AQ F'ed Up Last Week

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

It's looking more and more like they just galvanized moderate Arabs AGAINST them.

Way to go Osama, pretty soon they're going to hand over your head on a platter.

http://counterterror.typepad.com/the_counterterrorism_blog/2005/07/report_radical_.html


From the Al-Siyasah newspaper (received June 6):

"The Imam of al-Jabiriyah preached against the Americans and the Worshippers shouted 'O' Allah, make America stronger!"

"The Al-Siyasah newspaper has received news that several mosques in Kuwait have begun to exhibit a new phenomenon manifested in the rejection by worshippers of extremist prayers expressed by some of the Imams during their Khutbah [friday prayer].

These prayers included invitations to fight the Americans and to become more hostile towards them. An example of this [phenomenon] was when Nabil al-Awadi, who is an Imam at one of the mosques in the southern region of Al-Surrah, began preaching against the Americans in his last Friday Khutbah.

As a result, the people at prayer cut off his speech and demanded that he stop talking. Additionally, the worshippers at the mosque of Aisha Shabib in the Al-Jabiriyah neighborhood shouted, 'O' Allah, make Islam and America stronger' in response to what the Imam of that mosque had said during friday prayer about America and the current war [in Iraq]."


I bet you won't be hearing that on CNN anytime soon.

[violentkitten]

they coordinated a successful (for them) attack in the heart of the capital of the united states' major ally. how is that fucking up?

[scott]

First off, this is great.

Second, in a tangent... am I the only one skeptical that al Queda was actually behind the London bombing? I suspect that it was some other terrorist group, but that al Queda convinently took credit and it is all too easy to assign any terror related activities to AQ.

[MannyIsGod]

You know, I would have to say that moderate muslims were already against Al Queda.

No, I don't think AQ was taking false credit for the attack. The nature of their network makes cordination of this sort all too easy.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

they coordinated a successful (for them) attack in the heart of the capital of the united states' major ally. how is that fucking up?

AQ isn't doing anything they're doing (9/11, Iraq, London) to just kill people. They're trying to drive a wedge between the West and the Muslim world, and start a global war of Muslims vs. non-Muslims.

They are trying to provoke responses from the West that galvanize the Muslim world into "joining them" in a winner take all battle for the world.

Yeah, they killed some people, which isn't to be margianalized. But they also turned off a lot of Muslims with that attack last week. Think of it as failing at the grass roots campaign that they feel is ultimately a key cog in their defeat of the West.

Basically OBL and crew have hijacked their religion and it's nice to see Muslims actually saying enough's enough.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Manny, I agree with you that some moderate Muslims were against them. But you weren't seeing them speak up against Osama and Co.

Now you are.

[violentkitten]

so a lot of muslims weren't turned off by 9-11, but they were by what went down last week?

um...ok.

[Hook Dem]

First off, this is great.

Second, in a tangent... am I the only one skeptical that al Queda was actually behind the London bombing? I suspect that it was some other terrorist group, but that al Queda convinently took credit and it is all too easy to assign any terror related activities to AQ.
Why aren't you skeptical towards oil companies when they raise prices for bullshit reasons?

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

Forget it vk. The trend of AQ is to continuously go after civilians in the West, and that is increasingly turning off Muslims to their cause.

It's a cumulative effect.

[violentkitten]

interesting spin.

[scott]

Why aren't you skeptical towards oil companies when they raise prices for bullshit reasons?

Because 1) I understand the nature of the supply/demand dynamic and 2) I work for an oil company, dipshit.

[Shelly]

Has Osama been spotted lately? Do any of you think he's still alive?

[Johnny Tightlips]

who says i been jumpin' to conclusions about al quedo perpetrating the london bombings just because tony blair said it was islamic extremists?

[exstatic]

Has Osama been spotted lately? Do any of you think he's still alive?

No. Yes.

Read an interesting article on the evolution of aQ. Most of the old guard are dead. The new ones that are taking their places were never trained in the Middle East, and they're second generation Europeans, and therefore EU citizens, and can move freely through the EU. They are directed by no one. They work in very small groups and plan their own ops.

[Hook Dem]

Because 1) I understand the nature of the supply/demand dynamic and 2) I work for an oil company, dipshit.
I know you work for an oil company dipshit! Thats why I asked you the question. Just because some ships couldn't get through the Gulf to unload their precious cargo, it's time to raise prices? All of this crap is man made and you know it. I'm not talking about the level price of oil. I'm talking about this last week. I don't care if you do work for an oil company. That does not make you an expert. You have a chip on your shoulder about a mile wide and I'm not inpressed! We can continue this or you can come down to Earth and be civil. The choice is yours.

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

scott's probably got a company stock purchase plan, hence the defensiveness :lol

:flipoff

[Hook Dem]

scott's probably got a company stock purchase plan, hence the defensiveness :lol

:flipoff
Either that or one hell of an ego!

[JoeChalupa]

Moderate Muslims have been against terrorism for years.

Scott can defend his stances quite well and is one of the more intelligent posters in this forum.

[Vashner]

They don't need to grow spine. just to move out of the way of people with it..

[scott]

Just because some ships couldn't get through the Gulf to unload their precious cargo, it's time to raise prices?

Well, yes. And oil companies don't "set" prices... Crude oil, gasoline, and distillate are all traded on open exchanges. Supply and demand dictates prices, not dumb conspiracy theories.


All of this crap is man made and you know it. I'm not talking about the level price of oil. I'm talking about this last week.

Hurricanes that cause power outages and force refineries to shut down 190 mbpd of refining capacity when margins are high is man made "crap"? Is it Bush's hurricane machine, or is it the terrorists with giant fans off the coast of Africa?


I don't care if you do work for an oil company. That does not make you an expert.

It makes me someone who knows a hell of a lot more on the subject than you.


You have a chip on your shoulder about a mile wide and I'm not inpressed! We can continue this or you can come down to Earth and be civil. The choice is yours.

Come down to Earth and be civil? So we can talk about all kinds of other non-sequitous topics like why I'm not skeptical about the sky being blue?

I posted that I'm skeptical that aQ is the group responsible for the latest attack for the simple fact that there are lots of other terrorists groups out there, and I fear that our willingness to jump to the conclusion that aQ is responsible anytime something happens will be a mistake. Or maybe we should spend all of our attention on aQ while some other terrorist groups plots to kill us. Thankfully not even Dubya is that stupid.

Got any other brilliant observations? I'm also skeptical of the existence of unicorns - want to debate that next?

[RandomGuy]

I would believe this better if it wasn't third-hand from a blog that misspelled Alseyassah.

Find me an actual english version of the story that isn't from a blog and I will believe it. All I could find was this:
http://www.alseyassah.com/alseyassah/

My arabic is waaay to rusty to read it, though.

I did also find an interesting bit here:
http://www.arabtimesonline.com/arabtimes/kuwait/Index.asp

...but could find no mention of any "pro-american protests". Closest thing I could find was something that most conservative christian doo-dahs wouldn't admit about Islam:


'Terrorists ignorant of Islamic teachings'
KUWAIT CITY: Persons who claim to have in-depth knowledge of Islam but make incorrect statements about the religion are "uneducated people" who will face tough punishment from Allah, says Dean of Islamic Studies at Kuwait University (KU) Dr Mohammed Al-Tabtabaei. Al-Tabtabaei, who is the first Kuwaiti to receive a doctorate in his field, said acts of terrorism in the country are acts of people who do not understand the real teachings of Islam, adding Islam forbids terrorism and extremism. Pointing out the faculty of Islamic Studies in KU has a strategy to protect youth from extremist ideologies Al-Tabtabaei said rumors regarding increase in the number of crimes are untrue. The few crimes committed in Kuwait are by people with a weak religious foundation and lack of understanding of Islam, he added. Freedom and democracy should go hand-in-hand with religious understanding to enable the government do away with these crimes at the earliest long before they go out of control, said Al-Tabtabaei in conclusion.


By Fauziya Al-Ibrahim; Special to the Arab Times

[Aggie Hoopsfan]

I posted that I'm skeptical that aQ is the group responsible for the latest attack for the simple fact that there are lots of other terrorists groups out there, and I fear that our willingness to jump to the conclusion that aQ is responsible anytime something happens will be a mistake.

Who needs to jump to conclusions when they claimed responsibility?

[MannyIsGod]

Manny, I agree with you that some moderate Muslims were against them. But you weren't seeing them speak up against Osama and Co.

Now you are.
There are an amazing amount of things happening in this world that do not get the proper coverage because it just isn't what generates ratings.

Example: Moderate muslims speaking out.

Whats going to look better on your newscast? The carbomb in Iraq, or the moderate Muslim in France who hates Al Queda?

[smackdaddy11]

Before everyone starts patting themselves on the back that the moderates are finally speaking up, there is still a LONG,LONG way to go for islam to be compatible with western society. If you think this will slow down the Islamakazis, Case and point:

http://csmonitor.com/2005/0711/p01s04-woeu.html

A defiant Islam rises among young Britons

Thursday's attacks turn attention to a group alienated from British society.

By James Brandon | Correspondent of The Christian Science Monitor

LONDON – Thursday's coordinated terrorist attacks that killed at least 49 people have underscored competing forces within Britain's Muslim community: a minority that advocates violence against Western targets, and those who want to coexist peacefully with Britain's multifaith, multiethnic society.
Since the bombings, the media and Muslims have been at pains to explain that most of the country's 2 million Muslims are peaceful. "The Muslim community in Britain has a long history and is enormously diverse," says Anas al-Tikriti, a member of the Muslim Association of Britain.


But the attacks are turning attention to the increasing numbers of young British Muslims who are rejecting their parents' traditional culture in favor of a radical and expansionist Islam. This strikingly Western version of Islam combines an independence of thought with a contempt for established traditional scholarship and a theme of teenage rebellion.

"Getting involved in radical Islam is an emotional thing rather than a rational decision," says Abdul-Rahman al-Helbawi, a Muslim prayer leader. "And it's not a matter of intelligence or education - a lot of these radicals in Britain are very well-educated."

In Dalston market in north-east London on Thursday, "Abdullah," a Muslim watch-mender and evangelist, was in a pugnacious mood.

"We don't need to fight. We are taking over!" he said. "We are here to bring civilization to the West. England does not belong to the English people, it belongs to God."

Two days later in a prosperous West London cafe, Mr. Helbawi pondered the attacks. "It's not a surprise but I am still shocked," he said. "How can they do this? London is a city for all the world. This is not Islam."

Hours after the bombings, Helbawi logged onto an Internet chat room run by British Muslim extremists. "They were all congratulating each other on the attacks," he said. "It was crazy. They were talking about how they had won a great victory over the infidels, as if they had just come back from a battle."

Although so far, there is no evidence that British Muslims were involved in the bombs, there is little doubt that many British Muslims feel that Britain "deserved" the attacks for supporting the US invasions of Iraq and Afghanistan.

"Because Muslims explain the conflicts in Iraq, Kashmir, and Israel through Islam, every Muslim feels involved," said Helbawi. "People watch television and see Palestinian women being hit and pushed around by Israeli soldiers, and get angry and feel that they have to do something."

But beyond anger, a sense of alienation often drives radical Islam. Many second- and third-generation immigrants find themselves cut off not only from their parents' cultures but also from a British one that includes alcohol and looser sexual mores.

"If you don't drink, it really cuts you off from English society," says Ummul Choudhury, a London-based Middle East analyst for the Gulf Centre for Strategic Studies. "The view of the older generation is also that you do not integrate. If you do, you are told you are betraying your culture and religion."

The resulting isolation makes it easier for young Muslims to develop a contempt for British society.

"There is also a lot of racism toward white British people," says Ms. Choudhury. "It's not really something that people want to talk about, but there are definitely some things that Muslims say between themselves that they would never say in front of white people."



For frustrated and isolated young Muslims, radical Islam is not difficult to find. Girls in particular are often prevented from going out at night and can be easily drawn into online Muslim communities where they come into contact with other disillusioned Muslims from across Europe.

One leading analyst of the Islamic diaspora even compares the lure of extremist Islam to 1950s teens listening to Elvis in an attempt to shock their parents. "The son of a Pentecostal preacher in Brixton was recruited by the radical Muslims," says Nadhim Shehadi, acting head of the Middle East program at Chatham House.

"This young man initially tried to upset his parents by becoming a rapper," says Shehadi. "But when his parents stopped objecting, he became a jihadi instead."

The antiestablishment nature of this new Islam and its apparent status as an alternative to capitalism and secularism is also winning converts among native Britons.

"People come to Islam from all walks of life. It's not just middle-class people but also electricians, judges, and taxi drivers," says Sara Joseph, the editor of "Emel," a lifestyle magazine for Muslim women, who converted to Islam at age 17. "The main catalyst for conversion is often going out with a Muslim, although the primary factor is usually a search for spirituality."

While the estimated 1,000 British Christians, atheists, and members of other faiths who convert to Islam every year are often attracted by Islam's clearly defined teachings, this minor trend is overshadowed by Muslims' highbirth and immigration rates, which tomany Muslims promises increased political and social influence in the future.

Indeed, taking advantage of Britain's rapidly expanding and increasingly Muslim population are new parties that aim to promote ethnic and religious agendas. One is Respect, a left-wing party founded by former Labour MP George Galloway, that aims to unite Muslims and socialists around opposition to American foreign policy and globalization.

Linked to the desire for increased political power are attempts by some radical Muslims to begin a process of Islamicizing British cities.

Last month, Muslim groups in Glasgow petitioned the City Council to ban an Italian restaurant from serving alcohol to diners seated at outside tables. Hospitals in Leicester considered banning Bibles from hospital wards to avoid offending Muslim patients. In Birmingham, a group called Muslims Against Advertising began a campaign of painting over billboards that they deemed offensive to Islam - targeting ads for Levi's jeans, perfume, and lingerie.

But these small campaigns are polarizing public opinion along ethnic and religious lines - and creating support for Britain's far-right groups, who present themselves as defenders of Britain's hard-won freedoms.



And then there are the people who talk out of both sides of their mouths.


http://memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=745


Terror in London (4) - United Arab Emirates Friday Sermon: Igniting Civil Strife is the Habit of Jews and Christians, not Muslims

Following are excerpts from a Friday sermon delivered in the United Arab Emirates, and aired on UAE TV on July 8, 2005. The preacher's name is not available.

Preacher: What happened in a certain country, which was mentioned in the media yesterday, is a clear act of aggression, which is totally devoid of any logic, and is entirely unjustified. Whoever carries out such an act is not a Muslim, nor is he a religious person. This is the kind of criminal act that serves only those who wish to destroy mankind, and to thwart civilization and progress. Igniting civil strife and using the tools of war and destruction is the habit of the despicable Jews and Christians of the ancient nations, and the Koran has already deplored them for that.


I surf everywhere so saying moderate muslims have been speaking up is bunk. There are millions upon millions who believe Islam is it any everything else needs to be destroyed. If people believe this war will get less violent, your kidding yourselves. IF the mods do start combating their religious problems, violence will increase, not decrease. Any of you leftys ready for that scenario? I have been for years.

[MannyIsGod]

:lmao

Right on cue.

[Hook Dem]

"Got any other brilliant observations? I'm also skeptical of the existence of unicorns - want to debate that next?".................................................D on't get your panties in a wad Scott! I'm just jerking on your chain. Kinda payback for the snide remark in the other thread. . You know which one. I didn't think I ever did anything to you to deserve that. OK?

[smackdaddy11]

:lmao

Right on cue.

At least i address the issue at hand.

Do you ever want to address your "they don't hate freedom" B.S. that I already proved totally false?

I'll sing cum-ba-ya if we get to that point.

You'll error on the side of getting your ass blown up.

[MannyIsGod]

I'm sorry, a while back, you would have suckered me into a farse of a debate. But I've learned to weed through the people here that listen those that don't. It's pointless to speak to those who don't listen because it's about as intellectually stimulating as debating with my cat. Although my cat doesn't hate Muslims as much as you, so it may actually be worse.

So sorry, you'll have to go find another sucker.

[ChumpDumper]

Why would Imams in Kuwait be dogging the US in the first place? Don't they love us without condition?

[violentkitten]

I'm sorry, a while back, you would have suckered me into a farse of a debate. But I've learned to weed through the people here that listen those that don't. It's pointless to speak to those who don't listen because it's about as intellectually stimulating as debating with my cat. Although my cat doesn't hate Muslims as much as you, so it may actually be worse.

So sorry, you'll have to go find another sucker.

this cat doesn't hate muslims but he thinks there are some crazy motherfuckers out there that we can't ignore and must deal with.

[MannyIsGod]

this cat doesn't hate muslims but he thinks there are some crazy motherfuckers out there that we can't ignore and must deal with.
I agree. Smackdaddy is a Grand Wizard in hist anti muslim bigotry, however.

[scott]

"Got any other brilliant observations? I'm also skeptical of the existence of unicorns - want to debate that next?".................................................D on't get your panties in a wad Scott! I'm just jerking on your chain. Kinda payback for the snide remark in the other thread. . You know which one. I didn't think I ever did anything to you to deserve that. OK?

Actually I don't, but in any event I apologize.

[scott]

Who needs to jump to conclusions when they claimed responsibility?

Al Gore claimed responsibility for inventing the internet, and I don't believe him either.

[Duff McCartney]

I bet you won't be hearing that on CNN anytime soon.

You probably won't hear it on Fox either.

[Hook Dem]

Actually I don't, but in any event I apologize.
Me too! :lol

[smackdaddy11]

I'm sorry, a while back, you would have suckered me into a farse of a debate. But I've learned to weed through the people here that listen those that don't. It's pointless to speak to those who don't listen because it's about as intellectually stimulating as debating with my cat. Although my cat doesn't hate Muslims as much as you, so it may actually be worse.

So sorry, you'll have to go find another sucker.

So in other words, I don't listen which makes me wrong and you right. Eventhough you have no arguement to support the "they don't hate freedom" crap and I post "non-terrorists" saying the opposite. A farce of a debate when I use the actual words of Muslims all over the world.

You also were salivating at the Muslims Against Terrorism Rally scheduled in D.C. in May. More people showed at my childs school recital a few months back. :lol I pointed out the pathetic showing and nothing but crickets.

Where were the marches after 9/11, Spain, Britain, Indonesia, Australia????

I believe you don't want to discuss because you have no evidence to support your side. All I have ever asked is to see something, anything of substance from the Muslim community here and abroad. What do I read 90%+ of the time?


http://memritv.org/Transcript.asp?P1=748


Terror in London (7) - Head of London Center for Islamic History Hani Siba'i: In Islam, There Are No Such Things as Civilians; Al-Qaeda "rubbed the noses of the world's eight most powerful countries in the mud"

The following are excerpts from an interview with the head of the Al-Maqreze Centre for Historical Studies, Hani Al-Siba'i, which aired on Al-Jazeera TV on July 8, 2005.

Al-Siba'i: I think that British Prime Minister Tony Blair made a grave error when he spoke before the investigation and claimed that the perpetrators of these acts were acting in the name of Islam. I think that he will pay the price for this grave error in the future. No possibility should be ruled out. We do not rule out the possibility that it was done by the intelligence agency of another Western country hostile to Britain. We do not rule our countries... or some Zionist Americans who wanted to overshadow the G-8 summit. But at the same time, we do not rule out the Al-Qaeda organization. It's been claimed that Al-Qaeda died in Afghanistan, and was buried in the caves there. And behold: it was resurrected after the American occupation of Iraq. Moreover, Al-Qaeda controls the war agenda in Iraq. It is the Al-Qaeda organization in the Land of the Two Rivers (Iraq), headed by Abu Mus'ab Al-Zarqawi, that imposes its policies, to the extent that the Egyptian government was forced to... It was forced to recall (its ambassador), and other countries are afraid to send ambassadors there.

Host: He was not an ambassador, but rather a representative that was murdered, and then Egypt lowered its level of representation.

Al-Siba'i: He previously worked in the so-called "Israel." What I want to ask is: can this organization do this? Is it conceivable that it did it? Yes, it is. Why? In the year... We must not forget that on April 15, 2004, Sheik Osama bin Laden released a taped message, in which he said... He gave... He reached out for reconciliation...

Host:

Just to recall, you are referring to the Madrid incidents, in which some 190 people were killed.

Al-Siba'i: After the Madrid incidents, he addressed the Western and European nations. Obviously, he didn't address the leaders, whom he does not recognize. He talked to the Western nations about reconciliation...

Host: Excuse me, he gave them three or four months. But, forgive me, targeting civilians... You, as a Muslim and as the director of a center for Islamic history... Is targeting wretched civilians considered brave or manly?

Al-Siba'i: I think... The man (bin Laden) addressed these peoples so that they would pressure their governments. He told them: We did not attack you. You have been attacking us for more than two centuries, and your campaign continues. He said to them simply: Withdraw your soldiers from the Arabian Peninsula, withdraw from Afghanistan and Palestine...

Host: Excuse me, Is Sheik Osama bin Laden a religious scholar, who issues fatwas, or is he the head of Al-Qaeda?

Al-Siba'i: First of all, he is one of this (Islamic) nation. Allah... We have no clergy, or a pope, or anything like this. Anyone can carry out his religious duty, even if he is by himself.
Host: Mr. Hani, issuing fatwas is done by religious scholars.

Al-Siba'i: He has a Shura council, he has religious scholars... He wanted to debate with other scholars, but they refused. He asked to discuss matters with them, but they refused.

Host: The question, in short, is whether the religious scholars... Sir, the religious law assembly in Mecca at the end of last month issued a fatwa forbidding the killing of civilians. Should we follow it or Osama bin Laden?

Al-Siba'i: These assemblies resemble the assemblies of the Church. These assemblies forbid young people from going to Iraq to fight the Jihad. These assemblies... The Higher Religious Authority (in Saudi Arabia) are the ones who allowed the presence of Crusader forces in the Land of the Two Holy Places (Saudi Arabia). These assemblies...


Even the host slips.................................

Host: Mr. Hani, make no mistake. The same assembly ruled that Jihad in Iraq is allowed against soldiers. Even Sheik Osama (sic) Al-Maqdissi, Abu Musab Al-Zarqawi's mentor... OK. Abu Hani, OK... He asked Al-Zarqawi not to kill civilians and to attack only the Americans... I mean, only soldiers...

Al-Siba'i: The term "civilians" does not exist in Islamic religious law. Dr. Karmi is sitting here, and I am sitting here, and I'm familiar with religious law. There is no such term as "civilians" in the modern Western sense. People are either of Dar Al-Harb or not.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dar_al-Harb

Dar al-Harb (Arabic: "house of war") is a term used in many Islamic countries to refer to those areas outside Muslim rule. In some conservative traditions of Islam the world is divided into two components: dar al-Islam, the "house of submission" or the "house of God", and dar al-Harb, the "house of war": the home of the infidels or unbelievers (Arabic: kufr). The terms are usually understood to refer, respectively, to those lands currently administered by Muslim governments and those administered by non-Muslim governments. The exact definitions of these territories can vary widely according to the viewer's concept of who is and is not a Muslim, and which governments are or are not Muslim in practice.

The Muslim worldview espoused by the terms dar al-Islam and dar al-Harb is further confused by the addition of a third 'house' during the Ottoman era. See dar al-Ahd.

The goal of some aggressive Islamist organizations, such as Osama bin Laden's al-Qaeda network, is to expand the borders of dar al-Islam at the expense of dar al-Harb, and to create a universal Islamic community. According to their philosophy, this is the meaning of the term jihad. Another philosophy that espouses this terminology is the Saudi Wahhabist tradition. However, bin Laden and the Wahabbis differ on the important point of whether jihad may be pronounced and undertaken by individuals, or is a power reserved to the state. Bin Laden takes the former view, most likely emanating from his readings of Sayyed Qutb.

For more recent commentary on the meaning and relevance of the term dar al-Harb in the modern world, see the discussion under dar al-Islam.

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dar_al-Harb"



These institutes, like the Islamic Association (of Britain), represent white-collar people, the effendis, people with "prestige." They only represent their own interests and do not mix in society. They don't know... Ask other Muslims... People see them only on their TV screens. They don't participate in the demonstrations for the poor. they are not interested in people's problems. We invite them, and they don't show up.

Host: The Muslim Association of Britain represents 400 Islamic organizations...

Al-Siba'i: These are all interest groups. With all due respect, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Sheik Moududi group do business with one another.

Host: Are you claiming they are not Muslims?

Al-Siba'i: They are behind all these movements. They promote some people nobody has heard of. Then they promote some journalists.

Host: Excuse me, who do you want to promote? Those who want the banner of "There is no god but Allah" over the Queen of England and Buckingham Palace? Those who want to establish a caliphate and turn the Queen of England into a captive? Those who say (England) is Dar Al-Harb and property there can be plundered? Are those the kind of people you want?

Al-Siba'i: These associations do not represent the Muslim public. They collaborate with the British police for certain interests. They want an "English Islam," and not the Islam that was sent to the Prophet Muhammad.

Translation: These "moderate orgs. don't represent Islam. Only one "Islam". The one allowed to blow up civilians.


If Al-Qaeda indeed carried out this act, it is a great victory for it. It rubbed the noses of the world's eight most powerful countries in the mud. This victory is a blow to the economy...



Everthing I point out is from the horses mouths. You ignore it. Who is ignorant?

Nice job on the racism. See you pulled a Political Science 101. I'm losing, uhhhhhhhhhhhh...............................your a racist.

I don't give a fuck who it is. If Billy Joe Bobbie Sue believes in Islam, I'm watching him/her like a hawk.

Bring some substance to the table and I'll listen. The only thing you bring is beliefs ( and uhhhhh..........your a racist) without proof.

[MannyIsGod]

We've done it before. You regurgitate links and nothing more. I ask once again, have you been to a mosque?

Your answer will be the answer on whether or not I will respond to you further. I think I know what to expect.

[Guru of Nothing]

SmackDaddy, what are you gonna do?

I know, NOTHING!

[insert goofy puppy talk] Who's my little douche bag of liberty? [/Jon Stewart]

[whottt]

Has Osama been spotted lately? Do any of you think he's still alive?



Osama is still alive...but there are still plenty of psycho Pakistani's that need to be killed off in that region of the world...especially since Pakistan is a major nuclear power.

Ditto the psycho Saudi's in Iraq.


It really doesn't serve much purpose to catch Osama right now...

Once the psycho and nihilistic inclined scum have been cleansed by the US military, and Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran realized that they are surrounded on all sides by the US military, Israel, and India...the political desire to take on the West will be cured from the bottom up and those governments themselves will put the kibosh on the anti-American sentiment in their mosques and universities.

But right now...the oppressive and murderous fucks still need a place to go and die...

[mookie2001]

It really doesn't serve much purpose to catch Osama right now...

i must disagree
they catch deadbeat dads and arrest people for smoking joints i think they can catch the worst criminal in the world

[whottt]

Catching Osama now is like popping a pimple before it's got a whitehead on it...

All you do is fuck everything up and leave thousands of psycho fucks dormat just looking/waiting for an excuse to kill.

What's going on right now is akin to letting all the puss collect in one place before popping the zit.

I don't know for sure that the US is not trying to catch Osama...but I do know that they haven't tried their hardest to get him...

It'd be one thing if Al Quaeda was a centralized entity whose soldiers were forced into service...but it's different than that...the army must be destroyed before the general.

Otherwise you end up with a badly popped zit and a fucked up face.

[mookie2001]

well of course we havent tried our hardest
weve got 160k troops in iraq and federal investigators in aruba

[whottt]

Because catching Osama right now won't solve the problem. The solution is multi-faceted.

[mookie2001]

i think it would solve a big problem bush has, people thinking he's forgot about osama, he's diverting our attention by invading iraq and that he hasnt even used a quarter of his faculties to catch someone he promised to catch 4 years ago

[whottt]

Bush has zero problems...he got re-elected and will serve the maximum number of terms he can serve...he has zero problems. The only thing he has to be worried about now is his legacy...and he's going to have to win this war(or put us on the brink of winning it) to do that.

There is no quick fix to this conflict...and I don't know why everyone expects there to be...

In case you haven't noticed?

Al-Qaeda attacks and murders muslims on a daily basis in Iraq...they are being revealed for the scum they truly are...and they are losing the support of muslims worldwide...

That's one part of the solution to the problem.

Freeing the people of Iraq from a tyrant and improving their quality of life is another.

I notice in this thread that people talk about the moderate muslims...

Well Manny and Aggie are right and SmackDaddy is operating under an outdated set of beliefs...but it wasn't too long ago that Manny would have been wrong and Smackdaddy would have been right.

We are slowly and surely dragging Islam into the 21st century...but it's not going to be done by capturing one guy or winning one war.

It's going to be done by:

1.Killing off the apocalyptic generation that embraced terrorism(this is what is hapening in Iraq, and Afghanistan). These guys are killing machines that cannot be turned from their apocolyptic path. Taking Osama without thinning their ranks leaves this shadow army invisible and still indoctrinated with a heavy anti-western mentality. Since we cannot go into Pakistan(a nuclear country) or Saudi(the holy land to all muslims)...we have to bring them out to us.

2.Improving human rights and quality of life in the middle east(Again, this is Iraq and this is Pakistan). This not only improves the image of the West in the middle East, it weakens the recruiting power of the terrorists. Poverty is the #1 tool they have in recruiting their army.

3.Putting pressure on the despotic governments that we can't attack, to get rid of their Western Bigotry in their mosques and universities, and join the rest of mankind. The Universities are where they get their general and Mosques are the secondary tool for recruting soldiers. Number 2 is the primary way this goal will be achieved. As is having our military and allies located at key spots in the middle east.


There is no quick fix to this problem...but it's one that needs to be solved, because anyone that wants to play dumb and let someone with a suicide bombers mentality get hold of a country's nuclear arsenal...is fucking insane(IE 90% of the liberals in the US).

Osama's day will come...and yes there will probably be another terrorist attack on the US before that day comes.

[MannyIsGod]

It's going to be done by:

1.Killing off the apocalyptic generation that embraced terrorism(this is what is hapening in Iraq, and Afghanistan). These guys are killing machines that cannot be turned from their apocolyptic path. Taking Osama without thinning their ranks leaves this shadow army invisible and still indoctrinated with a heavy anti-western mentality. Since we cannot go into Pakistan(a nuclear country) or Saudi(the holy land to all muslims)...we have to bring them out to us.

2.Improving human rights and quality of life in the middle east(Again, this is Iraq and this is Pakistan). This not only improves the image of the West in the middle East, it weakens the recruiting power of the terrorists. Poverty is the #1 tool they have in recruiting their army.

3.Putting pressure on the despotic governments that we can't attack, to get rid of their Western Bigotry in their mosques and universities, and join the rest of mankind. The Universities are where they get their general and Mosques are the secondary tool for recruting soldiers. Number 2 is the primary way this goal will be achieved. As is having our military and allies located at key spots in the middle east.



I don't agree with everything you say, but I definetly agree with those main objectives. I think you and I would disagree that we are on the path torwards going that - I feel that we've treaded water or made slight progress at best - with the war in Iraq, but I at least like the fact you see the problem for the complex situation it is. I'm tired of the "they hate freedom" wrap because it doesn't hold any water.

[Nbadan]

Bush has zero problems...he got re-elected and will serve the maximum number of terms he can serve...he has zero problems. The only thing he has to be worried about now is his legacy...and he's going to have to win this war(or put us on the brink of winning it) to do that.

There is no quick fix to this conflict...and I don't know why everyone expects there to be...

In case you haven't noticed?

Al-Qaeda attacks and murders muslims on a daily basis in Iraq...they are being revealed for the scum they truly are...and they are losing the support of muslims worldwide...

If Democrats can prove that W perjured himself when he spoke to the Fitzgerald commission concerning Rove's involvement in the Plame leak, he would have big problems. Much bigger than a blow-job.

The Islamists lost the support of a majority of Muslims long ago, that's why Osama had little choice but to go to Afghanistan when he was chased out of Sudan. The misguided war on terror in Iraq has only infuriated otherwise moderate Muslims in the region to rise to arms, some for Nationalistic purposes, and other for religious and personal purposes.

[Nbadan]

1.Killing off the apocalyptic generation that embraced terrorism(this is what is hapening in Iraq, and Afghanistan). These guys are killing machines that cannot be turned from their apocolyptic path. Taking Osama without thinning their ranks leaves this shadow army invisible and still indoctrinated with a heavy anti-western mentality. Since we cannot go into Pakistan(a nuclear country) or Saudi(the holy land to all muslims)...we have to bring them out to us.

One could argue that for every terrorist we kill, 2 or 3 more join the fight against us. That's no way to ever win or end a war. Let's say that the U.S. and Britian decided to pull out all of its combat troops from Iraq today, what do you think would happen? Think: self-determination.

[Nbadan]

2.Improving human rights and quality of life in the middle east(Again, this is Iraq and this is Pakistan). This not only improves the image of the West in the middle East, it weakens the recruiting power of the terrorists. Poverty is the #1 tool they have in recruiting their army.

How can we pretend to be doing all this for the human rights of Iraqis while simultaneously continuing to support regimes world-wide and in the ME that abuse, torture, kidnap, and murder its citizens everyday? Poverty is a symptom of the problem that encourages radicalism in the Middle East, but the true cancer is a lack of a political voice for a majority of Muslims, and a lack of opportunity because of a lack of capitalism.

[whottt]

Dan...did someone steal your password?

To tell you the truth, I agree with several of the points you are making but I think you are oversimplifying this issue...

Like for instance...the standard lib attack questioning why we aren't in Saudi Arabia...

I'll get into this more tomorrow....

But surely you see the differences between Iraq and Saudi, Pakistan, and Iran?

For now I'll just say...we don't support Saudi Arabia...it's more like they support us...the terrorist movement we now are at war with is as much an enemy of that government as they are an enemy to us.


We can't declare war on Saudi Arabia..it would destroy our economy and send the entire world into a catyclysmic recession...Not to mention that we would be at war with every muslim in the world if we did so...Not just because we attacked the mother of Islam, but because historically the Saudi's have been one of the most peaceful and stable Arab countries in that region with regards to their neighbors, including Israel.

[Nbadan]

We can't declare war on Saudi Arabia..it would destroy our economy and send the entire world into a catyclysmic recession...Not to mention that we would be at war with every muslim in the world if we did so...Not just because we attacked the mother of Islam, but because historically the Saudi's have been one of the most peaceful and stable Arab countries in that region with regards to their neighbors, including Israel.

Look, I'm not crazy enough to believe that we should invade Saudi Arabia, but slowly nudging them toward a democracy wouldn't be a bad thing either. The Feudal game has run its course in the ME, its time for real the real hand of liberty, and freedom - Democracy, to reform the ME, but in order to have a true Democracy, a country must first legitimacy. This is precisely why I think we need to start withdrawing from Iraq. At some point its going to be sink or swim for the new Iraqi Government. The Shiite and Kurd mullahs and leaders have the power to end this insurgency immediately, but with U.S. troops still in there, in some cases protecting the very former Baathists who later turn against them, there is little reason for them to do so. Until we end the insurgency, it makes little sense to keep dumping billions of tax dollars into vulnerable reconstruction projects in Iraq.

[whottt]

Saudi will have to be nudged...but they are a long way from being nudged to Democracy...we'll have to nudge them to the point of where it's a crime to murder a woman first(and a few other mideastern countries need this nudging as well)...

Look, militarily none of these Arab countries are ever going to be able to beat us...these guys are the worst tactical fighters in the history of the World...that's why they rely so much on brutality and fear...I mean they never damage military installations...just civillians...that's supposed to stop a government bent on defeating them?

We can't leave Iraq now...doing that will alienate all the muslims who do support us there and everywhere and we will never be trusted in that part of the world...we will be viewed as cowards...they might like us more but they will respect and trust us less. And there is a big difference between the way the Shias and Sunis view America...

Not only that but the fledgling government will either get stomped by the Sunis or swallowed up by Iran...and we'll have a situation worse than Afghanistan was.

We can't just bomb them into the stone age and then walk out on them. That's beyond cruel and it's not in our best inerests...since cruelty and indifference in the middle east is a major cause of the war we now fight against terrorism.

It's best to just wait until they ask us to leave, their pride will dictate that they begin to fight their own battles without US aid. But they gotta learn to walk first...And despite newfound friendliness with Iran...their leader will never want to be subservient to Iran. It'll work out alright eventually...the Iraquis know they have an opportunity to be the showplace of the middle east and I think they have every intention of suceeding in this endeavor. Arabs have a lot of pride...or at least they try to.

[Shelly]

http://edition.cnn.com/2005/WORLD/europe/07/13/london.blair/

Blair shocked 'bombers' were British
PM outlines four-point plan to combat terror attacks

LONDON, England (CNN) -- Prime Minister Tony Blair has expressed his shock that the four men believed to have carried out last week's deadly terrorist attacks on London's transit system were British nationals.

But speaking to parliament on Wednesday, Blair also urged Britons to react calmly to the bombings that killed at least 52 people, and he condemned attacks against Muslims.

"Particularly with the shock of knowing that those that have perpetrated this were actually born and brought up in this country, I think it is particularly important we recognize the worldwide dimension of this," Blair said.

"I would ask for the same measured and calm response from the country that has characterized it since last Thursday," Blair told the House of Commons.

"This is a small group of extremists. Not one who can be ignored, but neither should it define Muslims in Britain who are overwhelmingly law-abiding, decent members of our society," he said Wednesday.

Blair told parliament the country had been united in the face of the bombings and that he wanted to "condemn utterly" race attacks that had come in their wake.

He told the Commons the government had a four-point plan, in which it would:

* Begin the process of consultation on planned counter-terrorism legislation within the next couple of weeks, with a priority being measures to combat the incitement and instigation of terrorism.

* Look urgently at how to strengthen the process for excluding from the UK those who incite hatred, and make it easier to deport such people.

* Start discussions immediately with Muslim leaders on combating "the perverted and poisonous misinterpretation of Islam" which lay behind the attacks.

* Talk to other nations on how to mobilize the "moderate and true voice of Islam."

Blair also said he wanted to send "a word of congratulations to our police and security services for the magnificent work that they have done."

Britain's interior minister, Home Secretary Charles Clarke, meanwhile warned of further attacks despite police tracing three likely suspects in the bombings to Leeds, northern England.

"We have to assume there are others who are ready to do the kinds of things that these people did last Thursday," Clarke told the BBC. Clarke is in Brussels for an emergency anti-terrorist meeting of European Union ministers. (Full story)

Metropolitan Police were back in Leeds, 320 kilometers (200 miles) north of London in West Yorkshire, for a second day searching six sites, three of them the home addresses of three of the men. (Full story)

On Tuesday, police arrested one man and conducted a controlled explosion to gain entry to one of the homes after questionable material was found. About 60 km north of London, police used another controlled explosion on a car left at a train station in Luton.

Police confirmed to CNN that one of the suspects was Shahzad Tanweer, 22, of Leeds.

Deputy Assistant Commissioner Peter Clarke, head of Scotland Yard's anti-terror branch, said Tuesday that the family of one of the men reported him missing several hours after Thursday's blasts, leading investigators to the four men, three of whom were from West Yorkshire.

All four had arrived in London by train on the morning of the bombings and were seen on closed-circuit television just before 8:30 a.m. at King's Cross station, he said.

Clarke said personal documents bearing the names of three of the men were found near the train seats where three of the bombs exploded, and that police have "very strong forensic and other evidence" suggesting that one of the Leeds men died on the explosion between the Aldgate and Liverpool stations.

[MannyIsGod]

What world is this man living in to be "shocked" because they were citizens of any particular country? How long before they realize what type of conflict this is?

[scott]

And by the way, Al Queda did not claim respsonsibility for the bombings, "The Secret Society of Al'Qaeda Jihad in Europe" did.

[Hook Dem]

And by the way, Al Queda did not claim respsonsibility for the bombings, "The Secret Society of Al'Qaeda Jihad in Europe" did.
A point everyone seems to be overlooking Scott!