story itself or both a lie. Is it a gossip that the reporter picked up. Is it a fact confirmed by other sources (are those other sources reliable and how about the reporter of the story) and so on and so on and so on. You tell me


Once again you make our discussion becomes very wide. Ok, I will make it clear. Did Newsweek or CNN ever cover the story about Coker involvement? If so, I would love you to show me where. That's what I call fair.


No it not, it is in the hands of the police and prosecutors office


I mean in the case. You have stated the Coker and the military involvement. I want to know how you construct it. But I think I will never get it from you. So forget what I ask you.


I am not here to write a scientific thesis for you to scrutinize. I already did that twice for several professors who DID deserve my effort. I am not writing to proof my right but give my views on certain subjects. For you or not to agree is not relevant to me. And as mentioned before many many times already, I may be wrong or partly wrong or even right.


Thank you for stating that this discussion doesn't need your effort to show how you conclude the Coker is behind the Soya attact.
If so, we can finish this discussion. you may conclude that Coker is behind it, and I conclude the opossite.

Now the question about this Barbaric Beheading, do you also think Coker is involved?


Find out the real face of Islam, read www. faithfreedom.org

principe
User
spacer line
 

.


If so, we can finish this discussion. you may conclude that Coker is behind it, and I conclude the opossite


fair enough



AnisJ
User
User icon of AnisJ
spacer line
 

'Pincipe' and 'Searching' yth.,

"Pardon me, this forum does not consist of you two".
"Who are you to tell others what to do ..... ; is this your style to discuss ..... I myself believe in: 'the speech of freedom' ........ !!! Emoticon: Smile Emoticon: Smile Emoticon: Bye bye Emoticon: Bye bye Emoticon: Yes! Emoticon: Yes!


'Ahu kura ahia, mansia nia'


You have to be logged in to post a message. You can login by clicking here.
If you do not have an account yet, you can register yourself here.



77,000,674 topic views - 234,994 posts - 13,697 topics - 25,725 members - last post @ 18-11-2019 04:56 CET

Created by indahnesia.com · feedback & contact · © 2000-2019
Other websites by indahnesia.com: ticketindonesia.info · kamus-online.com · indonesiepagina.nl · suvono.nl

125,822,573 pageviews Discover Indonesia Online at indahnesia.com