/* */

PDA

View Full Version : Some questions on my mind.



sameer
09-07-2006, 03:12 PM
It’s pretty clear to me that one of the things the West fears/ opposes to is the setting up of an Islamic state/ government run and controlled by students/Scholars/ learned people who follow Islam. The question on my mind is why?

Is this a threat to them in some way? Do they assume that any Islamic state would send terrorists against them? Would they do that without a reason? Is Somaila really threat to them in some way? Why accuse the Islamic freedom fighters there to be training al-Qeada recruits?

If Nigeria executes someone according to Shari’a, y is it big world news in a negative way? Don’t other ppl in the US and other countries have the death penalty carried out on them?

Was Taliban a threat to the US? I know they were accused of hiding Bin-Laden so they bombed them. But isn’t fact that the Taliban was going to give up Bin-Laden if they provided them with proof? This seemed to be a reasonable request, especially since in my country a person is put on trial b4 he is extradited to the US for a crime. Or maybe proof wasn’t important and this man was guilty no matter what? How come all the negative propaganda about the Taliban on the western news just before 9-11? Did they need to turn the western public against the Taliban even b4 9-11 so what ever they had planned for them would seem justified?

Don’t drugs kill more ppl in the US than the 9-11 events? Isn’t drugs a bigger terror and the drug dealer a bigger terrorist killing more ppl around the world? I am sure drugs affects us a lot closer to our homes and lives more than any terrorist.
So with this in consideration, y don’t the US demand that the drug lords of Colombia and other countries be handed over and if not, then invade them also since they are a bigger threat to the US and the World than the Taliban or Hamas?


What are your thoughts on this topic?
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
TheRightPathI
09-08-2006, 05:51 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
?

Don’t drugs kill more ppl in the US than the 9-11 events? Isn’t drugs a bigger terror and the drug dealer a bigger terrorist killing more ppl around the world? I am sure drugs affects us a lot closer to our homes and lives more than any terrorist.
So with this in consideration, y don’t the US demand that the drug lords of Colombia and other countries be handed over and if not, then invade them also since they are a bigger threat to the US and the World than the Taliban or Hamas?


What are your thoughts on this topic?

Yeah drugs are really big here in the U.S. tons of kids in highschool do it, especially pot. Alcohol to kills a lot of people every year. Don't really know why America doesn't acknowledge the fact that drugs are definitely a much greater problem to America. Some people very strongly believe It's a War On Islam.
Reply

Woodrow
09-08-2006, 06:03 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by TheRightPathI
Yeah drugs are really big here in the U.S. tons of kids in highschool do it, especially pot. Alcohol to kills a lot of people every year. Don't really know why America doesn't acknowledge the fact that drugs are definitely a much greater problem to America. Some people very strongly believe It's a War On Islam.
Sadly, although any one of is many times more likly to be killed by a crack head looking for money to buy crack, than by a terrorist. We do not see the threat because it seldom occurs enmass. The law and the government can only do what the people will support and so far the majority of the people do not see the drug lords in South America as affecting the average American. It is known that there are many drug related deaths, but the attitude seems to be, who cares it is only crack heads killing crack heads. Too many people see the drug problem as being a victimless crime.
Reply

north_malaysian
09-08-2006, 06:40 AM
Suprisingly, after America liberated Afghanistan - Afghanistan produce more...and more opiums......is it for American market?:rollseyes
Reply

Welcome, Guest!
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up
Dawud_uk
09-08-2006, 07:24 AM
assalaamu alaykum,

muslims must fight to end oppression and injustice, that means where it could an islamic state would stop the west and especially the US oppressing people around the world. therefore it is a threat to the present world order and must be stopped at any cost.

however the more they fight islam, the more muslims see the truth behind the lies from their enemies, the more publicity there is the more people around the world revert to islam, so their war on terror / islam is backfiring big time and making what they fear the most more not less likely.

assalaamu alaykum,
Abu Abdullah
Reply

chitownmuslim
09-08-2006, 07:39 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
Don’t drugs kill more ppl in the US than the 9-11 events? Isn’t drugs a bigger terror and the drug dealer a bigger terrorist killing more ppl around the world? I am sure drugs affects us a lot closer to our homes and lives more than any terrorist.
So with this in consideration, y don’t the US demand that the drug lords of Colombia and other countries be handed over and if not, then invade them also since they are a bigger threat to the US and the World than the Taliban or Hamas?


What are your thoughts on this topic?
Very good point bro, I totally agree...
Reply

sameena
09-08-2006, 08:16 AM
:sl: brother

I totally agree but its not just that west should think what they are doing and y they r doing ,its time for us(muslims) to unite and stand firmly against these oppressions .

:w:
Reply

TheRightPathI
09-08-2006, 08:25 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
Don’t drugs kill more ppl in the US than the 9-11 events? Isn’t drugs a bigger terror and the drug dealer a bigger terrorist killing more ppl around the world? I am sure drugs affects us a lot closer to our homes and lives more than any terrorist.
So with this in consideration, y don’t the US demand that the drug lords of Colombia and other countries be handed over and if not, then invade them also since they are a bigger threat to the US and the World than the Taliban or Hamas?


What are your thoughts on this topic?

Salam, Some facts on Drugs in America,
America has only 5% of the world population but consumes 60% of ALL illegal drugs produced in the world

There are 47 million school age kids in America, currently over 27 million of them try drugs and alcohol each year.

Alcohol kills about 80,000 each year in America

1,360,000 Drug Prisoners in America
1.7 million Americans are incarcerated in prisons or jails, more per capita than any other nation.

More from this website http://www.a1b2c3.com/drugs/gen008.htm

After reading this, I wonder why there is a war on terriosm and not on drugs....
Reply

north_malaysian
09-08-2006, 09:11 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by TheRightPathI
Salam, Some facts on Drugs in America,
America has only 5% of the world population but consumes 60% of ALL illegal drugs produced in the world

There are 47 million school age kids in America, currently over 27 million of them try drugs and alcohol each year.

Alcohol kills about 80,000 each year in America

1,360,000 Drug Prisoners in America
1.7 million Americans are incarcerated in prisons or jails, more per capita than any other nation.

More from this website http://www.a1b2c3.com/drugs/gen008.htm

After reading this, I wonder why there is a war on terriosm and not on drugs....
WOW.. thanks for th facts... I'll give you reps!!!
Reply

sameer
09-08-2006, 01:39 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by TheRightPathI
Salam, Some facts on Drugs in America,
America has only 5% of the world population but consumes 60% of ALL illegal drugs produced in the world

There are 47 million school age kids in America, currently over 27 million of them try drugs and alcohol each year.

Alcohol kills about 80,000 each year in America

1,360,000 Drug Prisoners in America
1.7 million Americans are incarcerated in prisons or jails, more per capita than any other nation.

More from this website http://www.a1b2c3.com/drugs/gen008.htm

After reading this, I wonder why there is a war on terriosm and not on drugs....
wow.

So its clear that the "war on terror" is really a war on Islam or rather a war against Shari'ah and a true Islamic state. When all the terror in the world is taken into perspective it seems to be pretty obivious.

They may not fear individual praticing muslims, but rather a group of praticing muslims. But y would they fear this? Is it a war of ideology/religion vs islam..where one side is trying to survive the influence/spread of islam?
Reply

Keltoi
09-08-2006, 02:02 PM
I don't think the U.S. cares whether an Islamic state exists or not, as long as it isn't oppressive towards its people and is a force of stability. Anyone who thinks President Bush and Tony Blair get together to discuss ways to "kill all those blasted Muslims" is suffering from delusions of grandeur.
Reply

Woodrow
09-08-2006, 02:11 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
wow.

So its clear that the "war on terror" is really a war on Islam or rather a war against Shari'ah and a true Islamic state. When all the terror in the world is taken into perspective it seems to be pretty obivious.

They may not fear individual praticing muslims, but rather a group of praticing muslims. But y would they fear this? Is it a war of ideology/religion vs islam..where one side is trying to survive the influence/spread of islam?
I really don't think it is a war against Islam. Most Americans are quite ignorant about what Muslims are. They have a lot of confusion as to it being a Religion, Culture or Race. I believe what happened with the war on terror is that they wanted an identifiable enemy with distinuishing features. It just so happened that the immediatly associated terrorists were mid-eastern and readily seen as identifiable from the typical Westerner. The Arab population became a recognisable face and something the label of terrorist could be placed on. Americans want to put a face on a name. The majority of Americans believe that all Arabs are Muslim and that all Muslims are Arab. The 3 became synonamous. Arab=Muslim=Terrorist.

I would not call it a war against Islam. I would call it prejudice against Arabs. Has anybody noticed that non-Arab Muslims have not been targeted? The war on Terror has been confined to Arabic nations. Non-Arab Muslims are not harassed. The problem is not that Americans are anti-Muslim, the problem is Americans are very racialy biased. Racial discrimination is still very much alive and active. I would say that virtually every non-white citizen in the USA has experienced prejudice, no matter what his religion is.
Reply

Keltoi
09-08-2006, 02:28 PM
Obviously there are many racists in the U.S., just as there are in Arab countries, but you can't discuss this issue honestly by mentioning race and not terrorism. This situation didn't happen in a vacuum. That being said, many Americans don't understand Arab culture, not to mention the Muslim religion that comes with it in most cases. Americans know that we have enemies who fit that criteria. It makes it really difficult for the average Arab Muslim living in the United States and Western Europe. I think the problem is lack of communication. I think more Muslim leaders in the U.S. need more exposure to the American public in general, more time on T.V news, more T.V. programs that show average American Arab Muslims living in the U.S. The problem is just a lack of understanding, and that usually leads to fear and hatred.
Reply

Jayda
09-08-2006, 02:38 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
So with this in consideration, y don’t the US demand that the drug lords of Colombia and other countries be handed over and if not, then invade them also since they are a bigger threat to the US and the World than the Taliban or Hamas?


What are your thoughts on this topic?
they do... mexico and columbia and other parts of south america have been destroyed in the US drug war... the drug lords are bad people and something should be done about it but the united states sometimes goes too far...

i think that is the same think like in afghanistan or in iraq... they have a good purpose in mind and something has to be done but they reck everybody elses life in the process... you should see what has happened to tijuana
Reply

Jayda
09-08-2006, 02:39 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by TheRightPathI
After reading this, I wonder why there is a war on terriosm and not on drugs....
it has been going on for decades and killed millions... its just not reported like in the middle east...
Reply

- Qatada -
09-08-2006, 02:57 PM
:salamext:


http://www.islamicboard.com/basics-i...tml#post481340


:wasalamex
Reply

KAding
09-08-2006, 11:18 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by sameer
It’s pretty clear to me that one of the things the West fears/ opposes to is the setting up of an Islamic state/ government run and controlled by students/Scholars/ learned people who follow Islam. The question on my mind is why?
Well, the same reason why America and its allies clashed with communism, the ideologies on both sides appear incompatible. So there is a natural tendency towards resistance, on both sides. Many in the West hope there will be a world wide acceptance of their values, which they associate with liberty and prosperity. Similarly, clearly many of those who profes political Islam have a global outlook on life, they hope to spread their truth to all, so that all societies can achieve social justice and freedom from domination by other men, by following Gods laws.

But of course, this incompatibility does not explain it all. There are historical circumstances that led us to this open clash and these hostilities. In my opinion Americans didn't care at all about Islam in politics or Islamic states until 1979, when the Islamic revolution took place in Iran and American embassy personel was taken hostage. This was the first time American foreign policy really started to take into account political Islam IMHO. Yet, even after 1979 the importance of 'Islam' in American policy was limited. The US didn't approach the Middle East and its dictators any differently than it approached dictators in other parts of the world, everything was viewed in the context of the Cold War. With the fall of the Wall and the removal of the communist threat American policy could focus clearly on the new threat that emerged, partly because of it's own actions in the region, actions that were IMHO never before framed as a 'fight against Islam'. For example the first Gulf War and the containment of Saddam. Heck, not even the support of Israel was framed in an Islamic context, but rather in one of arab nationalism. The same goes for the Somalia intervention in 1993, I don't remember anyone back than talking about the possibility of an Islamic state. The same goes for Bosnia. All that changed in 2001, suddenly all that mattered was Islam and everything in the region was related to it.

Muslims often act as if the resistance to Islam is an old phenonemon, a continuation of the crusades in the Middle Ages, but it was simply not a political issue, certainly not before 1979, but hardly even between 1979 and 2001. Muslim fanatism was not seen as a particular threat, it was only discussed in the context of, say, the civil war in Algeria. This war against a certain political interpretation of Islam is a new phenonemon.

Is this a threat to them in some way? Do they assume that any Islamic state would send terrorists against them?
They consider it likely, yes. Mainly because of their experience with the Taliban. Pious Muslims tend to protect and help their Muslim brothers, especially if that brother is disliked by kaffirs. While certainly even idealistic Islamic politicians are limited by some 'real politik', it is clear there is more support for 'freedom fighters' resisting 'zionist-crusaders' among those who favour an Islamic state. Such a state is simply more likely to protect and shelter those willing to conduct martyrdom operations against the perceived enemy, namely the US. Because lets be clear about this, it's not just Americans distrusting these regimes, it's also these regimes distrusting America. The hate goes both ways.

Would they do that without a reason? Is Somaila really threat to them in some way? Why accuse the Islamic freedom fighters there to be training al-Qeada recruits?
Because of the many contacts between Bin Laden and those around him and the Islamic Courts Union in Somalia. Like I said, these organizations share the same hope in the establishment of a caliphate and the destruction of non-Islamic government in the Muslim world. They are revolutionaries and thus a threat to the status quo and stability. For example, they have in the past sheltered those who were held responsible for the attacks on the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 in which over 300 people died.

If Nigeria executes someone according to Shari’a, y is it big world news in a negative way? Don’t other ppl in the US and other countries have the death penalty carried out on them?
Yeah, I agree on that. But it is related to the perceived incompatibility of ideology and thus values. Sharia law is different from Western law, which many Westerns think is 'universal'. So they are angry about it, some punishments are often seen as injust and 'barbaric'.

Was Taliban a threat to the US? I know they were accused of hiding Bin-Laden so they bombed them. But isn’t fact that the Taliban was going to give up Bin-Laden if they provided them with proof? This seemed to be a reasonable request, especially since in my country a person is put on trial b4 he is extradited to the US for a crime. Or maybe proof wasn’t important and this man was guilty no matter what?
The US was angry after 9/11. And impatient. The taliban were not even the recognized government of Afghanistan, only Saudi-Arabia and Pakistan recognized them. I doubt they had 'proof' in the legal sense right after the 9/11 attacks, but a US court of law had already indicted him for his supposed involvement in the 1998 embassy bombings. Remember that Bin Laden had already formally declared war against the United States a few years earlier, only now did they return the favor. After all he had openly declared he intended to attack the US:

format_quote Originally Posted by OBL
[t]he ruling to kill the Americans and their allies civilians and military - is an individual duty for every Muslim who can do it in any country in which it is possible to do it, in order to liberate the al-Aqsa Mosque (in Jerusalem) and the holy mosque (in Makka) from their grip, and in order for their armies to move out of all the lands of Islam, defeated and unable to threaten any Muslim. This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, 'and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,' and 'fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah'.
Before 9/11 this declaration was taken seriously, but not serious enough to warrant military action in response to the threat. After 9/11 this changed. In this context of an open declaration of war and a connection to earlier attacks against US targets, 'legal proof' was insufficient for the Americans. They wanted him, dead or alive, he was their public enemy #1. He wanted war, and he got war. The US no longer viewed the problem as one of law enforcement, but as one of defense, so it has now become a military matter. As Bush made clear in one of his speeches, the US considered anyone an enemy that was associated with him or that harbored him or associates.

How come all the negative propaganda about the Taliban on the western news just before 9-11? Did they need to turn the western public against the Taliban even b4 9-11 so what ever they had planned for them would seem justified?
The Americans hardly cared about the Taliban pre-9/11, there was also little interest in Afghanistan in general in the Western press and among the public. The Taliban got negative press, not because of a propaganda campaign by the US government, no mostly after reports by organizations like Human Rights Watch, Amnesty International and the UN. Again, there was a clash between the values espoused by the Taliban, especially their view on the role of women in society, and Western values. They appeared to be complete opposites. That led to negative press.

Don’t drugs kill more ppl in the US than the 9-11 events. Isn’t drugs a bigger terror and the drug dealer a bigger terrorist killing more ppl around the world? I am sure drugs affects us a lot closer to our homes and lives more than any terrorist.
Thats a bit silly. Thats a bit like saying: "Don't more Palestinians die in car accidents than of Israeli bullets, if so, why do so many Muslims criticize Israel?". The issue is the political agenda and the deliberate criminal act with the intention to undermine and disrupt society. Drugsellers want money, they do not have a political agenda, in their mind they are not involved in a 'war' with the society they sell drugs to.

So with this in consideration, y don’t the US demand that the drug lords of Colombia and other countries be handed over and if not, then invade them also since they are a bigger threat to the US and the World than the Taliban or Hamas?
Actually, the US is very much engaged in what the call the 'war on drugs', so they are certainly attempting to prosecute those who use or sell drugs. However, they don't invade, say, Columbia, because the country is itself actively hunting down drug traders. So any comparison with the Taliban is quite ludicrous, because:
1. There is no politics involved (i.e. a declaration of war)
2. The country in question is already attempting to eradicate the problem
Reply

KAding
09-08-2006, 11:27 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by TheRightPathI
Yeah drugs are really big here in the U.S. tons of kids in highschool do it, especially pot. Alcohol to kills a lot of people every year. Don't really know why America doesn't acknowledge the fact that drugs are definitely a much greater problem to America.
Ehm, are you serious? The US has one of the toughest anti-narcotics laws and enforcement in the developed world. They most certainly take it serious. Just because one problem is bigger than another doesn't mean the smaller problem should be ignored.
Reply

KAding
09-08-2006, 11:34 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
I really don't think it is a war against Islam. Most Americans are quite ignorant about what Muslims are. They have a lot of confusion as to it being a Religion, Culture or Race. I believe what happened with the war on terror is that they wanted an identifiable enemy with distinuishing features. It just so happened that the immediatly associated terrorists were mid-eastern and readily seen as identifiable from the typical Westerner. The Arab population became a recognisable face and something the label of terrorist could be placed on. Americans want to put a face on a name. The majority of Americans believe that all Arabs are Muslim and that all Muslims are Arab. The 3 became synonamous. Arab=Muslim=Terrorist.
To the 'common man' perhaps. But those who direct American foreign policy are not that ignorant and don't use simplistic logic like that.

Certain interpretations of Islam became the enemy, because those who attack the US do it in name of Islam, simple. When you write pages of stuff like: "This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, 'and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,' and 'fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah'.". Well, lets just say you get the impression Islam has something to do with it.

I would not call it a war against Islam. I would call it prejudice against Arabs. Has anybody noticed that non-Arab Muslims have not been targeted? The war on Terror has been confined to Arabic nations. Non-Arab Muslims are not harassed. The problem is not that Americans are anti-Muslim, the problem is Americans are very racialy biased. Racial discrimination is still very much alive and active. I would say that virtually every non-white citizen in the USA has experienced prejudice, no matter what his religion is.
I disagree. While this may be true for some bigots, but overall even Americans realize this is about Islam, not Arabs.
Reply

KAding
09-08-2006, 11:35 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by Jayda
they do... mexico and columbia and other parts of south america have been destroyed in the US drug war... the drug lords are bad people and something should be done about it but the united states sometimes goes too far...
The US war on drugs destroyed Mexico and Columbia? Could you elaborate?

i think that is the same think like in afghanistan or in iraq... they have a good purpose in mind and something has to be done but they reck everybody elses life in the process... you should see what has happened to tijuana
Agreed.
Reply

Skillganon
09-09-2006, 12:43 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Woodrow
I would not call it a war against Islam. I would call it prejudice against Arabs. Has anybody noticed that non-Arab Muslims have not been targeted? The war on Terror has been confined to Arabic nations. Non-Arab Muslims are not harassed. The problem is not that Americans are anti-Muslim, the problem is Americans are very racialy biased. Racial discrimination is still very much alive and active. I would say that virtually every non-white citizen in the USA has experienced prejudice, no matter what his religion is.
I too have notice that mainly their WAR is confined to the arab nations.
Any reason why?
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Their is a purpose, but I am afraid many don't read the books I read. He's an american author, a University professor in the Department of Modern Languages and Linguistics. Anyone intersted?
Reply

TheRightPathI
09-09-2006, 01:45 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
Ehm, are you serious? The US has one of the toughest anti-narcotics laws and enforcement in the developed world. They most certainly take it serious. Just because one problem is bigger than another doesn't mean the smaller problem should be ignored.
Salam, ARE YOU JOKING ME? I just graduated from high school two years ago. I could right now in a matter of minutes get all the pot I needed for like a year if I really wanted to. All types of people did it in highscool and ANYONE could easily have access to it, same goes for heroin, crack, and all the other drugs.
My brother, was telling me how some people he never would suspect, have done pot or other drugs.
Reply

ManchesterFolk
09-09-2006, 01:57 AM
Do they assume that any Islamic state would send terrorists against them?
Yes.

Would they do that without a reason?
Is being an 'infidel' a reason?
Reply

QuranStudy
09-09-2006, 02:06 AM
Is being an 'infidel' a reason?
Nope.
Reply

Skillganon
09-09-2006, 02:08 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by QuranStudy
Nope.
Good answer. Very Informative, but maybe it is not the answer he want's.
Reply

Woodrow
09-09-2006, 02:16 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
To the 'common man' perhaps. But those who direct American foreign policy are not that ignorant and don't use simplistic logic like that.

Certain interpretations of Islam became the enemy, because those who attack the US do it in name of Islam, simple. When you write pages of stuff like: "This is in accordance with the words of Almighty Allah, 'and fight the pagans all together as they fight you all together,' and 'fight them until there is no more tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah'.". Well, lets just say you get the impression Islam has something to do with it.

However, all of the overt activities directed towards Muslims have been in Arabic Nations, which have less than 15% of the worlds Muslims


I disagree. While this may be true for some bigots, but overall even Americans realize this is about Islam, not Arabs.
However those of us who are not of Arabic heritage can walk the streets, have no problems with our non-Muslim neighbors and are never harased by the police or subjected to scrutiny when we go into public buildings or board airplanes.
Reply

ManchesterFolk
09-09-2006, 02:23 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Skillganon
Good answer. Very Informative, but maybe it is not the answer he want's.
The only awnser I want is the real one.
Reply

Skillganon
09-09-2006, 02:27 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by ManchesterFolk
The only awnser I want is the real one.
Look up towards the heaven, and don't take you eye it or you will miss it. :rollseyes
Reply

ManchesterFolk
09-09-2006, 02:31 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Skillganon
Look up towards the heaven, and don't take you eye it or you will miss it. :rollseyes
What?

What does 'don't take you eye it' mean? :giggling:
Reply

AHMED_GUREY
09-09-2006, 04:21 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
Because of the many contacts between Bin Laden and those around him and the Islamic Courts Union in Somalia.
Please elaborate on the ''many'' so-called links and please no hearsay C.I.A/Pentagon dogma

ICU snubs Bin laden



Like I said, these organizations share the same hope in the establishment of a caliphate
it's not just the organisations who hope this..

and the destruction of non-Islamic government in the Muslim world.
you mean corrupt governments

They are revolutionaries and thus a threat to the status quo and stability.
friend the Islamic Courts delivered stability before the status quo was anarchy

For example, they have in the past sheltered those who were held responsible for the attacks on the US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998 in which over 300 people died..
Never proven to be true

Islamic leaders in Mogadishu have invited international observers to Somalia to conduct a fact-finding mission about the possible presence of terrorists in the Horn of African country. The proposal appears to be an effort to dispel concerns that the Supreme Islamic Council, which seized control of Mogadishu and other parts of Somalia last month, may be harboring al-Qaida operatives.
Somalia's Islamic Leaders Invite International Observers to Conduct Fact-Finding Mission

i wonder why nobody is answering the invitation

2 months have passed now

are they afraid that they will be proven wrong? and therefore can't use the old lame Al Qaeda Al Qaeda card on Somalia?

Question has U.S intelligence service in the last 4 years provided any concrete evidence at ALL??

and not

''allegedly''

''they might''

''potential''

it's sad that there trying to put the terrorist tag on a people's revolution

this is an indigeneous movement not a foreign one.

and you can't stop it you can only slow it down:happy:
Reply

KAding
09-09-2006, 09:30 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by Skillganon
I too have notice that mainly their WAR is confined to the arab nations.
Wny reason why?
Is Afghanistan an Arab nation? Is Iran an Arab nation? Is Pakistan an arab nation? Are the Islamic guerilla in Southern Phillipines arabs? Are Somalis arabs?

So I disagree. Much of the attention of US policy went to non-Arabs. US policy makers are not stupid, they can understand the difference between a Muslim and an arab!

Their is a purpose, but I am afraid many don't read the books I read.
Who are 'they'? Those who decide American foreign policy? They don't read books at the US state department?

Again, it's not Joe Sixpack that makes US policy!
Reply

KAding
09-09-2006, 10:16 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by AHMED_GUREY
Please elaborate on the ''many'' so-called links and please no hearsay C.I.A/Pentagon dogma

ICU snubs Bin laden
No CIA/Pentagon hearsay? The intention of this thread seemed to me to be to understand why Americans act as they do. Much of that action is based on analysis by the CIA and the Pentagon. You might disagree with these analysis, but certainly the US governments use it when they decide policy. Simply saying "but it's the pentagon saying it" is not a refutation of any of the claims. In this case it was actually the FBI who made the link to some members/groups that are now in the ICU.

At the very least the US believes these people are sympathetic to Al-qaeda. I would suggest you read the wikipedia page on one of the leaders of the ICU in Somalia, it might help you understand why the US is concerned:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Dahir_Aweys

The US don't trust them one bit. And I can hardly blame them. Remember that Bin Laden himself claimed involvement in Somalia.

it's not just the organisations who hope this..
True. And? These people all belong to the same group of what Westerners call 'Islamists'. These are revolutionary movements, who rarely limit themselves to only their country, but generally have 'bigger' ideas.

you mean corrupt governments
Some are corrupt, some are not. Turkey is not particularly corrupt, nor is Malaysia or Indonesia. But I have yet to see an Islamic state that is not also corrupt though. I don't believe Iran, Saudi Arabia or the Taliban are any better personally.

friend the Islamic Courts delivered stability before the status quo was anarchy
Sure. Americans don't really care about who governs Somalia itself, they only hope whoever does won't give shelter to those who plot against the US.

Never proven to be true
Perhaps not. But there are suspicions, enough of them to make US policy hostile towards the ICU.

Somalia's Islamic Leaders Invite International Observers to Conduct Fact-Finding Mission

i wonder why nobody is answering the invitation

2 months have passed now

are they afraid that they will be proven wrong? and therefore can't use the old lame Al Qaeda Al Qaeda card on Somalia?

Question has U.S intelligence service in the last 4 years provided any concrete evidence at ALL??
I don't know. They certainly made enough specific claims, about the Al-Itihaad al-Islamiya in Somalia being funded by Bin Laden. Bin Laden claiming Somalia "was his biggest victory". The FBI conducted a criminal investigation into the embassy bombings, so I assume there are plenty of facts in there. There was a trial on it after all.

and not

''allegedly''

''they might''

''potential''
Well, clearly they are themselves still in doubt. Otherwise they would have acted more decisively in Somalia. So far they have only expressed concern about the situation. They have not intervened.

it's sad that there trying to put the terrorist tag on a people's revolution

this is an indigeneous movement not a foreign one.
Well, I don't think the US ever called the ICU itself a terrorist organization. Only that some of its members had links to terror organizations.

and you can't stop it you can only slow it down:happy:
Well, if the Somalis want to be ruled by an Islamic regime, by all means they should and the US should stay out of it. But if, like in Afghanistan, people start using it as a safe-haven and plot against the US, then you can expect the US to act.
Reply

AHMED_GUREY
09-10-2006, 01:01 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
No CIA/Pentagon hearsay? The intention of this thread seemed to me to be to understand why Americans act as they do. Much of that action is based on analysis by the CIA and the Pentagon. You might disagree with these analysis, but certainly the US governments use it when they decide policy. Simply saying "but it's the pentagon saying it" is not a refutation of any of the claims. In this case it was actually the FBI who made the link to some members/groups that are now in the ICU.
SADDAM HAD NO LINKS WITH AL QAEDA

wasn't this one of the reason why they invaded my brothers and sisters?

so no WMD'S and no link with Al qaeda

this is simply pure colonization

At the very least the US believes these people are sympathetic to Al-qaeda.
If the Americans or Westerners know terrorism as Islam and terrorists as Muslims, I am a Muslim; if they know the terrorists as people who want to install an Islamic government, I am that. But if they know terrorists as those who kill people or create problems and tensions, I am not that.-Hassan Dahir Aweys

I would suggest you read the wikipedia page on one of the leaders of the ICU in Somalia, it might help you understand why the US is concerned:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hassan_Dahir_Aweys

The US don't trust them one bit. And I can hardly blame them. Remember that Bin Laden himself claimed involvement in Somalia.
Bin laden can claim alot of things it doesn't mean all his claims have a concrete foundation to stand on

Bin laden has never been in somalia in the last 15 years

the warlord thugz would have spotted him from miles away and then chase him to get the 25 million $ reward

True. And? These people all belong to the same group of what Westerners call 'Islamists'. These are revolutionary movements, who rarely limit themselves to only their country, but generally have 'bigger' ideas.
so are you saying the ''christianists'' limit themselves to their own countries??

:D that's funny


Some are corrupt, some are not. Turkey is not particularly corrupt, nor is Malaysia or Indonesia. But I have yet to see an Islamic state that is not also corrupt though. I don't believe Iran, Saudi Arabia or the Taliban are any better personally.
when i say corruption i'm not talking about finance (evendo in some countries it is a major factor) but about Islam

what muslim want is security

they want their governments to act swiftly and coloborate with other muslim countries when there in need

they want to be free to practice their religion

Sure. Americans don't really care about who governs Somalia itself, they only hope whoever does won't give shelter to those who plot against the US.
but what the US is doing is wrong

they were invited to do research with a fact finding team in somalia with the blessing of the ICU and end the speculation of so-called al-qaeda fighters being in somalia


Perhaps not. But there are suspicions, enough of them to make US policy hostile towards the ICU.
i don't know if you remember a video 2 months back about arab fighters being allegedly in the somali Capital

they showed somali fighters under night vision and try to claim they were arabs :heated:

I don't know. They certainly made enough specific claims, about the Al-Itihaad al-Islamiya in Somalia being funded by Bin Laden. Bin Laden claiming Somalia "was his biggest victory". The FBI conducted a criminal investigation into the embassy bombings, so I assume there are plenty of facts in there. There was a trial on it after all.
did Bin laden claim he was part of the black hawk down battle?

and he called a thousand innocent civilians dead a victory?

first of all Aideed was a warlord with no connections to bin laden or what so ever

bin laden can call hizbollah's war with Israel his biggest victory it doesn't mean he had anything to do with it



Well, clearly they are themselves still in doubt. Otherwise they would have acted more decisively in Somalia. So far they have only expressed concern about the situation. They have not intervened.
you know if US does tries to come in my country i rather have them say it directly and stop playing around the bush with ''allegedly'' ''they might'' ''potential''

they were invited to see for themselves and they have still not answered the invitation

makes me think wether they want to invade my country for some sinister unknown reason
Reply

KAding
09-10-2006, 11:18 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by TheRightPathI
Salam, ARE YOU JOKING ME? I just graduated from high school two years ago. I could right now in a matter of minutes get all the pot I needed for like a year if I really wanted to. All types of people did it in highscool and ANYONE could easily have access to it, same goes for heroin, crack, and all the other drugs.
My brother, was telling me how some people he never would suspect, have done pot or other drugs.
But that is not because lack of trying by law enforcement or the absence of laws against narcotics! The amount of money being spend on the 'war on drugs' is ludicrous. IMHO it is one of the biggest law enforcement mistakes ever made in the US, there are so many people in prison in the US on drug related crimes.
Reply

KAding
09-10-2006, 11:44 AM
format_quote Originally Posted by AHMED_GUREY
SADDAM HAD NO LINKS WITH AL QAEDA

wasn't this one of the reason why they invaded my brothers and sisters?

so no WMD'S and no link with Al qaeda
What does Iraq have to do with our discussion about Islamic states?

this is simply pure colonization
Uh huh, I can already see all those American settlers preparing for the colonization of Iraq.

If the Americans or Westerners know terrorism as Islam and terrorists as Muslims, I am a Muslim; if they know the terrorists as people who want to install an Islamic government, I am that. But if they know terrorists as those who kill people or create problems and tensions, I am not that.-Hassan Dahir Aweys
This is ridiculous, of course those who want to install Islamic government are not 'terrorist' because of that. Some have links to terrorists though, which is enough to make the US suspicious.

Bin laden can claim alot of things it doesn't mean all his claims have a concrete foundation to stand on

Bin laden has never been in somalia in the last 15 years
True. If he were there now the Americans would already be in Mogadishu.

so are you saying the ''christianists'' limit themselves to their own countries??

:D that's funny
What are Christianists? Do you know any Christian movements that want to create a theocratic state? Christianity has nothing like the 'sharia' that would need to be implemented by a theocratic government.

when i say corruption i'm not talking about finance (evendo in some countries it is a major factor) but about Islam

what muslim want is security

they want their governments to act swiftly and coloborate with other muslim countries when there in need

they want to be free to practice their religion
If you think the Taliban was not corrupt, that Iran is not corrupt, I just have to say I disagree with you. But again, this is the clash of values I was talking about. You wanted to know why there is friction between the West and the Islamic world, well this is one of the reasons. What is corrupt to you is not corrupt to me and vise versa.


but what the US is doing is wrong

they were invited to do research with a fact finding team in somalia with the blessing of the ICU and end the speculation of so-called al-qaeda fighters being in somalia
What is the US doing exactly?

i don't know if you remember a video 2 months back about arab fighters being allegedly in the somali Capital

they showed somali fighters under night vision and try to claim they were arabs :heated:
Are there no Muhajideen in Somalia? Why not? They were in Bosnia, in Chechnya, in Pakistan, in Afghanistan, in Algeria. But there are none in Somalia? But that doesn't matter anyway, a Muhajideen is not necesarrily a terrorist of course.

But hey, I agree with you. I hope the US isn't stupid enough to intervene in Somalia. I only responded to your first post because I think you painted too simple a picture of reality. Americans are not completely without reason to mistrust for example the Taliban or the ICU.
Reply

AHMED_GUREY
09-10-2006, 03:08 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding
What does Iraq have to do with our discussion about Islamic states?
They were examples of blunders made by the US intelligence services

the same services that now use the ''allegedly'' card on somalia

Uh huh, I can already see all those American settlers preparing for the colonization of Iraq.
American army,british army etc etc

American reconstruction companies!

american oil companies

british companies

Saddam had signed deals in 97/98 with Chinese and russian companies

This is ridiculous, of course those who want to install Islamic government are not 'terrorist' because of that. Some have links to terrorists though, which is enough to make the US suspicious.
yeah but US sometimes is simply borderline paranoid wouldn't you agree?

True. If he were there now the Americans would already be in Mogadishu.
then you agree with me that this ICU movement is an indigeneous one and not a puppet movement that takes orders from foreign puppeteers as the media likes to paint it

What are Christianists? Do you know any Christian movements that want to create a theocratic state? Christianity has nothing like the 'sharia' that would need to be implemented by a theocratic government.
Christianist

also when a person in a american democratic court is sworn in

wich book is used? ----> the bible

Suskind, a former Wall Street Journal reporter, quotes other Republicans who have concluded that Bush believes – or at least gives the impression he believes – that his judgments are directed by God.

In a British TV interview, Blair said of his controversial decision to send troops to Iraq: "If you have faith about these things, then you realize that judgment is made by other people. If you believe in God, it's made by God as well."

:rollseyes

If you think the Taliban was not corrupt,that Iran is not corrupt,I just have to say I disagree with you. But again, this is the clash of values I was talking about. You wanted to know why there is friction between the West and the Islamic world, well this is one of the reasons. What is corrupt to you is not corrupt to me and vise versa
well i've seen a BBC special on afghanistan a while back and it was very sad

at least under taliban rule women didn't have to fear ''rape''

at least under taliban people had jobs

at least under taliban people had electricity and clean water

"During the Taliban time, you could walk the streets safely day and night. Now we have to sleep with guns for pillows because we can be robbed at any time," said Abdul Haddi, 35, a car dealer. "Now we have the freedom to listen to music, and nobody bothers us about wearing beards, but music does not put food on the table. We prefer extremism to instability."

At a nursing school on the grounds of Mir Weis Hospital, female students and teachers this week expressed grave concern for their safety in the streets. Saying they feared being accosted and molested by gunmen, they begged the school's director for door-to-door bus service so they would not have to walk or wait outdoors.

During the Taliban era, the school received special permission to teach girls after agreeing to follow strict Islamic rules, with no men allowed on the premises, no music or parties and special curtained buses bringing veiled students to class. Now, the girls said, the atmosphere inside the school is more relaxed, but the conditions outside are far more frightening.

"We are so confused and worried. There are gunmen everywhere, and there is no stability," said Khatira, 18, a nursing student. "I hate guns, and I only want to study. I was born in a time of fighting, and I never saw any stable conditions except with the Taliban. In the time of extremism, I could study safely. Now I can't."
These stories remind me of my country

Many Residents Longingly Recall Life Under Strict Islamic Code; 'We Prefer Extremism to Instability'


What is the US doing exactly?
have a look


Are there no Muhajideen in Somalia? Why not? They were in Bosnia, in Chechnya, in Pakistan, in Afghanistan, in Algeria. But there are none in Somalia? But that doesn't matter anyway, a Muhajideen is not necesarrily a terrorist of course.
somali born arabs,pakistanis,indians,oromos shouldn't be confused with foreign fighters

But hey, I agree with you. I hope the US isn't stupid enough to intervene in Somalia. I only responded to your first post because I think you painted too simple a picture of reality. Americans are not completely without reason to mistrust for example the Taliban or the ICU.
true but like i said before sometimes this mistrust is borderline paranoia
Reply

sameer
09-11-2006, 01:38 PM
ok, what caused the 1979 bombing of the embassy in Iran? Did they up and bombed it for fun, or was there a reason for it?
Does the US need war in its economy /lifestyle? I mean, does war help the US economy and they need to keep getting/identifying "emenies"? Does this help a particualr party stay in power? or rather distract its citezens from the problems at home?

...........................

Has the US backed itself into a corner? maening they cannot quit the war until bin laden and al qaeda has been erradicated. If they did, then they would lose politcial gain because the whole "war" would have been lost seeeing that these were the scape goats used to justify the war. So now, since
there are many freedom fighters popping up in various countries in the world and as long as the american public percieves themn to be the same as or resemble al qeada then the war must go on regardless on the intentions of the freedom fighters. But then again, this may be what the political players want/need to stay in power.
.......................

I remember all the movies for a period of b4 the 90's had the russians as the enemy, thus creating the racist thoughts in ppl minds. So today, i guess the same is being done by identifying anyone who wears a beard or has the last name of Mohammed, Ali, etc by creating islamaphobia in the ppl minds. So is the goverment using or taking advantage of the apparant racism that exists among some ppl in the states and calling it patriotism instead.

...

Or is it simply seeing that Islamic ideology and shari'ah had once controlled the majority of the civilised world for a number of centuries inthe past, then this is a great threat to the western social/political structure and the uprising must be quelled early? They have already destroyed the bigest threat of communism (USSR) now, next in line is the idea of true Islamic states ?
Reply

sameer
09-11-2006, 08:13 PM
format_quote Originally Posted by KAding

Actually, the US is very much engaged in what the call the 'war on drugs', so they are certainly attempting to prosecute those who use or sell drugs. However, they don't invade, say, Columbia, because the country is itself actively hunting down drug traders. So any comparison with the Taliban is quite ludicrous, because:
1. There is no politics involved (i.e. a declaration of war)
2. The country in question is already attempting to eradicate the problem
hmmm this country/ army?
^o)

Colombia military in bomb scandal
By Jeremy McDermott
BBC News, Medellin


Evidence suggests the military are contributing to the violence
Army officers in Colombia have been accused of placing car bombs around the capital in the latest military scandal to hit the country.

The officers hoped to claim reward money from the government's informants programme for discovering the bombs.

President Alvaro Uribe made a televised address to the nation urging Colombians to keep faith in the security forces, amid a growing crisis in confidence.

He has made the strengthening of the military his government's cornerstone.

Such is the crisis in confidence in the military that President Uribe decided that he had to show his face to the nation and reassure Colombians that his military, backed by Washington, was not spinning out of control.

'Isolated incidents'

In the latest scandal, army officers are accused of placing car bombs around Bogota, including one that went off wounding more than a dozen soldiers and killing a civilian.

The motivation was to claim reward money from the government, which offers payments of up to $400,000 (£220,000) for information on the activities of Marxist rebels and drugs traffickers.

In another incident, 10 policemen were killed by the army in what was presented as a friendly fire tragedy.

However, evidence has shown that they were killed at point-blank range.

Several soldiers, including a colonel, have been arrested and accused of murdering the policemen on the orders of a notorious drug baron.

Mr Uribe insisted that these scandals are isolated incidents and that things are getting better.

But evidence now suggests that the military are contributing to the violence, not just fighting it.
Reply

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 30
    Last Post: 05-19-2011, 11:52 PM
  2. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 05-11-2011, 10:24 PM
  3. Replies: 8
    Last Post: 02-26-2009, 05:12 AM
  4. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 09-06-2007, 01:33 AM
  5. Replies: 25
    Last Post: 02-11-2007, 08:33 PM
British Wholesales - Certified Wholesale Linen & Towels | Holiday in the Maldives

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!