PDA

View Full Version : Have Bush and Blair increased terrorism by their actions



Zafar
07-09-2005, 11:42 AM
Have Bush and Blair increased terrorism?

The statement issued by the Islamic terror organization Secret Organisation Group of al-Qaeda claiming it carried out today’s bombings in Central London is chilling reading and very ominous for the future here in England and elsewhere. I was against the war as were millions of other people. The military action against Afghanistan and Iraq is clearly mentioned in the statement. The bombing of Iraq and Afghanistan was an act of bullying of the highest order, despite having reservations of any attacks on Iraq, the UN were pushed aside by the real tyrant Bush and his poodle Blair and they both misled other leaders with a concoction of poisonous lies and spin in order to lead an unjust and heinous attack on the Iraqi people, I say Iraqi people because Saddaam unlike the people of Iraq is tucked up nice and cosy at a secret location somewhere, where he is being pampered with regular meals, new clean clothes, a nice warm bed, and he even receives free regular dental treatment something even the British tax payers don’t enjoy.
More than 100,000 civilians have probably died as direct or indirect consequences of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, according to a study by a research team at Johns Hopkins University's Bloomberg School of Public Health in Baltimore. Although the paper's authors acknowledge that thorough data collection was difficult in what is effectively still a war zone, the data they managed to collect are extensive: Iraqis were 2.5 times more likely to die in the 17 months following the invasion than in the 14 months before it. Before the invasion, the most common causes of death in Iraq were heart attacks, strokes and chronic diseases. Afterward, violent death was far ahead of all other causes.
The abuse the prisoners faced in the Abu Gharib prison which was photographed with US and British soldiers abusing inmates and torturing them was always going to create some sort of revenge... now we know.
Britain played a huge part in these attacks. The prisoners in those pictures were helpless, but someone somewhere was always going to retaliate on their behalf. Surely we cannot be surprised at what happened today and act all innocent.
Blair first gave the excuse he was after the weapons of mass destruction and that turned out to be a lie. Then he went for regime change, yes Saddaam was a dictator but there are hundreds of dictators all over the world why not go after them?
The truth is hundreds of thousands of innocent civilians have been killed in Iraq and Afghanistan, amongst them many women and young children; surely we were going to pay for that!
Far from trying to combat terrorism have Bush and Blair increased the likelihood of terror attacks by their actions?
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
root
07-09-2005, 01:58 PM
No,
Reply

Muezzin
07-09-2005, 02:07 PM
Originally Posted by root
No,
That was a very informed reply, and I'm very glad you posted it with full research and assorted miscellany to back it up.
Reply

Abubakar
07-09-2005, 04:46 PM
:sl:

Yes

:w:
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
imaad_udeen
07-09-2005, 07:57 PM
No matter what Bush and Blair have done, it is not excuse for 'Muslims" to murder innocent people in the name of Allah and his Prophet (PBuH).

In my opinion, they are worse since they are Muslims and should know better.
Reply

Zafar
07-09-2005, 09:52 PM
When you engage in a war you must expect retaliation.
If I throw a rock at your head and you start bleeding, I would expect a reaction from you.
The Prophet Muhammad PBUH engaged in Jihad.
The innocent people you say...most of which are against Islamic views.
In Islam you have to kill homosexuals, stone to death adulterers, kill any Muslim who renounces faith, death penalties for murderers and cutting of limbs for theives this is Islamic law, as commanded by Allah SWT.
The innocent people you are talking about all reject this.
Reply

imaad_udeen
07-09-2005, 10:35 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
When you engage in a war you must expect retaliation.
If I throw a rock at your head and you start bleeding, I would expect a reaction from you.
The Prophet Muhammad PBUH engaged in Jihad.
The innocent people you say...most of which are against Islamic views.
In Islam you have to kill homosexuals, stone to death adulterers, kill any Muslim who renounces faith, death penalties for murderers and cutting of limbs for theives this is Islamic law, as commanded by Allah SWT.
The innocent people you are talking about all reject this.
So that is what Islam is all about, killing those who do not believe?

I thought the Prophet (PBuH) said that the People of the Book (Christians and Jews) were to be protected.
Reply

Muezzin
07-09-2005, 11:24 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
When you engage in a war you must expect retaliation.
If I throw a rock at your head and you start bleeding, I would expect a reaction from you.
Bad example. The Prophet PBUH actually had to put up with this sort of treatment.
Reply

khilji
07-09-2005, 11:50 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
When you engage in a war you must expect retaliation.
If I throw a rock at your head and you start bleeding, I would expect a reaction from you.
The Prophet Muhammad PBUH engaged in Jihad.
The innocent people you say...most of which are against Islamic views.
In Islam you have to kill homosexuals, stone to death adulterers, kill any Muslim who renounces faith, death penalties for murderers and cutting of limbs for theives this is Islamic law, as commanded by Allah SWT.
The innocent people you are talking about all reject this.
:sl:

Brother Zafar,

If Allah (SWT) and our beloved prophet (SAWS) had prescribed the above (killing people are OK who holds views against some Islamic laws) as you claim, then all that is preached by the Daniel Pipes, Taslima Nasreens, Salman Rushdie's and Ali Sina's claim would be true and Muslims of the world would forever be locked in a mortal fight with the rest of the world to convert them or kill them. This has not been the case in 1400 years of Islam's history, instead it brought people prosperity and development where-ever it went, except for the last 200 years when we were defeated by the colonizers.

Before you go on to make sweeping statements like the above, on behalf of 1.7 billion muslims of the Ummah, if I may humbly ask to please ask yourself, if in reality how many you speak for.

:w:
Reply

Danish
07-10-2005, 12:21 AM
:sl:
yes DEFINATLEY
Reply

imaad_udeen
07-10-2005, 12:45 AM
Originally Posted by khilji
:sl:

Brother Zafar,

If Allah (SWT) and our beloved prophet (SAWS) had prescribed the above (killing people are OK who holds views against some Islamic laws) as you claim, then all that is preached by the Daniel Pipes, Taslima Nasreens, Salman Rushdie's and Ali Sina's claim would be true and Muslims of the world would forever be locked in a mortal fight with the rest of the world to convert them or kill them. This has not been the case in 1400 years of Islam's history, instead it brought people prosperity and development where-ever it went, except for the last 200 years when we were defeated by the colonizers.

Before you go on to make sweeping statements like the above, on behalf of 1.7 billion muslims of the Ummah, if I may humbly ask to please ask yourself, if in reality how many you speak for.

:w:
:sl:

Beautifully put.

:w:
Reply

Abubakar
07-10-2005, 08:04 AM
Originally Posted by Zafar
When you engage in a war you must expect retaliation.
If I throw a rock at your head and you start bleeding, I would expect a reaction from you.
The Prophet Muhammad PBUH engaged in Jihad.
The innocent people you say...most of which are against Islamic views.
In Islam you have to kill homosexuals, stone to death adulterers, kill any Muslim who renounces faith, death penalties for murderers and cutting of limbs for theives this is Islamic law, as commanded by Allah SWT.
The innocent people you are talking about all reject this.

:sl:

Brother reread this post and think about what you have written.

Do you know what any of the dead thought,believed, which religion they followed?

If you could tell me how you know what they believed I would like you to share this knowledge.

Your posting shows a great insensitivity towards others feelings at this time, and surely as Muslims we are bound to find out the truth behind anything and not just assume.

I am suprised at your tone.

:w:
Reply

Abubakar
07-10-2005, 08:07 AM
Originally Posted by imaad_udeen
No matter what Bush and Blair have done, it is not excuse for 'Muslims" to murder innocent people in the name of Allah and his Prophet (PBuH).

In my opinion, they are worse since they are Muslims and should know better.

:sl: Brother

It is good to see that we agree on this matter.

:w:
Reply

Zafar
07-10-2005, 08:39 AM
Shariah must be implemented.
This is incumbent on all Muslims.
After which everyone will be protected Muslim or Non Muslim.
To implement Shariah will be bloody.
The Kuffaar refuse to live under Shariah, this is the problem,
Its irelevant how many Muslims believe this.
Reply

minaz
07-10-2005, 08:45 AM
Originally Posted by Zafar
When you engage in a war you must expect retaliation.
If I throw a rock at your head and you start bleeding, I would expect a reaction from you.
The Prophet Muhammad PBUH engaged in Jihad.
The innocent people you say...most of which are against Islamic views.
In Islam you have to kill homosexuals, stone to death adulterers, kill any Muslim who renounces faith, death penalties for murderers and cutting of limbs for theives this is Islamic law, as commanded by Allah SWT.
The innocent people you are talking about all reject this.
Brother Zafar i think the above statement shouldn't have been said without an expansion on each point. I understand what you are saying but it's dangerous as many others may not.
Here's one of may favourite surah of the qu'ran (because I recite it everyday, lol and I implement it too :p )

Surah 109: The Disbelievers - al Kafiroon
"Disbelievers! I do not worship what you worship nor do you worship what I worship. I shall never worship what you worship You have your own religion and I have mine."
Reply

Abubakar
07-10-2005, 05:09 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
Shariah must be implemented.
This is incumbent on all Muslims.
After which everyone will be protected Muslim or Non Muslim.
To implement Shariah will be bloody.
The Kuffaar refuse to live under Shariah, this is the problem,
Its irelevant how many Muslims believe this.

:sl:

You say to implement Shariah will be bloody can you explain how that ties in with the ruling that we must not kill women, children and non-combatants?

:w:
Reply

aamirsaab
07-10-2005, 05:16 PM
Woah Hash, chill out man. What exactly did you expect Blair to do to prevent these bombings?
Reply

aamirsaab
07-10-2005, 05:18 PM
What are you on about Hash?
Reply

aamirsaab
07-10-2005, 05:21 PM
You can't pin everything down to Blair. He is only one man.
There is no eveidence to support that because of Blair's actions 40+ british victims died. They died cus someone bombed london.
Reply

Muezzin
07-10-2005, 05:33 PM
Originally Posted by Hash
Brother prevention is better than cure, do you think, if he never attacked muslims and waged war on muslims, invaded islamic countires and occupy muslim coun tires, do you think if he never did all this these people would resist against him. Look at poland or swedan, these countires leave muslims alone, they dont persecute or attack muslims, so they tjhemself no one retaliates against them. But look at blair, becuase of his actions, obvously he made his country a target and becuase of his actions 40+ innocent british people lost their lives.
I tend to agree, but just playing Devil's Advocate here, using that logic what was the motivation for the 9/11 attacks?
Reply

minaz
07-10-2005, 05:38 PM
Stupidity
Reply

Zafar
07-10-2005, 05:50 PM
Thank you Hash.
There are too many watered down Muslims in this world, who ignore our brothers and sisters and our mothers and fathers being killed all over the world.
100,000 killed in Iraq
100,000 killed in Afghanistan
in Chechnya
In Palestine
in Bosnia
in Kashmir
Yes thats right Muslim brothers and sisters shall I go on.....
Why do you cry for the 50 killed in London.
There will be a 2 minute silence to remember the victims on Thursday.
Where is the 2 minute silence for all the Muslim women and children killed by Blair and Bush.
Is you theory that you sit and watch our Muslims being humiliated everyday without any action?
Reply

minaz
07-10-2005, 05:52 PM
Thanks for informing me about the 2 minute silence - never knew that. Anywho will you exercise the rememberence?
Reply

Muezzin
07-10-2005, 05:52 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
Thank you Hash.
There are too many watered down Muslims in this world, who ignore our brothers and sisters and our mothers and fathers being killed all over the world.
100,000 killed in Iraq
100,000 killed in Afghanistan
in Chechnya
In Palestine
in Bosnia
in Kashmir
Yes thats right Muslim brothers and sisters shall I go on.....
Why do you cry for the 50 killed in London.
There will be a 2 minute silence to remember the victims on Thursday.
Where is the 2 minute silence for all the Muslim women and children killed by Blair and Bush.
Is you theory that you sit and watch our Muslims being humiliated everyday without any action?
To put it bluntly: what have you done about it? Seriously. I've had enough of certain individuals sending other Muslims on guilt trips simply for disagreeing. What action do you suggest? I'm listening.
Reply

Nakisai
07-10-2005, 05:54 PM
i think that if it because some Musilm feel like the usa is trying to change the way we as Musilm live and do things. some thimes I feel the same way but than I think how much harm can they do? because what they do to us here. will be nothing to what they will face on Judgement day. do you agree? so people as Muslim should not kill in the way that they have its a boodly mess and they needed to know what they are doing is not justify by their way of thinking.
Reply

Nakisai
07-10-2005, 05:56 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
Thank you Hash.
There are too many watered down Muslims in this world, who ignore our brothers and sisters and our mothers and fathers being killed all over the world.
100,000 killed in Iraq
100,000 killed in Afghanistan
in Chechnya
In Palestine
in Bosnia
in Kashmir
Yes thats right Muslim brothers and sisters shall I go on.....
Why do you cry for the 50 killed in London.
There will be a 2 minute silence to remember the victims on Thursday.
Where is the 2 minute silence for all the Muslim women and children killed by Blair and Bush.
Is you theory that you sit and watch our Muslims being humiliated everyday without any action?
so true but yet sooo sad :wilted_ro
Reply

imaad_udeen
07-10-2005, 06:19 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
100,000 killed in Iraq
100,000 killed in Afghanistan
M.O. = inflate casualties to justify terrorism?
Reply

Nablus
07-10-2005, 06:42 PM
Terror who export this expression to the world The jews first when they considered freedom fighters in Palestin as terrorists

All of us know the black history of Britain in the Middle-east .The british people are the terrorists because they elected Tony so they deserve that.They could force The british army to get out from Iraq.Because .

what did the british do with our sisters and brothers in Iraq?!!!!!!!!!something shamefull let them cry and weep like our families in Iraq and Palestine


Yesterday they stepped on the noble Quran in Israel and America
who condemned no one!
they claim that they respect religions but its just apropaganda
But we are the first people who condemn what ever is the action

because we are very weak. say the truth what ever is the result


Britain get out from Iraq and dont support Zionism u will be safe
Reply

Nakisai
07-10-2005, 06:43 PM
Originally Posted by imaad_udeen
M.O. = inflate casualties to justify terrorism?

I don't think that he said that to Justify Terrorism
but to say that we have became like them and some many ways. so do 9/11 justifty The MILLIONS who are dieing now as we are on this forum? did Bush ever say that their was Musilms who was killed in 9/11???
Reply

Muezzin
07-10-2005, 07:06 PM
Originally Posted by Nablus
Terror who export this expression to the world The jews first when they considered freedom fighters in Palestin as terrorists

All of us know the black history of Britain in the Middle-east .The british people are the terrorists because they elected Tony so they deserve that.
Really? So, because I'm British, I'm a terrorist? Please do not make such sweeping statements - plenty of people did not vote for Tony Blair (myself included), but unfortunately it just was not enough.


Yesterday they stepped on the noble Quran in Israel and America
who condemned no one!
Let the ignorant do as they will. They will receive the punishments of the Hereafter.
Reply

imaad_udeen
07-10-2005, 07:36 PM
Originally Posted by Nakisai
I don't think that he said that to Justify Terrorism
but to say that we have became like them and some many ways. so do 9/11 justifty The MILLIONS who are dieing now as we are on this forum?
huh?

did Bush ever say that their was Musilms who was killed in 9/11???
Bush remarks on Islam:

# "Some of the comments that have been uttered about Islam do not reflect the sentiments of my government or the sentiments of most Americans. Islam, as practiced by the vast majority of people, is a peaceful religion, a religion that respects others. Ours is a country based upon tolerance and we welcome people of all faiths in America."

Remarks by President George W. Bush in a statement to reporters during a meeting with U.N. Secretary General Kofi Annan
The Oval Office, Washington, DC
November 13, 2002

# "We see in Islam a religion that traces its origins back to God's call on Abraham. We share your belief in God's justice, and your insistence on man's moral responsibility. We thank the many Muslim nations who stand with us against terror. Nations that are often victims of terror, themselves."

President Hosts Iftaar Dinner
Remarks by the President at Iftaar Dinner
State Dining Room

# "Islam is a vibrant faith. Millions of our fellow citizens are Muslim. We respect the faith. We honor its traditions. Our enemy does not. Our enemy doesn't follow the great traditions of Islam. They've hijacked a great religion."

Remarks by President George W. Bush on U.S. Humanitarian Aid to Afghanistan
Presidential Hall, Dwight David Eisenhower Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C.
October 11, 2002

# "Islam is a faith that brings comfort to people. It inspires them to lead lives based on honesty, and justice, and compassion."

Remarks by President George W. Bush on U.S. Humanitarian Aid to Afghanistan
Presidential Hall, Dwight David Eisenhower Executive Office Building, Washington, D.C.
October 11, 2002

# "All Americans must recognize that the face of terror is not the true faith -- face of Islam. Islam is a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world. It's a faith that has made brothers and sisters of every race. It's a faith based upon love, not hate."

President George W. Bush Holds Roundtable with Arab and Muslim-American Leaders
Afghanistan Embassy, Washington, D.C.
September 10, 2002

# "If liberty can blossom in the rocky soil of the West Bank and Gaza, it will inspire millions of men and women around the globe who are equally weary of poverty and oppression, equally entitled to the benefits of democratic government. I have a hope for the people of Muslim countries. Your commitments to morality, and learning, and tolerance led to great historical achievements. And those values are alive in the Islamic world today. You have a rich culture, and you share the aspirations of men and women in every culture. Prosperity and freedom and dignity are not just American hopes, or Western hopes. They are universal, human hopes. And even in the violence and turmoil of the Middle East, America believes those hopes have the power to transform lives and nations."

President George W. Bush Calls for New Palestinian Leadership
The Rose Garden, Washington, D.C.
June 24, 2002

# "When it comes to the common rights and needs of men and women, there is no clash of civilizations. The requirements of freedom apply fully to Africa and Latin America and the entire Islamic world. The peoples of the Islamic nations want and deserve the same freedoms and opportunities as people in every nation. And their governments should listen to their hopes."

Remarks by the President George W. Bush at the 2002 Graduation Exercise of the United States Military Academy
West Point, New York
June 1, 2002

# "America rejects bigotry. We reject every act of hatred against people of Arab background or Muslim faith America values and welcomes peaceful people of all faiths -- Christian, Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, Hindu and many others. Every faith is practiced and protected here, because we are one country. Every immigrant can be fully and equally American because we're one country. Race and color should not divide us, because America is one country."

President George W. Bush Promotes Compassionate Conservatism
Parkside Hall, San Jose, California
April 30, 2002

# "We're taking action against evil people. Because this great nation of many religions understands, our war is not against Islam, or against faith practiced by the Muslim people. Our war is a war against evil. This is clearly a case of good versus evil, and make no mistake about it -- good will prevail."

Remarks by the President George W. Bush at a Town Hall Meeting with Citizens of Ontario
Ontario Convention Center, Ontario, California
January 5, 2002

# "Eid is a time of joy, after a season of fasting and prayer and reflection. Each year, the end of Ramadan means celebration and thanksgiving for millions of Americans. And your joy during this season enriches the life of our great country. This year, Eid is celebrated at the same time as Hanukkah and Advent. So it's a good time for people of these great faiths, Islam, Judaism and Christianity, to remember how much we have in common: devotion to family, a commitment to care for those in need, a belief in God and His justice, and the hope for peace on earth."

Remarks by the President in Honor of Eid Al-Fitr
The Diplomatic Reception Room
December 17, 2001

# "The teachings of many faiths share much in common. And people of many faiths are united in our commitments to love our families, to protect our children, and to build a more peaceful world. In the coming year, let us resolve to seize opportunities to work together in a spirit of friendship and cooperation. Through our combined efforts, we can end terrorism and rid our civilization of the damaging effects of hatred and intolerance, ultimately achieving a brighter future for all."

President's Message for Eid al-Fitr
December 13, 2001

# "According to Muslim teachings, God first revealed His word in the Holy Qur'an to the prophet, Muhammad, during the month of Ramadan. That word has guided billions of believers across the centuries, and those believers built a culture of learning and literature and science. All the world continues to benefit from this faith and its achievements."

Remarks by the President George W. Bush At Iftaar Dinner
The State Dining Room, Washington, D.C.
November 19, 2001

# "The Islam that we know is a faith devoted to the worship of one God, as revealed through The Holy Qur'an. It teaches the value and the importance of charity, mercy, and peace."

President George W. Bush's Message for Ramadan
November 15, 2001

# "This new enemy seeks to destroy our freedom and impose its views. We value life; the terrorists ruthlessly destroy it. We value education; the terrorists do not believe women should be educated or should have health care, or should leave their homes. We value the right to speak our minds; for the terrorists, free expression can be grounds for execution. We respect people of all faiths and welcome the free practice of religion; our enemy wants to dictate how to think and how to worship even to their fellow Muslims."

President George W. Bush Addresses the Nation
World Congress Center, Atlanta, Georgia
November 8, 2001

# "All of us here today understand this: We do not fight Islam, we fight against evil."

Remarks by President George W. Bush to the Warsaw Conference on Combating Terrorism
November 6, 2001

# "I have assured His Majesty that our war is against evil, not against Islam. There are thousands of Muslims who proudly call themselves Americans, and they know what I know -- that the Muslim faith is based upon peace and love and compassion. The exact opposite of the teachings of the al Qaeda organization, which is based upon evil and hate and destruction."

Remarks by President George W. Bush and His Majesty King Abdullah of Jordan
The Oval Office, Washington, D.C.
September 28, 2001

# "Americans understand we fight not a religion; ours is not a campaign against the Muslim faith. Ours is a campaign against evil."

President George W. Bush Remarks by the President to Airline Employees
O'Hare International Airport, Chicago, Illinois
September 27, 2001

"The terrorists are traitors to their own faith, trying, in effect, to hijack Islam itself. The enemy of America is not our many Muslim friends; it is not our many Arab friends. Our enemy is a radical network of terrorists, and every government that supports them."

President George W. Bush's Address to a Joint Session of Congress and the American People
United States Capitol, Washington, D.C.
September 20, 2001

# "I've made it clear, Madam President, that the war against terrorism is not a war against Muslims, nor is it a war against Arabs. It's a war against evil people who conduct crimes against innocent people."

Remarks by President George W. Bush and President Megawati of Indonesia
The Oval Office, Washington, D.C.
September 19, 2001

# "The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war."

Remarks by the President at Islamic Center of Washington, D.C.
Washington, D.C.
September 17, 2001
Reply

Nakisai
07-10-2005, 07:52 PM
thank you for that
Reply

Z
07-10-2005, 08:37 PM
Asalamu Alaikum

All those remarks that Bush makes, he doesn't even know anything about. He voices from an ear piece. And he's a darn good liar too, you actually believe it's not a war against Islam and is a war against terror? He did say there was mass WMDs in Iraq, looks like there wasn't. Now the kids scream we had to bomb tens and thousands of innocent Iraqi women and kids just because Saddam was going to kill my daddy. Umph!

Interesting. He saw the women in Afghanistan in oppression, what about the women in Suadi Arabia? They don't have much freedom, why doesn't he go free them?

The prophet SAW said a drop of Muslim blood is worth MORE than the Kaba itself! (?) Wake up!

We feel for the innocents of 9/11 and in London a few days ago, did you even think about the blood of Kashmiris and Chechnyians when their blood was spilt? The blood of Muslims in India when they were attacked by the hindus? How they cut them into pieces and burnt them alive! We didn't see Bush going to stop that terror did we? No, 'cos he's not after realy world peace. All he wants is world domination.

I pray that if Allah does not want to guide these savage kufar, and if none of them are going to be guided, then may he finish them all and fill His earth with people of peace and tranquil.

I hate not to make sense, someone correct me if I'm wrong.
Reply

Zafar
07-10-2005, 09:07 PM
Its not about what little I've done or what little you've done.
It's about the 50 that died in London, and how some people are disgusted by this and turn a blind eye to Muslim victims all over the world everyday.
For instance why is there no outrage and a thread started on this bulletin board for the apartheid wall circling Jerusalem!
Reply

Muezzin
07-10-2005, 09:09 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
Its not about what little I've done or what little you've done.
It's about the 50 that died in London, and how some people are disgusted by this and turn a blind eye to Muslim victims all over the world everyday.
Okay. I understand you now. Bear in mind that the Western media is 'selective' of what it reports, so it's not always the citizens' fault.

For instance why is there no outrage and a thread started on this bulletin board for the apartheid wall circling Jerusalem!
Good question. Have you tried searching for one? If there's not already a thread about it, make one.
Reply

Zafar
07-10-2005, 09:14 PM
Starting a thread wont achieve anything. Its not about what little I do.
I don't want to talk about 50 people dying in London.
This event is insignificant.
There will be more of the same soon.
In conclusion there is no justification in getting excited about the London bombings.
This will be the norm.
Reply

Muezzin
07-10-2005, 09:16 PM
That's an awfully depressing standpoint to take, brother Zafar. Bear in mind also that several Muslims were killed in this attack. I personally think loss of any human life is an extremely sad event.

At the same time, we should be positive and look for ways to achieve peace.
Reply

Zafar
07-10-2005, 09:23 PM
Yes it is... very sad. I'm glad we agree on that. I am not belittling any loss of life, what I am saying is the attack is to be expected bearing in mind this countries foreign policy.
And the attack in London should be put into context of attacks on Muslims around the world.
2 min silence for 50 and nothing for 100,000 and so on.....
I'm sorry but it is a fact that until this country returns land back to the Muslims and withdraws troops from Arab lands and justice prevails in Palestine these attacks will continue as ordered by Allah SWT.
Reply

Abubakar
07-10-2005, 09:23 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
Shariah must be implemented.
This is incumbent on all Muslims.
After which everyone will be protected Muslim or Non Muslim.
To implement Shariah will be bloody.
The Kuffaar refuse to live under Shariah, this is the problem,
Its irelevant how many Muslims believe this.

:sl: Brother

I see that you do not wish to answer my question.

Peace
Reply

Muezzin
07-10-2005, 09:26 PM
I see where you're coming from, brother Zafar. You must understand that all this 2 minutes silence and whatnot is more a result of such an event happening so close to home than people not caring about Muslims dying worldwide.

I do agree Palestine is a key issue here. I also think the Western governments should initiate a dialogue of sorts with whoever this group or groups may be, rather than fighting fire with fire. As Ghandi said, 'An eye for an eye makes the whole world go blind'.

Of course, our Governments probably won't do that, since it's the right thing to do. Unfortunately the right thing is hardly ever the most profitable.
Reply

khilji
07-10-2005, 09:32 PM
:sl:

To all brothers and sisters of faith in this thread, including Zafar and Nablus,

The fragmentation of the Ummah is the source of all problems:

- when the Ottoman empire was broken up, the British instigated nationlism, but if the Arabs did not go for it, we would not have probably seen the Palestine problem as we see it today

It is a hypothetical statement, but I believe you will be able to see the point I am trying to make. Before blaming others and pointing fingers, we must look at ourselves to see where did we go wrong to end up where we have ended up.

Our fore fathers and ancestors made many mistakes, the results of which we are getting now - we must look at history to learn from it, analyze it fine details and sift through it to realize how the current situation was created.

I will ask of you to do one thing, to go to the wisest person you personally know and ask these questions:

- why are the muslims the way they are today, what is the reason for the downfall of muslims
- what can we do in the future to get out of this situation and excel as we did in the past

We need to look at the wisest source of all , the Holy Al-Quran and the advice of our beloved Prophet (SAWs) and they have already given us the answers many times.

unity, unity, unity
act, act, act
organize, organize, organize
unionize, unionize, unionize

so that we will be able to bargain collectively as one unit and one body.

We have a modest effort going at this thread:

LI Islamic Forum > General Forums > World Affairs >
Representative group from all muslim communities

The idea is to unite and act, instead of complaining and whining, not to mention avoiding and discouraging counterproductive negative activity.

The colonial era has ended, the world population has reached a certain point in their social and cultural evolution. I do not believe any country or group, western or eastern will try to suppress a genuine and positive effort for self-improvement.

Please read through the above thread and please let us know if you would be kind enough to join us and lend a hand in this effort to help the people of the Ummah.

:w:
Reply

Zafar
07-10-2005, 09:35 PM
Providied a warning has been issued to withdraw troops, and it is ignored by the leader, then an attack will be justified.
The loss of life is regretable, but part of the operation.
I'm sorry I don't have a reference at hand, if anyone can help, The Prophet SAW was involved in battle with catapults and he was advised about women and children in the firing line and he ordered to continue with the attack, the ruling is not black and white.
Reply

Abubakar
07-10-2005, 09:52 PM
Originally Posted by Nablus

All of us know the black history of Britain in the Middle-east .The british people are the terrorists because they elected Tony so they deserve that.They could force The british army to get out from Iraq.Because .

what did the british do with our sisters and brothers in Iraq?!!!!!!!!!something shamefull let them cry and weep like our families in Iraq and Palestine


:sl: Brother

Thank you. I did not vote for Tony Blair, I have always stood against the war in Iraq and Afganistan. But you think it is fine for me to have people I love killed because of something done by the Government of the country I live in.

So your Islam does not contain compassion and justice?

What happens to my brothers and sisters in Iraq is a crime against humanity do you think I don't weep for them as much as I weep for the dead in London?

I have yet to see anywhere in Islam that it says someone should be punished for anothers wrong doing.

What happened to the Islamic edict that women, children and non-combatants should not be killed.

Frankly you should look at yourself.

Peace
Reply

Abubakar
07-10-2005, 10:01 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
Providied a warning has been issued to withdraw troops, and it is ignored by the leader, then an attack will be justified.
The loss of life is regretable, but part of the operation.
I'm sorry I don't have a reference at hand, if anyone can help, The Prophet SAW was involved in battle with catapults and he was advised about women and children in the firing line and he ordered to continue with the attack, the ruling is not black and white.

:sl: Zafar

I am beginning to doubt that you are who you initially appear to be.

If you are a Muslim then look hard at what you are advocating and the consequences of what you are saying.

If you are not, go and play somewhere else.

Peace
Reply

Abubakar
07-10-2005, 10:11 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
Its not about what little I've done or what little you've done.
It's about the 50 that died in London, and how some people are disgusted by this and turn a blind eye to Muslim victims all over the world everyday.
For instance why is there no outrage and a thread started on this bulletin board for the apartheid wall circling Jerusalem!

:sl:

It is exactly about what little you or I have done. Your words indicate that you are a supporter of these attrocities in London. The next step for you is to carry out similar.

My words indicate that I do not support the taking of innocent lives anywhere in the world. My actions will, by the grace of Allah, will also follow that path.

We will all answer for our deeds in this life, and there are none of us who will not need the mercy of Allah when we are Judged.

Peace
Reply

imaad_udeen
07-10-2005, 11:02 PM
Originally Posted by Zafar
Providied a warning has been issued to withdraw troops, and it is ignored by the leader, then an attack will be justified.
The loss of life is regretable, but part of the operation.
I'm sorry I don't have a reference at hand, if anyone can help, The Prophet SAW was involved in battle with catapults and he was advised about women and children in the firing line and he ordered to continue with the attack, the ruling is not black and white.
Men do not intentionally murder the innocent.

Men should fight like soldiers, not criminals, and respect innocent life, even if you believe your enemy refuses too.
Reply

kadafi
07-11-2005, 12:01 AM
:sl:

Members are warned not to advocate any un-islamic actions.

Islam condemnes what happend at the London bombings.

Who so ever kills a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he has killed all mankind, and who so ever saves the life of one, it shall be as if he had saved the life of all mankind," (Al-Ma'dah:32).

“…take not life, which God hath made sacred, except by way of justice and law: thus doth He command you, that ye may learn wisdom.”
[ 6:151]

:w:
Reply

YamahaR1
07-11-2005, 05:09 PM
Originally Posted by Nablus
The british people are the terrorists because they elected Tony so they deserve that.They could force The british army to get out from Iraq.
Using your method of analysis.....The Iraqi people accepted Saddam Hussein as their leader (I don't recall the country as a whole standing up and removing him on their own) so then did they deserve the sanctions and then now war brought on by the actions (or lack thereof) of their leader?
Reply

YamahaR1
07-11-2005, 06:10 PM
Have Bush and Blair increased terrorism by their actions?

My answer would also be "no."

In the 1998 Fatwa issued by Osama, he stated "The 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 and the holy mosque 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 God, "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 God."

Terrorism was a problem before either of these leaders became elected. And, for years, it was tolerated without retaliation by these countries.

Do you want to know what I think? Well, even if you don't I'm saying it anyway.....
I think all of these problems stem from fundamental problems with communication and understanding how each side thinks.

I can tell from the posts I've read here to date that there are some serious misperceptions about President Bush, Blair, Americans, the military, among other things. And, there is no doubt in my mind, there are incorrect perceptions against muslims, Islam, terrorists (or freedom fighter depending on your viewpoint). And, if those perceptions are throughout the muslim/non-muslim world....no wonder things are in the state that they are. It's interesting....those against the western "occupation" in Iraq support the insurgents because they want the occupation ended in Iraq....yet we stay because the more there are insurgent attacks, the less stability we perceive which makes us want to remain until there is stability. So, the very act that tries to get us to leave, makes us stay. Kind of ironic don't you think?
Reply

khilji
07-12-2005, 12:10 AM
Originally Posted by YamahaR1
Using your method of analysis.....The Iraqi people accepted Saddam Hussein as their leader (I don't recall the country as a whole standing up and removing him on their own) so then did they deserve the sanctions and then now war brought on by the actions (or lack thereof) of their leader?
Nablus's statement that the British people deserve to have been bombed is wrong, killing "innocent" civilians is not justified not in Islam or in Geneva convention rules of engagement. The British public could not have voted Blair out of office at the time and stopped British deployment and it was clear from the amount of protests and polls that a large number of the British public was against Iraq war. Although a lot of us found it puzzling that Blair managed to wiggle in the second time around.

Besides, whoever did this, I highly doubt that Iraqi national's whose family and relatives got killed were involved in the bombing. "Islamists" who claim that they are taking revenge for fellow muslims who got killed in other places, is the biggest joke of all, I want to ask them, what else have they ever done for the other fellow muslims - if they really wanted to help fellow muslims there are a thousand and one constructive ways. You are seeing this rot and pus, because the Ummah has degenerated and its sick body is home to a lot of this rot and pus.

As for your statement about Iraqi people choosing Saddam, I am afraid it was a little more complicated than that. It was the Ottoman sultans and the Arab nationalists who are to blame for this, because it was their weakness which the British took advantage of and curved up the Ottoman Vilayets in these many countries, one of which is Iraq. Baathists were a natural extension of this nationalist movement and Saddam was its latest incarnations. Once in power, Saddam consolidated his position with Sunni henchmens, many of whom were his tribal kinsmen. His grip on power was like a cancerous tumor on Iraq. There were many coups but none were successful. The most recent was the Shia uprising in the 1st Iraq war, Shia's were encouraged but eventually the coalition army left them to be slaughtered by Saddam.

As for the Sanctions, it helped Saddam but made the people of Iraq and its children suffer, it was wrong, immoral and a crime.

Finally, Saddam's actions did not cause the Iraq invasion, it was Bush and his neocon advisers headstrong stupidity that caused it. Saddam was an out and out idiot and even at the last moment, I really thought he would give up and saved some lives, but I guess it was not that simple for him either, he could not just surrender with all his cronies, his cronies would probably have killed him before that - in any event, he did what he thought was best and just like Bush, Blair and the Neocons, Saddam also has blood in his hands.

All of the above people should be forwarded to UN war crimes tribunals, not just Saddam, if there is so called "justice" as opposed to the currently prevailing rules of the jungle called "might is right".
Reply

khilji
07-12-2005, 12:45 AM
Originally Posted by YamahaR1
Do you want to know what I think? Well, even if you don't I'm saying it anyway.....
I think all of these problems stem from fundamental problems with communication and understanding how each side thinks.

I can tell from the posts I've read here to date that there are some serious misperceptions about President Bush, Blair, Americans, the military, among other things. And, there is no doubt in my mind, there are incorrect perceptions against muslims, Islam, terrorists (or freedom fighter depending on your viewpoint). And, if those perceptions are throughout the muslim/non-muslim world....no wonder things are in the state that they are. It's interesting....those against the western "occupation" in Iraq support the insurgents because they want the occupation ended in Iraq....yet we stay because the more there are insurgent attacks, the less stability we perceive which makes us want to remain until there is stability. So, the very act that tries to get us to leave, makes us stay. Kind of ironic don't you think?
Communication and understanding or perception is a problem, more dialogue and effort as you are trying in this forum is positive and good for all parties, I very much encourage this. People are product of their environments, you have your meme's and we have ours. The meme's will continue to be there, so it is best that we try to understand each other's meme's and accept them as they are.

The "insurgent's" logic is moronic as you have correctly pointed out and I agree with you completely, there is however one caveat, in their paranoia the "insurgents" really believe that the US is there for the long term and just like Saudi Arabia, they believe that the US will install a puppet regime there to control oil resources of Iraq. Some claim that the US is supposedly constructing permanent bases in Iraq, these are probably rumors.

If democracy succeeds and Iraq has a stable government, the US will be out and the Iraqi's will never accept an occupier as their friend who has caused the death of so many tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. So I would ask you, what the US would have achieved with this adventure, what was in it for the US:

- less terrorism, no, its a breeding ground
- secure oil source, no, Saddam was always interested to sell in the world market and Iraqi's will do the same

The result is that after 500 billion dollars and 3000 lives, the US will have helped a muslim nation removed an idiotic but powerful dictator, in the process tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi's lost their lives and as a result the US will never be a friend with this sizable and oil-rich country called Iraq.

Democracy, yes Iraq will have some form of it, but when muslims get democracy they choose Islam, just like they did in Algeria, not an outcome that the neocon's like or envision.
Reply

Sheikh Haroon
07-12-2005, 02:52 PM
Salaam Zafar.

I just read your posts.

When you engage in a war you must expect retaliation.
If I throw a rock at your head and you start bleeding, I would expect a reaction from you.
The Prophet Muhammad PBUH engaged in Jihad.
The innocent people you say...most of which are against Islamic views.
In Islam you have to kill homosexuals, stone to death adulterers, kill any Muslim who renounces faith, death penalties for murderers and cutting of limbs for theives this is Islamic law, as commanded by Allah SWT.
The innocent people you are talking about all reject this.
This is incorrect information. Allah says in the Qur'an 2.256 "There is no compulsion in religion". If this is true, then where does killing people who don't want to believe in Islam come into it? The Qur'an does not speak about killing apostates. The rest of the things you have said also, where does the Qur'an give explicit legislation for us to kill homosexuals? For God's sake they are ill people, not evil people! We've gotta help them, not kill them! For murderers, yes they get death, justly so. So too for thieves. Notice though, the ayah after this sentence? "But if they repent, then leave them alone".

Please let's not propagate rubbish in our over zealous da'wah. Thanks for understanding.

Regards
Reply

Abubakar
07-12-2005, 08:28 PM
:sl: Sheikh Haroon

I agree 100% with your post.

I have doubts over Zafar and his true identity.

He posted

"Providied a warning has been issued to withdraw troops, and it is ignored by the leader, then an attack will be justified.
The loss of life is regretable, but part of the operation.
I'm sorry I don't have a reference at hand, if anyone can help, The Prophet SAW was involved in battle with catapults and he was advised about women and children in the firing line and he ordered to continue with the attack, the ruling is not black and white."

This is not the language of someone who supports this but of an outsider, having spent a lot of time argueing these points the thinkI do know is that these guys can quote Qaran and Hadith. Out of context yes but they know their stuff.

I suspect a reporter fishing for quotes or something similar.

Peace
Reply

minaz
07-12-2005, 09:43 PM
Lol lets starts a new thread "does anyone know zafar?" - this could be the start of a good 'ol middle aged witch hunt :p
Reply

Muezzin
07-12-2005, 09:44 PM
Originally Posted by minaz
Lol lets starts a new thread "does anyone know zafar?" - this could be the start of a good 'ol middle aged witch hunt :p
SILENCE, WITCH!

:p
Reply

YamahaR1
07-12-2005, 09:59 PM
Originally Posted by khilji
If democracy succeeds and Iraq has a stable government, the US will be out and the Iraqi's will never accept an occupier as their friend who has caused the death of so many tens of thousands of Iraqi civilians. So I would ask you, what the US would have achieved with this adventure, what was in it for the US:

- less terrorism, no, its a breeding ground
- secure oil source, no, Saddam was always interested to sell in the world market and Iraqi's will do the same

The result is that after 500 billion dollars and 3000 lives, the US will have helped a muslim nation removed an idiotic but powerful dictator, in the process tens of thousands of innocent Iraqi's lost their lives and as a result the US will never be a friend with this sizable and oil-rich country called Iraq.

Democracy, yes Iraq will have some form of it, but when muslims get democracy they choose Islam, just like they did in Algeria, not an outcome that the neocon's like or envision.
What was in it for the US? Bottom line…..protect our national interests and defend our way of life. 9/11 caused a heightened concern regarding terrorism. As Pres. Bush stated (and I'm paraphrasing), we will not distinguish between terrorists and those countries sponsoring/harboring them. We can not sit idly back and allow people to attack our homeland either without defending ourselves agaisnt those who threaten our way of life. We did sit idly back for many years and never retaliated. 9/11 was the turning point.
Saddam was not fully complying with the inspections. Just curious….how many people here have read the 9/11 Commission Report or the WMD Reports? There was much evidence that showed that Saddam continued to pursue WMD (while stockpiles were not found, all subsequent reports showed that Saddam was merely waiting for the inspections to stop and his plans were to reconstitute his WMD program). There had also been a long, documented history of ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda and the terrorist training camps based in Iraq (hence, it had already been a breeding ground for terrorism prior to the start of the war in 2003). Again, all Saddam had to do was allow true and open inspections and this could have all been avoided because it would've cleared the air regarding the suspicions on the WMD. Again, Americans have much better things to do than starting a war for fun. We don't enjoy sending our sons and daughters in harms way for the fun of it. (And, despite what some here think, we also don't torture, kill, rape and pillage for kicks either.) But, by not complying, Saddam gave the appearance that he had no respect for the UN requests and therefore, was not trustworthy and was a threat to our country. Our fear was that not only did Saddam have WMD, but that he would give them to those terrorists who would cause additional harm to US citizens. In the end, knowing that Saddam was only waiting the inspections out to reinstate his WMD program, I think it was best that he was removed. He was a threat and would've always been a threat to many. And, I do think the Iraqi people will be better off in a nation where they can control their own destiny. Yes, things are still unstable. This is something that takes times. Humans don't come out of the womb running either. The Iraqis have a fresh start. I pray that the new Iraqi leaders have the wisdom to now make decisions that ensures that the Iraqi people are prosperous and is willing to be a supporter of peace in the world community rather than a hinderance.
From the U.S.'s perspective, this is not a war about religion. We do not harbor ill will towards muslim nations or muslims as a group. This is not a war about oil. America is a nation rich in its own right. I think various countries of the world form a symbiotic relationship. We have things that Middle Eastern countries need to survive (materially speaking) and vice versa. Americans are more than willing to purchase oil and have the money to do so. We have no need to steal it or cause war to obtain it.
Now, many people have stated that the sanctions against Iraq merely hurt the citizens of Iraq, not the Iraqi leadership (and I agree) but it is a non-violent (i.e., non-war) tool used against world leaders for containment. Saddam could not be left unattended after he attacked Kuwait. Containment, in itself, is just as costly (if not more costly) in terms of life and money if analyzed. Please check out this report from the University of Chicago regarding costs of containment. Several pages are data but the first few pages are the meat of the report. Very interesting reading for those who've not considered these costs.
http://gsbwww.uchicago.edu/fac/steven.davis/research/War%20in%20Iraq%20versus%20Containment,%20Weighing %20the%20Costs%20(March%202003).pdf
The war in Iraq was first and foremost to get a regime change due to the perceived threat of Saddam and as part of the War on Terror. I disagree that all Iraqis see Americans as a foe. No doubt, there are some who do. Just like there are many people in the U.S. who were against the war. There will always be differences of opinion. In the end, today, each person has the choice for what happens from here on out. Either we can be part of the solution of part of the problem.
People who focus on only the negative will continue to do so no matter what positive news is out there. I, on the other hand, am a person who sees a cup as half full rather than half empty. I see hope for a future where the Iraqis can guide their own destiny. While there have been losses, there has also been positive progress.
Reply

badr
07-13-2005, 12:04 AM
Islam is the religion of peace that came out to offer humanity peace and well being in which ALLAH'S eternal mercy and compassion is manifested in the world.
ALLAH has commanded humanity to avoid evil: HE has forbidden immorality, rebellion, cruelty aggressiveness those who do not obey HIS after it has been agreed the curse will be upon them. They will have the Evil Abode. Killing innocent people is Evil act.

The meaning of Islam is total submission to ALLAH'S will. Islam is the religion of peace, purity and obedience. It is the religion of harmony. God conveyed HIS message of peace and unity to men by HIS prophets and messengers include, Abraham, Moses, Jesus, and Mohammad. Islam's message has been restored and enforce in the last stage of religious evolution by GOD'S last prophet and messenger Muhammad.
Reply

Preacher
07-13-2005, 12:08 AM
9/11 was a Pseudo-event perpetrated to achieve self-serving criminal goals by the criminals who work for syndicates and major corporations in the USA. You call them "elected officials" or the executive branch. This is what the following facts tells people.


9-11 Questions the "mainstream" media would not address

Home Page
Reply

Preacher
07-13-2005, 12:17 AM
We will never be able to see an end to terrorism because the double-terrorists are the perpetrators and the real culprits.
They then become the judge, the prosecutor and also the noble warriors of a “war on terrorism.’ Very very strange indeed: we are facing mass deception of an unprecedented nature and scale in human history.
If anything positive may emerge from the July 7 tragedy in London it is the growing realization that the terrorists and those who claim to be fighting a ‘war on terrorism’ are just one and the same people. For this reason we must resolve to expose the enemies of freedom and never give up to the hollow rhetoric of freedom and democracy on the part of double-terrorists.

Believing in their statements of mass deception or even staying silent in the face of their ever increasing lies sends the message to the double-terrorists and their allies that their terrorism upon terrorism works in favor of their totalitarian designs and so makes further atrocities at home and abroad more likely.

Blair's declaration that acts of terrorism will never influence British government policy is a clear sign that the attacks were staged for influencing public opinion in favor of not only continuing the bloodbath of innocents abroad but also to consolidate tyranny at home without much resistance.

One must note that after exposure of the Downing Street Memos and all associated lies that were invented to legitimize bloodbath in Iraq, there was a growing pressure on the UK government to withdraw troops from Iraq. Furthermore, a growing number of Britons were realizing the preferential treatment of the worse-than-apartheid state-of-Israel’s never ending occupation, terrorism, open racism, crimes against humanity, and the double standards on the part of US and UK towards Muslim states.

To ease the pressure, the news was leaked to the press on June 24 that the US is planning to withdraw some troops from Iraq. But that was not good enough to swing public opinion. That’s why behind the scene, planning was underway to make sure terrorism continues with unabashed skullduggery. British public’s acquiescence to the regime’s policy of continuing the war in Iraq would reinforce the message that double-terrorism works. Such a message in support of terrorism upon terrorism would dishonor the memories of those who died on October 07 at the hands of the same terrorists who have taken lives of more than 120,000 Iraqis in the war and 1.8 million Iraqis through genocidal sanctions so far.

Not only government leaders, but many other citizens of the world, as civic leaders, religious leaders, teachers, netizens, and letter writers may help send the shame-less terrorists the right message by categorically condemning terrorism at home and abroad. Their immediate response of blaming Muslims for what happens is a clear sign that the bloodbath was staged. The repeated stress on “our way of life” and “values” show the totalitarian designs to impose the same on others with the barrel of a gun.

Unfortunately, in newscasts throughout the day, we have heard several Britons describing how they had felt distanced from terrorism occurring elsewhere in the world until today's events. This is why such barbaric events are staged when it is time to elect a war leader in Spain, or to make public opinion in favor of war in Australia, or to ensure continued support from Turkey. What was shown on the “mainstream” TV channels was a typical human response that takes everything on the face value. The co-opted commentators kept repeating that many Britons have viewed terrorism as America's problem in a way to mean: “Did you see it for yourself now. Don’t say no to any war that we may be launching in the near future.”

Whatever else might be said about such expressions, they simply support the message from the leading crusaders (Bush and Blair) that terrorism works, that it can enable its perpetrators to shape world opinion as well as world order in their image. Such a message encourages others to join the ranks of terrorist armies at home and opportunistic collaborators abroad for more violence in distant parts of the world, a tiny fraction of which the British witnessed today.

Therefore we must take this opportunity to realize that the perpetrators on the bombing in London and Iraq and Afghanistan are using well trained armies to commit terrorism abroad and well trained secret agents to commit terrorism at home for additional support for terrorism abroad.

While the terrorists are fighting in the name of freedom and democracy and that definitely has merit, the intentional invasions and occupations on the basis of lies, the intentional killing of innocent people and the intentional establishment of countless concentration camps is never justifiable as means to promote the stated cause. The democratic terrorists should have learned from the failure of Communism that the end does not justify the means.

We will never be able to see an end to terrorism because the double-terrorists are the perpetrators: the real culprits. They then become the judge, the prosecutor and also declare a “war on terrorism.’ Very very strange indeed: we are facing mass deception of an unprecedented scale in human history.

A mere realization of this reality is enough to neutralize terrorist practices by preventing them from attaining their totalitarian designs in the short run. In the long run, they are going to take themselves out of steam with their own hands. No one is militarily so strong to defeat them. However, they digging a deep hole for themselves with the belief that they can continue to lie, cheat and fool the world indefinitely.

Public opinion is a powerful force. Spain withdrew its forces from Iraq. Italy is withdrawing partial forces in the face of mounting expressions of domestic and world opinion. Even UK leaked it to the press that it is considering withdrawal. Immediately after the bombing the double-terrorists’ initial promise was to keep fighting the war they have launched on the basis of nothing else but pure lies.

Thus, the categorical condemnation of this double-terrorism would go a long way towards its elimination. We need to expose and defeat the mindset that promotes and sustains this bloody game of double terrorism. Such a mindset is not hard to notice. For example, this mindset would argue to forget about Israeli, American, Russian and Indian occupations; focus on ending resistance to these occupations.

The cruel, inhuman mindset of these double-terrorists argues that the world must never give even the appearance of approving of, or yielding, to the resistance posed by the occupied, oppressed and humiliated people in Palestine, Afghanistan, Chechnya, Iraq and Kashmir in word or deed. For example, such a sick mindset criticizes the New York Times for arguing that the Chechans deserve independence. They force people to take things on the face value and exact collective punishment on nations. Just the way they practice double-terrorism, they also use double language. They would say: “Chechans and Palestinians may well deserve independence, but the atrocities that occur should have the effect of making the world deaf to their legitimate grievances for a substantial period of time.”

This mindset is on display in Israel and the US is following the same line in Iraq. All human beings are not alike, nor do they suffer equally under foreign occupations. Some of them would lose everything, their families and all loved ones and in desperation would react against the oppressors. Others would find it perfectly legitimate to fight for their freedom. It doesn’t mean that the terrorist-occupiers should prolong their unjust occupations on the basis that acts of resistance, which they call terrorism, should have the sole effect of impeding the legitimate causes they are intended to promote.

Such thinking is the product of the sick-terrorist-mindset of the double terrorists. They know that as long as their tyrannical occupation would remain in place, resistance is bound to come. And as long as there is resistance, there would remain justification for prolonging tyranny under the banner of a war on terrorism.

One such sick terrorist mind is on display on Media Monitors dot net. Len Breslow, in an article, “we are all in the same boat,” argues: “Were the world to turn its back on the Chechan cause in response to the actions of a handful of terrorists, many innocent Chechans would be penalized for the actions of the few. But I believe the cost is necessary since the destruction of innocent human life is worse than most forms of oppression.” [1]

It means the destruction on life on the part of Chechens is no destruction at all. It is destruction when it is exacted on the oppressors: the terrorists and the enemies of their freedom. If Chechens die, let them die and put their legitimate cause on hold. But let no one from the aggressor’s side face death and destruction. Would this kind of an approach ever work in bringing peace when we know about the law of nature that every action has an equal and opposite reaction?

The above quoted argument shows the exact ideas which Friedman, Pipes, Spencer and the rest of the war lords are promoting in different words, at different time but with more sophistication in a professional manner.

It is naïve to assume that such an inhuman approach to the already occupied and oppressed people would encourage the majority of those, whom the freedom fighters claim to represent to move against the freedom fighters, thus further isolating them. This is dream of the sick minds. If every Palestinian, Iraqi, Afghan and Chechen is not standing up to give his life for ending the oppression and occupation of the lying aggressors, it does not mean that they do not respect those who commit themselves to die for the sake of real freedom: not the freedom that the US has brought to Iraq and Afghanistan. It simply means that they expect their revenge tomorrow.

If Palestinians, Kashmiris and Chechens are given the right to self-determination, and if forces of tyranny are withdrawn from Iraq and Afghanistan, it would never amount to rewarding terrorism. The UK didn’t reward terrorists when it ended its occupation of the US. Nor all those Americans, who fought against King George and other tyrants from UK, were terrorists.

If we go by the standards promoted by the sick terrorist minds in the US and UK, then we will have to put the struggle for democracy and freedom in Iraq on hold because allowing US and UK to operate in Iraq and install governments of their choice there means the world is rewarding the terrorist who launched this war on false pretexts. First they have to renounce terrorism and then we will see what “legitimate” causes they want to promote with the unprecedented kind of naked aggression.

Hope the repeat tragedy on the pattern of 9/11 that occurred in London will drive home the lesson in Britain and the rest of the world that we are facing terrorism upon terrorism from the double-terrorists. No amount of silence or surrendering our rights to real freedom and self-determination will prevent them from striking at home and abroad with the twin objectives of consolidating police state at home[2] and puppet regimes abroad.

Note:

[1] See http://world.mediamonitors.net/content/view/full/16559

[2] See Robert Verkaik, "Clarke set to rush through emergency arrest powers," Independent, July 08, 2005. http://news.independent.co.uk/uk/leg...icle297645.ece


The sick mindset of the double terrorists
Reply

khilji
07-13-2005, 12:59 AM
First of all, let me thank you for taking the time to reply to my post.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
What was in it for the US? Bottom line…..protect our national interests and defend our way of life.
How was it achieved by invading Iraq, if it had increased "terrorism" since the invasion - according to all US govt. reports.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
9/11 caused a heightened concern regarding terrorism. As Pres. Bush stated (and I'm paraphrasing), we will not distinguish between terrorists and those countries sponsoring/harboring them.
The attack on Afghanistan's Taliban regime was understandable, as the Taliban was giving shelter to OBL and his group - and most countries in the world supported this move after 9/11, although it should be pointed out that no factual evidences were found for the 9/11 crimes and only circumstantial evidences were used to implicate OBL.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
We can not sit idly back and allow people to attack our homeland either without defending ourselves agaisnt those who threaten our way of life. We did sit idly back for many years and never retaliated. 9/11 was the turning point.
Fair enough. But Iraq had in no way threatened the US, the whole story of WMD was a fairy tale trumped up by Cheney and the neo-cons, even the CIA were pressured by Cheney and his sub-ordinates.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
Saddam was not fully complying with the inspections. Just curious….how many people here have read the 9/11 Commission Report or the WMD Reports? There was much evidence that showed that Saddam continued to pursue WMD (while stockpiles were not found, all subsequent reports showed that Saddam was merely waiting for the inspections to stop and his plans were to reconstitute his WMD program).
Please read this:

http://www.pipa.org/OnlineReports/Ir..._03_Report.pdf

and please tell us which of the TV channels you normally watch.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
There had also been a long, documented history of ties between Iraq and Al Qaeda and the terrorist training camps based in Iraq (hence, it had already been a breeding ground for terrorism prior to the start of the war in 2003).
False statement, yes there were minor contact between the two groups, but no evidence of working cooperation. 9/11 has no link with Iraq invasion, but Bush, the blind, was leading the US public - a blind leading the blind, if we can say that.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
Again, all Saddam had to do was allow true and open inspections and this could have all been avoided because it would've cleared the air regarding the suspicions on the WMD. Again, Americans have much better things to do than starting a war for fun. We don't enjoy sending our sons and daughters in harms way for the fun of it. (And, despite what some here think, we also don't torture, kill, rape and pillage for kicks either.)
Agreed, no one goes to war for fun and when history judges Bush for the reasons he went to war, it will not be kind. He should be tried for war-crimes for killing 50-100k innocent Iraqi's in an illegal war and if he is found to be guilty, the US harboring him may also be guilty, just like the Taliban was guilty, if OBL did commit the 9/11 crime. The same goes for Blair and the UK. Will they ever be tried, nooo, because they are man-gods, the leader of other man-gods, whose lives are infinitely more valuable than pesky muslims, in far-away places like Iraq and Afghanistan.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
But, by not complying, Saddam gave the appearance that he had no respect for the UN requests and therefore, was not trustworthy and was a threat to our country.
Quite a stretch, don't you think. This is the danger of pre-emptive strike. In the end, it is might is right. I am strong, I have the power to hit you and you cannot stop me, I think you are a threat, so here goes, Saddam out, 50-100k Iraqi's out, yes we lost 2k, maybe we will loose another 1k, but hey, we can do what we want, because we are the 800 pound gorilla, and we do not care what others think or do. If we see a threat, we will take him out, because we "can" do it.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
Our fear was that not only did Saddam have WMD, but that he would give them to those terrorists who would cause additional harm to US citizens. In the end, knowing that Saddam was only waiting the inspections out to reinstate his WMD program, I think it was best that he was removed. He was a threat and would've always been a threat to many.
Bush and his people succeeded to dupe a large portion of the US population, because they were angry and they wanted to hit back - Bush just found some cooked up reason of WMD to direct the anger and fear towards Saddam and Iraq, and of course Saddam was the fool who never saw what was coming.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
And, I do think the Iraqi people will be better off in a nation where they can control their own destiny. Yes, things are still unstable. This is something that takes times. Humans don't come out of the womb running either. The Iraqis have a fresh start. I pray that the new Iraqi leaders have the wisdom to now make decisions that ensures that the Iraqi people are prosperous and is willing to be a supporter of peace in the world community rather than a hinderance.
Here we go again, the benevolent idea of nation building - never forget the prime directive, never to interfere in other's affairs, because when you change history in your ignorance and arrogance, you take responsibility for the good and bad and it can be a terrible responsibility.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
From the U.S.'s perspective, this is not a war about religion. We do not harbor ill will towards muslim nations or muslims as a group. This is not a war about oil. America is a nation rich in its own right. I think various countries of the world form a symbiotic relationship. We have things that Middle Eastern countries need to survive (materially speaking) and vice versa. Americans are more than willing to purchase oil and have the money to do so. We have no need to steal it or cause war to obtain it.
Here, I agree with you, unlike many of us foolish muslims who do not know enough about the US to know this to be true. But the above being true, the tragedy is that you are led by fools like Bush and his neocons into places like Iraq, where you have killed 50-100k innocent civilians for dubious motives, reasons and benefits to the US.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
Now, many people have stated that the sanctions against Iraq merely hurt the citizens of Iraq, not the Iraqi leadership (and I agree) but it is a non-violent (i.e., non-war) tool used against world leaders for containment. Saddam could not be left unattended after he attacked Kuwait. Containment, in itself, is just as costly (if not more costly) in terms of life and money if analyzed. Please check out this report from the University of Chicago regarding costs of containment. Several pages are data but the first few pages are the meat of the report. Very interesting reading for those who've not considered these costs.
http://gsbwww.uchicago.edu/fac/steve...nt,%20Weighing %20the%20Costs%20(March%202003).pdf
Saddam should have been removed when there was a great opportunity, but elder Bush missed it. Sanctions were never effective, it only hurt the people. The link does not work by the way.

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
The war in Iraq was first and foremost to get a regime change due to the perceived threat of Saddam and as part of the War on Terror.
Let me see here, now obviously you are a Republican and you have voted for Bush, or am I wrong?

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
I disagree that all Iraqis see Americans as a foe. No doubt, there are some who do. Just like there are many people in the U.S. who were against the war. There will always be differences of opinion. In the end, today, each person has the choice for what happens from here on out. Either we can be part of the solution of part of the problem.
Or was it "Either you are with us, or you are with the terrorists."

Originally Posted by YamahaR1
People who focus on only the negative will continue to do so no matter what positive news is out there. I, on the other hand, am a person who sees a cup as half full rather than half empty. I see hope for a future where the Iraqis can guide their own destiny. While there have been losses, there has also been positive progress.
OK, despite all my sarcastic comments and despite my sadness in seeing your point of view, I am also an optimist like yourself. What has happened has happened, we cannot bring back the dead, nor can we change the past, but we must work towards a future, where all of us can have a more fair and just world and it is never too late to try.
Reply

onestop
07-13-2005, 01:53 AM
Have Bush and Blair increased terrorism by their actions :

I wander what God would say to Bush and Blair, maybe: " you two dude have done a great deeds to the world man! You two have changed the world into an extremely peaceful paradise. well done man!. and please continue using your great powers which i have given you wisely. Keep up the good works !!"
Reply

YamahaR1
07-13-2005, 04:37 PM
Originally Posted by Preacher
9/11 was a Pseudo-event perpetrated to achieve self-serving criminal goals by the criminals who work for syndicates and major corporations in the USA. You call them "elected officials" or the executive branch. This is what the following facts tells people.


9-11 Questions the "mainstream" media would not address

Home Page
Have you read the 9/11 report?
Have you watched Fahrenhype 9/11?
Have you read any media articles other than those that criticize the US (yes, they are out there. Even in the US, we have to dig for them :) )?

If so, then you know the answers to many of these questions. For those who really want to know the truth or more than just their believed version, I recommend doing some research. I don't for one minute think I know all the answers. There may be some that still need discussion. But, I've viewed these questions and know for a fact that there are answers to many. I assume for many people, it is much easier to subscribe to some sort of conspiracy theory :shade: than to do research and find the answers they seek.

Personally, I don't have time to address them all. Answers are out there to the majority of these questions for those who want to know. I imagine there are some processes and procedures that aren't released to the general public for security reasons.

An example of where you can find some answers:
45. Why were the Black Boxes never recovered?
First, the "black boxes" are the Flight Data Recorder (FDR) and the Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR). According to the Washington Post the black boxes were found by members of the FBI Evidence Response Team for Flight 77 (Pentagon crash)– which corresponds to a Newsweek article. The FDR for flight 93 is discussed in the 9-11 report.
Reply

YamahaR1
07-13-2005, 04:41 PM
Originally Posted by onestop
I wander what God would say to Bush and Blair, maybe: " you two dude have done a great deeds to the world man! You two have changed the world into an extremely peaceful paradise. well done man!. and please continue using your great powers which i have given you wisely. Keep up the good works !!"
That equally goes for Saddam, those who are suicide bombers/commit terrorist acts, and anyone else who chooses violence over peace.
Reply

Muezzin
07-13-2005, 04:42 PM
Originally Posted by YamahaR1
That equally goes for Saddam, those who are suicide bombers/commit terrorist acts, and anyone else who chooses violence over peace.
I was under the impression Saddam just chose Doritos over Froot Loops.
Reply

YamahaR1
07-13-2005, 05:01 PM
Originally Posted by khilji
How was it achieved by invading Iraq, if it had increased "terrorism" since the invasion - according to all US govt. reports.
Which government reports are you referring to? I'm not sure that I've seen them.

Originally Posted by khilji
Fair enough. But Iraq had in no way threatened the US, the whole story of WMD was a fairy tale trumped up by Cheney and the neo-cons, even the CIA were pressured by Cheney and his sub-ordinates.
Nope. WMD was discussed way before the Bush administration. Go back to the Clinton administration and you'll find plenty of info.
Oh, and what do you guys define a neo-con as?

Originally Posted by khilji
and please tell us which of the TV channels you normally watch.
Honestly, I don't watch much news. I usually surf. I don't really have particular ones that I always use. As long as it is in English, I check it out.

Originally Posted by khilji
False statement, yes there were minor contact between the two groups, but no evidence of working cooperation. 9/11 has no link with Iraq invasion, but Bush, the blind, was leading the US public - a blind leading the blind, if we can say that.
I disagree. I never said that Saddam was linked to 9/11 but to say that there was only "minor" contact is incorrect.

Originally Posted by khilji
Agreed, no one goes to war for fun and when history judges Bush for the reasons he went to war, it will not be kind. He should be tried for war-crimes for killing 50-100k innocent Iraqi's in an illegal war and if he is found to be guilty, the US harboring him may also be guilty, just like the Taliban was guilty, if OBL did commit the 9/11 crime. The same goes for Blair and the UK. Will they ever be tried, nooo, because they are man-gods, the leader of other man-gods, whose lives are infinitely more valuable than pesky muslims, in far-away places like Iraq and Afghanistan.
If the Iraqis think that Saddam is not guilty, then set him free. Place him back as their leader. They have that option.

Originally Posted by khilji
Quite a stretch, don't you think. This is the danger of pre-emptive strike. In the end, it is might is right. I am strong, I have the power to hit you and you cannot stop me, I think you are a threat, so here goes, Saddam out, 50-100k Iraqi's out, yes we lost 2k, maybe we will loose another 1k, but hey, we can do what we want, because we are the 800 pound gorilla, and we do not care what others think or do. If we see a threat, we will take him out, because we "can" do it.
It wasn't just based on evidence provided from the U.S. There were other countries that legitimately believed that Saddam did indeed possess WMD. I, for one, am relieved he didn't have them. The loss of life on both sides would be much worse. And, knowing that he was only waiting for the sanctions to end to reinstate his WMD program tells me that the pre-emptive action was the right thing to do.

Originally Posted by khilji
Bush and his people succeeded to dupe a large portion of the US population, because they were angry and they wanted to hit back - Bush just found some cooked up reason of WMD to direct the anger and fear towards Saddam and Iraq, and of course Saddam was the fool who never saw what was coming.
Angry, yes. Anxious to get revenge. Not exactly. Many Americans did and still do not agree with the war in Iraq. It's not like the majority was a bunch of blood thirsty loonies hell bent on killing a bunch of muslims to make themselves feel better.

Originally Posted by khilji
Here we go again, the benevolent idea of nation building - never forget the prime directive, never to interfere in other's affairs, because when you change history in your ignorance and arrogance, you take responsibility for the good and bad and it can be a terrible responsibility.
Agreed. Except, I say this applies equally to both sides.

Originally Posted by khilji
Let me see here, now obviously you are a Republican and you have voted for Bush, or am I wrong?
Wrong and right. I am a libertarian by registration but I consider myself more as an independent because I simply don't agree with any one party 100%. And, yes, I did vote for Bush both times. In both elections, I simply couldn't stomach the Democratic Party alternative. And, while there were libertarian candidates, the party still doesn't have a fighting chance in this country where the two major parties reign. So, then I pick what I think is the lesser of two evils. :) You also have to remember, we vote for candidates for much more than that of foreign policy.

Originally Posted by khilji
OK, despite all my sarcastic comments and despite my sadness in seeing your point of view, I am also an optimist like yourself. What has happened has happened, we cannot bring back the dead, nor can we change the past, but we must work towards a future, where all of us can have a more fair and just world and it is never too late to try.
I'm glad to see another optimist in this world of so many pessimists! :applaud:

And here is the link again. Hopefully, it will work this time.
Reply

YamahaR1
07-13-2005, 05:06 PM
Originally Posted by Muezzin
I was under the impression Saddam just chose Doritos over Froot Loops.
Didn't you know....Americans wage war against muslim leaders who prefer Doritos. It's another one of those conspiracy theories that is out there circulating in hotmail accounts, I'm sure. ;D

Just like the world could use more optimists....its also nice to see those with a sense of humor. :applaud:
Reply

Bittersteel
07-13-2005, 05:18 PM
I am a pessimist.And I always think secularism will occupy Muslim lands..........
Reply

YamahaR1
07-13-2005, 05:21 PM
Originally Posted by Abdul Aziz
And I always think secularism will occupy Muslim lands..........
Why?
Reply

جوري
11-04-2010, 09:32 PM
Originally Posted by YamahaR1
For those who really want to know the truth or more than just their believed version, I recommend doing some research.
Low standards or a sub-par education? it is difficult indeed to ask the right questions when you're wedged in one sphere and can't fathom variables existing outside of it!

all the best
Reply

GuestFellow
11-08-2010, 12:42 AM
Originally Posted by YamahaR1
What was in it for the US? Bottom line…..protect our national interests and defend our way of life.
I think you forgot to mention Israel. XD
Reply

Pygoscelis
11-08-2010, 05:56 AM
I say yes. Given the rocky history between the middle east and the west (from the crusades on till present), it was like poking a hornets nest sending troops to "libarate" Iraq and deal with imaginary "weapons of mass destruction". It was a similar blunder attacking Afghanistan instead of trying to deal diplomatically, which may have failed and then the military could have been used. To not even try was a huge diplomatic blunder that I think makes the "war" unwinable.
Reply

Pygoscelis
11-08-2010, 05:59 AM
Originally Posted by Aziz
I am a pessimist.And I always think secularism will occupy Muslim lands..........
As nice as that would be (secularism worldwide), it isn't something worth dying for, or killing for.
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: 38
    Last Post: 04-27-2009, 05:45 AM
  2. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 07-08-2008, 02:41 PM
  3. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 07-30-2006, 11:27 AM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!