PDA

View Full Version : How to Stop the Suicide Bombings



Walter
04-26-2007, 11:30 PM
Hi Everyone:

Every night I hear the depressing news of suicide bombers murdering innocent civilians. I thought that the following could stop this practise.

A well publicised and televised debate on one question: Do suicide bombers qualify for martyrdom.

The preservation of life is a strong emotional drive. However, it can be over ridden by a higher goal: martyrdom. I thought that the defence of one's family may override this emotional drive, but it does not, for even when trying to protect your family, you still want to live.

I believe that there will be a shortage of candidates for suicide missions if the candidates themselves did not believe that they would be martyrs.

Regards,
Grenville
Reply

Login/Register to hide ads. Scroll down for more posts
Keltoi
04-27-2007, 02:15 PM
You are probably correct, but who is going to convince them? The average everday Muslim cleric will denounce suicide terrorism as un-Islamic, but the people who are carrying out these attacks aren't listening to those guys. They are brainwashed by the extremist element.
Reply

Walter
04-27-2007, 03:15 PM
Hi Keltoi:

That is why there needs to be a well publicised debate between some who disagree that they qualify for martyrdom and many of the respected teachers who do believe that they do qualify. The problem is the will do organise such a debate. Who will do it? I am certainly willing to assist.

Regards,
Grenville
Reply

Zulkiflim
04-27-2007, 05:29 PM
Salaam,

Intent is important.

If the pertson wishes to exact revenge...then it is for revenge
If it is to uphold justice
If it is for Jihad
If it is to stop oppression..and so on..

The intent is important.

As the Quran said,Many people claim that their place in heaven is assured,then the Quran challenges..SEEK YE DEATH,BUt none of them will..

I believe that there will be a shortage of candidates for suicide missions if the candidates themselves did not believe that they would be martyrs.
Matrys will always exist for in their mind they are always right.
It is the same for both sides of the coin.

Inshallah the Jihad continues for those who speak and act is right.
Who defend and fight as they fight you.
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
Uthman
04-27-2007, 05:39 PM
Greetings,

Excuse my pessimistic thinking (which I am renowned for), but I don't think it can be stopped.

That doesn't, of course, mean that we don't try. What is important is that we make sure that everybody understands that Islam prohibits suicide. And prove it using the verse from the Qur'an. After that, if a person still goes on to do these suicide bombings (often sugarcoated with the term 'martyrom operation'), then that is their prerogative. Our duty, however, will have been done. I would like to quote a friend of mine on this notion:

Always think, i am the horse that carries the rider. It is the rider who will do the presentation, i merely carry him along. That rider is the Message of Islam.
Education, in a nutshell.

Regards
Reply

mustafajadeed
04-27-2007, 10:01 PM
Salam Alay Koom:

Al Qur'an Sura 4 Nisaa Ayat 29:

"O you who believe! Eat not up your property among yourselves in vanities: But let there be among you Traffic and Trade by mutual goodwill: Nor kill (or destroy) yourselves: For verily The God has been to most Merciful."

Al Qur'an Sura 4 Nisaa Ayat 93:

"If a man kills a believer intentionally, his recompense is Hell, to abide their in (forever): and the wrath and the curse of The God are upon him, and a dreadful penalty is prepared for him."

Did I say these things? No, The Book of The God did.

If I strap on an Bomb and Blow-up (Destroy) myself. I have Violated that Command not to do so.

If (as is usually the case) I Blow-up (Destroy) myself AND others who are Muslim, MY destination is not "The Garden as a Martyr." The God said it is HELL that is me destination( khaalideena feeha) Forever in it.

I know that some of my Brothers and Sisters would rather listen to their Sheiks, Scholars, Imams, Muftis, Etc. But something has to be realized here:

Many (NOT All- Let me make that clear) of them are the ones who would have me Violate The Order that has been by The God not to Kill Myself and Other Muslims- and then LIE to me about "72 Virgins waiting" for me.

I do not need 72 Virgins in Hell. I need to stay out of Hell. That is part of the purpose of this Test of life on this world.

My "Hadith" is a little shabby, but I know that there is one that basically tells you that however you killed yourself, is how you will do so in Hell. If you drank poison, you will drink poison, if you stabbed yourself you will stab yourself.

Blow-Up Forever (Khaalideen)?

That is what must be drilled into Muslims. Follow Allah, and not Mankind. Post those Ayat everywhere! Until it starts to sink in.

Ma Salam
Reply

barney
04-27-2007, 10:10 PM
A way to limit suicide bombings is for it to not be rewarded by a "positive" response. Al Quada killed a few hundred people in Spain and the Spanish people voted in a knocked kneed government who capitulated to the death squads.

As long as Suicide bombing is glorified as martyerdom and veiwed as Jihad, it's not only going to be seen as acceptable, but as obligatory. This is how it's presented.
The Arab Dictators actually Pay the familys of suicide bombers more than they would earn in several lifetimes. But they beleive their real reward is from Allah.
Reply

*charisma*
04-27-2007, 10:15 PM
^Not all suicide bombers think like that. There are actually a few other reasons one chooses to become a suicide bomber, but they're not really thought of.
Reply

NoName55
04-27-2007, 10:18 PM
Originally Posted by mustafajadeed
Salam Alay Koom:

Al Qur'an Sura 4 Nisaa Ayat 29:
..................
.................
.................
A rafidah inspired child or youth in Palestine/Israel who is brainwashed/coerced in to blowing up him/herself is going to hell?
why not the terror masters who hide in sewers when israel comes for vengence?

A badly armed soldeir who dives under the enemy tank with a hand grenade is hellbound?
Reply

Walter
04-28-2007, 06:06 PM
Hi NoName55:

We should be clear about going to hell and martyrdom. A martyr goes to heaven via persecution unto death for their belief.

A suicide bomber may go to heaven as a soldier, but I do not believe that they can qualify as martyrs. I am not talking about suicide bombers who kill innocent people who are not fighting them - that is simply murder.

It would appear that these suicide bombers are being deceived by their teachers, and I am convinced that the most effective way of ending this deception is with an honest debate with these teachers and broadcast to their students. Again, the question is who is willing to debate them.

I wrote a published article on this here if you are interested:

http://researching.wordpress.com/200...icide-bombers/

Regards,
Grenville
Reply

Muezzin
04-28-2007, 06:57 PM
I really fail to see how certain people think that deliberately killing oneself and civilians will grant them a place in Paradise...

Suicide and killing civilians are both expressly forbidden in Islamic teachings.
Reply

Keltoi
04-28-2007, 07:04 PM
Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
Speaking of martyrdom operations...

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070428/...DE5QiX14ys0NUE

.

Somehow, the notion of causing oneself to explode into a fiery ball of bone shards, shrapnel, and soft tissue for ones deity is utterly foreign to me.
Do you think they are really doing it for God? Granted, there are some "true" believers out there that actually think they are, but this is all wrapped up in politics. If the leaders of these terrorist organizations actually believed that blowing yourself up was the way to Heaven, they would have done it themselves. The key is to brainwash the young, outcasts, homeless, etc, into accepting this absurd notion of martrydom by suicide. That is how these organizations, who mainly have political objectives, use religion for their own means.
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
04-28-2007, 08:47 PM
Originally Posted by Grenville
Hi Keltoi:

That is why there needs to be a well publicised debate between some who disagree that they qualify for martyrdom and many of the respected teachers who do believe that they do qualify. The problem is the will do organise such a debate. Who will do it? I am certainly willing to assist.

Regards,
Grenville
I wanted this also - the reformation of the Council of Princes and Elders, but there is one problem. The scholars who need to attend this debate on behalf of the support for martyrdom missions (among a thousand other worthy issues), would be arrested the moment they entered the venue. So I asked for a general amnesty to allow them to Assemble, but... it's like talking to a brick wall.

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

NoName55
04-28-2007, 08:58 PM
Originally Posted by Muezzin
I really fail to see how certain people think that deliberately killing oneself and civilians will grant them a place in Paradise...

Suicide and killing civilians are both expressly forbidden in Islamic teachings.
Then pehaps you should have a talk with baby killers like Messrs. bush blair types, who create environments where sadrs and moqtadas of this world thrive.

How difficult do you think it is to convince a 16 year old who has nothing/no-one left, to "volunteer"?
Reply

barney
04-28-2007, 09:11 PM
Originally Posted by NoName55
Then pehaps you should have a talk with baby killers like Messrs. bush blair types,
Tony Blair hasnt strapped a nail bomb to his chest and blown the snot out of a school. Or indeed a Nursery. Quite simply, he hasnt killed any babys.



I dont have to remind anyone here that the Suicide bombers although following a political agenda do not blow themselves to bits because it's an effective way of killing people.A truck bomb will kill just one person less if the suicidal driver isnt inside, and he can wander off back home and get another truck for tommorows attack.
They do it as a offering of their devotion to Allah.(weather he actually accepts it or not is irrelevant, they beleive he does and the Islamic Terrorists can read for hour after hour scripture which they say supports this.)

The only way for Islam to truely be veiwed as a "religion of peace" is for ordinary Muslims to take their religion back and to move it forward.
Reply

NoName55
04-28-2007, 09:14 PM
They do it as a offering of their devotion to Allah
why dont the jackasses of this world realise that revenge is something other than devotion to Allah
Reply

Woodrow
04-28-2007, 09:38 PM
Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
Your first sentence is a fair one and I can only offer my opinion based upon what we read and witness as to the motivations expressed by these killers. I think you need to examine the motivations of those who explode car bombs in the midst of crowded markets and those who behead their fellow humans to the droning intonation of “Allahu Akbar”.

I would say ideologically, at the root of the conflict and hatreds that cause people to commit these atrocities are the religious perspectives pulsing away. There are many on this board who will seek to define who is, and who is not a “real” Moslem and what “real” Islam is.
I would propose to you, for example, that the 19 highjackers who flew commercial airliners into mega buildings were in fact Moslems and were acting on behalf of an Islamic belief which was to exact retribution on the evil “Great Satan” and was an ideologically sanctioned act of Jihad. I believe that a very large percentage of the Moslem populations’ perception of the West is couched in religious terms and that is, in part, made manifest in our support of Israel. The Moslems hate them and therefore hate us by proxy. This hatred is founded in a religious blood feud dating back centuries.
I'm going to go backwards and try to answer a few.

I would propose to you, for example, that the 19 highjackers who flew commercial airliners into mega buildings were in fact Moslems and were acting on behalf of an Islamic belief which was to exact retribution on the evil “Great Satan” and was an ideologically sanctioned act of Jihad. I believe that a very large percentage of the Moslem populations’ perception of the West is couched in religious terms and that is, in part, made manifest in our support of Israel. The Moslems hate them and therefore hate us by proxy. This hatred is founded in a religious blood feud dating back centuries.
As they had identified themselves as Muslim and there are no witnesses to say that they had committed the sin of shirk, I have to accept them as being Muslim

However, their actions are contradictory to the teachings of Islam.

This next one I have trouble in agreeing with.

a very large percentage of the Moslem populations’ perception of the West is couched in religious terms and that is, in part,
I tend to think you are not aware as to where the majority of the world's Muslim population is. Very few Muslims are anti American, although many are anti American policies. Very many of the world's Muslims are living in Western countries or countries closely aligned with the West. Any perceptions are not the result of any religious teachings for most Muslims.

I would say ideologically, at the root of the conflict and hatreds that cause people to commit these atrocities are the religious perspectives pulsing away. There are many on this board who will seek to define who is, and who is not a “real” Moslem and what “real” Islam is.
As a Muslim I find it very difficult to explain what a Muslim is to a non-Muslim. At the Very minimal a Muslim is any Person who has said the Shahadah or was born of Muslim Parents. A Muslim is simply a person who has chosen to serve the one Monotheistic God(swt) who was revealed through all of the Prophets(PBUT)

Islam is the act of Surrendering to the Will of God(swt) All Islamic teaching is directed with a single goal and that is to live our lives so that all we do, think or say is an act of surrendering to God(swt)

If a person is not acting in a manner that is a an act of servitude to God(swt) they are being unIslamic.
Your first sentence is a fair one and I can only offer my opinion based upon what we read and witness as to the motivations expressed by these killers. I think you need to examine the motivations of those who explode car bombs in the midst of crowded markets and those who behead their fellow humans to the droning intonation of “Allahu Akbar”.
Perhaps the motivation is more related to living in countries that have not seen peace for many decades and the people of those countries have been over run consistantly by foreigners. Areas where all strangers have shown themselves to have come with destructive intent.

Perhaps the motivations are more in terms of wanting freedom. Not much different then our attitudes towards the British in the 18th century.
Reply

aamirsaab
04-28-2007, 09:51 PM
:sl:
Originally Posted by barney
The only way for Islam to truely be veiwed as a "religion of peace" is for ordinary Muslims to take their religion back and to move it forward.
That's what I'm doing.
:statisfie
Reply

Grace Seeker
04-28-2007, 11:17 PM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
Islam is the act of Surrendering to the Will of God(swt) All Islamic teaching is directed with a single goal and that is to live our lives so that all we do, think or say is an act of surrendering to God(swt)

If a person is not acting in a manner that is a an act of servitude to God(swt) they are being unIslamic.

Can one be both a Muslim and unIslamic at the same time?
Reply

SirZubair
04-28-2007, 11:33 PM
How to stop suicide bombings..........

... make it illegal.

:rollseyes
Reply

SirZubair
04-28-2007, 11:36 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Can one be both a Muslim and unIslamic at the same time?
Yes, one can be Muslim and be Unislamic at the same time. Open your eyes, watch the news, read the newspapers. There are many many many many examples of Muslims commiting unislamic acts.

* beating up their wives
* Killing their own daughters
* forcing their children into relationships
* Having sex with a goat ( i can't believe his punishment was to marry the goat... poor goat.. )

Yeah, it happens.
Reply

NoName55
04-28-2007, 11:43 PM
more obscenites!

:(:cry:
Reply

Snowflake
04-29-2007, 12:03 AM
Educating people would be like treating the symptoms and not getting rid of the disease.

Therefore, the most effective method to stop suicide bombing would be to stop attacking muslim countries! Treat the disease and the symptoms will vanish too.
Reply

Joe98
04-29-2007, 12:01 PM
Originally Posted by Muslimah_Sis
Therefore, the most effective method to stop suicide bombing would be to stop attacking muslim countries!
So, if the US leaves Iraq, the Sunni and Shiite will stop killing each other???
Reply

Muezzin
04-29-2007, 01:53 PM
Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
Your first sentence is a fair one and I can only offer my opinion based upon what we read and witness as to the motivations expressed by these killers. I think you need to examine the motivations of those who explode car bombs in the midst of crowded markets and those who behead their fellow humans to the droning intonation of “Allahu Akbar”.

I would say ideologically, at the root of the conflict and hatreds that cause people to commit these atrocities are the religious perspectives pulsing away. There are many on this board who will seek to define who is, and who is not a “real” Moslem and what “real” Islam is.

I would propose to you, for example, that the 19 highjackers who flew commercial airliners into mega buildings were in fact Moslems and were acting on behalf of an Islamic belief which was to exact retribution on the evil “Great Satan” and was an ideologically sanctioned act of Jihad. I believe that a very large percentage of the Moslem populations’ perception of the West is couched in religious terms and that is, in part, made manifest in our support of Israel. The Moslems hate them and therefore hate us by proxy. This hatred is founded in a religious blood feud dating back centuries.
You know, I'd usually delete such sweeping generalisations, but since you're new, I'll give you a chance to explain what you mean on the off-chance I'm mistaken.
Reply

Suomipoika
04-29-2007, 02:13 PM
Originally Posted by Muslimah_Sis
Educating people would be like treating the symptoms and not getting rid of the disease.

Therefore, the most effective method to stop suicide bombing would be to stop attacking muslim countries! Treat the disease and the symptoms will vanish too.
Except that symptoms of the disease were there before the disease then. USA was victim of terrible suicide attack before it started invading country where these attackers had been trained.
Reply

NoName55
04-29-2007, 02:18 PM
Are some people really so dumb as to believe that 9/11 is cause or beginning of everything?

Had it been so, It would be Saudi Arabia (where alleged 9/11 hijackers and Osama came from) and Iran and lebanon under Occupation (where the terror hails from) NOT Iraq!
Reply

Suomipoika
04-29-2007, 02:32 PM
Originally Posted by NoName55
Are some people really so dumb as to believe that 9/11 is cause or beginning of everything?

Had it been so, It would be Saudi Arabia (where alleged 9/11 hijackers and Osama came from) and Iran and lebanon under Occupation (where the terror hails from) NOT Iraq!
What muslim country was USA invading by the time of 9/11? It was claimed that invading muslim countries is a symptom, not a disease, and the disease is invading muslim countries.

My problem is that the disease seems to appear only after the symptoms.
Reply

Suomipoika
04-29-2007, 02:35 PM
Hmm, I cant edit my posts yet I think, anyway, what I meant to say was:

What muslim country was USA invading by the time of 9/11? It was claimed that the suicide attacks is the symptom, not a disease, and the disease is invading muslim countries.

My problem is that the disease seems to appear only after the symptoms.
Reply

Muezzin
04-29-2007, 02:38 PM
Originally Posted by Suomipoika
What muslim country was USA invading by the time of 9/11? It was claimed that invading muslim countries is a symptom, not a disease, and the disease is invading muslim countries.

My problem is that the disease seems to appear only after the symptoms.
Yes, 9/11 was a cause. However, the Iraq war has been proven to have exacerbated terrorism.

Clicky clicky

Looky looky

Those who say 9/11 was not a cause are deluded. Those who say the Iraq war had absolutely no effect on strengthening international terrorism are also deluded. Everyone has a role to play, Muslims and Western Governments included.
Reply

NoName55
04-29-2007, 02:39 PM
Originally Posted by Suomipoika
Originally Posted by NoName55
Are some people really so dumb as to believe that 9/11 is cause or beginning of everything?

Had it been so, It would be Saudi Arabia (where alleged 9/11 hijackers and Osama came from) and Iran and lebanon under Occupation (where the terror hails from) NOT Iraq!
What muslim country was USA invading by the time of 9/11? It was claimed that invading muslim countries is a symptom, not a disease, and the disease is invading muslim countries.

My problem is that the disease seems to appear only after the symptoms.
Read the reply again in its entirety, I do not like to waste time with those who distort

P.S Iraq did sweet F.A. to provoke the situation it is in.

PPS: Invading Iraq has achieved nothing but liberation for and unleashing of previously dormant terror Master namely Moqtada Sadr and his Mushrik gangs
Reply

Suomipoika
04-29-2007, 02:58 PM
Originally Posted by Muezzin
Yes, 9/11 was a cause. However, the Iraq war has been proven to have exacerbated terrorism.

Clicky clicky

Looky looky

Those who say 9/11 was not a cause are deluded. Those who say the Iraq war had absolutely no effect on strengthening international terrorism are also deluded. Everyone has a role to play, Muslims and Western Governments included.
I do agree that invasions to Iraq and Afghanistan has increased terrorism, but that wasnt the point, the claim I originally quoted and argued against was that once the attacks against muslim countries are removed, suicide attacks will vanish too. As 9/11 demonstrates, that clearly is not the case.
Reply

Grace Seeker
04-29-2007, 03:04 PM
Originally Posted by NoName55
Invading Iraq has achieved nothing but liberation for and unleashing of previously dormant terror Master namely Moqtada Sadr and his Mushrik gangs
That may be true. But short of inventing a time machine and going back to correct mistakes of the past, you have yet to actually provide an answer to the question: What can be done to stop the suicide bombings?


Are you suggesting that nothing can be done now?
Reply

Suomipoika
04-29-2007, 03:12 PM
Originally Posted by NoName55
Read the reply again in its entirety, I do not like to waste time with those who distort

P.S Iraq did sweet F.A. to provoke the situation it is in.

PPS: Invading Iraq has achieved nothing but liberation for and unleashing of previously dormant terror Master namely Moqtada Sadr and his Mushrik gangs
I have absolutely no idea what everything you have posted in reply to me has to do for or against the claim that once attacks against muslim countries stop, so shall suicide attacks.
Reply

Amadeus85
04-29-2007, 03:32 PM
I think that extremist quaranic schools should be controlled and checked by goverments and even closed if its proven that they are supporting terrorism. I think that education is the key to stop suicidal terrorists. Children aren't born to become martyrs and to kill civilians in suicidal blast.Children are taught to do it, somehow, by someones.For example lets look at Palestina and its schools.Its well known that children there are taught to hate jews and to praise shaheeds who committed suicidal acts.I know that their situation is very hard and they are frustrated, but terrorism isn't the way to win freedom.A man who calls himself a fighter, a soldier , a man, he just can't blow up himself in a bus full of civilians.It is not act of a caurage, but rather act of cowardness.And of course killing innocent palestinian civils by israeli army is also an act of cowardness and shamefull.So first it must be an education.Because untill some mothers keep on sending their children to "go to paradise", the problem with suicide bombings won't be stopped.
And i say again, i also notice the tragedy of Arabs living in Palestina, but they must understand that with every innocent Jew killed, they are farer and farer from the independence.And of course Israel must understand that with every innocent Arab killed, this country is farer and farer from gaining peace.
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
04-29-2007, 05:25 PM
Originally Posted by Joe98
So, if the US leaves Iraq, the Sunni and Shiite will stop killing each other???
Something like that. They will do what they have always done. Barter. It's one of their natural talents ;)

Ninth Scribe
Reply

doodlebug
04-29-2007, 07:04 PM
I made a new thread but it never got posted. Anyhoo it was about Iran and a documentary that I just watched on the Discovery channel. While filming the documentary they were having a sign up whereby men would gather to this area where there was a HUGE poster saying "sign up here to be a martyr", or something to that effect. Basically they were signing up to be suicide bombers.

Maybe if Iran stopped provoking things like this, oh and stopped the chanting of "death to America" after the prayers are completed at the mosques, then some of it would stop.

Just a thought. :)
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
04-29-2007, 08:18 PM
Originally Posted by Ruggedtouch
Gee whiz. Here I was thinking that NAWASIB was a term of endearment.
Lol, it IS a term of endearment. They have lots of name-calling! According to Dr. Zawahiri, I'm Bush's mother... but whatever.

It's when they stop addressing themselves... that's when you should really start to worry.

For the time being, any dialogue is better than none.

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
04-29-2007, 10:09 PM
peace upon those who follow righteous guidance,


simply teach the people about islam.

education will stop suicide bombings.

oppression will only increase it.

ar-rum greatly oppresses ash-shams...
Reply

guyabano
04-30-2007, 07:24 AM
Originally Posted by *charisma*
^Not all suicide bombers think like that. There are actually a few other reasons one chooses to become a suicide bomber, but they're not really thought of.
Like what? Explain !


Footnote: Suicide Boming just kill innocent people and is an act of pure cowardry. It never solved a problem !
Reply

Woodrow
04-30-2007, 08:16 AM
Education is the key.

This is a world wide problem and not limited to any one group. However for simplicity I will just mention Iraq as that is the most visible.

The problem is how to get the education where it is needed. No, I do not have a solution to that. Logistically it is not possible with todays world conditions.


Just as we need to take one bite at a time to eat a whole loaf of bread we need to deal with this problem one step at a time.

I think we need to first identify who is benefiting from the continuation of suicide bombers. The people in Iraq do not seem to be. So the question is who or what is the providing source for the continuation of them?

Who is most likely to benefit from a weakened Iraq? Suicide bombers do seem to be weakening the country and keeping the people divided and suspicious of each other. It is also reducing the number of the best defenders of Iraq.

I really doubt that the US would benefit from a fallen Iraq. A strong Iraq would be in the best interest of the US. A strong country is productive and contributes to the world economy, a poor fallen country is a burden and expensive to keep contained.

So the first question is to identify who stands to gain the most from a destroyed Iraq. That is who is encouraging and backing the suicide bombers. If we can find and eliminate that problem, we will open the doors for education to enter.
Reply

guyabano
04-30-2007, 08:51 AM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
I really doubt that the US would benefit from a fallen Iraq. A strong Iraq would be in the best interest of the US. A strong country is productive and contributes to the world economy, a poor fallen country is a burden and expensive to keep contained.
Agree :thumbs_up
Reply

Chechnya
04-30-2007, 01:43 PM
Before we discuss how to stop "suicide bombings", why not discuss how to stop aerial bombardment - which in the history of modern warfare has killed many many more people than sucide bombings?


As for the muslims views on these bombings - if they are used in ONLY military operations, then i think most would accept them.

As someone earlier said, a badly armed soldier jumping under a tank and blowing it up should be praised for his heroic act - not condemned as a hell-bound manic

in some instances, this brave self-sacrifice act has saved lives
Reply

aamirsaab
04-30-2007, 01:45 PM
:sl:
To kill a weed, one must severe the root.

The same can be applied to suicide bombings.
Reply

Md Mashud
04-30-2007, 01:46 PM
Stop suicide bombers? how about israel stop the oppression -that would stop it..
Reply

Walter
04-30-2007, 02:56 PM
Hi Keltoi:

I do not believe that all suicide bombers are "young, outcasts, homeless, etc". Some (perhaps more than we think) are educated and well off.

As I attempted to explain in my article, martyrdom is an honour for Christians and Muslims. It is perhaps the most honourable way to die. I remember at the start of the war in Afghanistan that old men with WW1 vintage rifles were reportedly crossing the Pakistani border to fight in hopes of being martyred. Therefore, just as martyrdom is attractive to young, old, rich poor etc Christians, it is the same for Muslims. The article is linked below.

http://researching.wordpress.com/200...icide-bombers/

The issue then becomes: do suicide bombers actually qualify for martyrdom. This is not a subjective exercise in describing the offensiveness of the act. Martyrdom is an offensive act. Stephen was martyred, and it was very ugly - but an honour for him. Therefore simply describing the gruesomeness of the act will not dissuade anyone.

Suicide bombers do what they do because they BELIEVE that they will receive a martyr’s reward. An erroneous belief can only be broken when exposed to convincing truth. That truth for them must come from the Koran. The problem is: who will tell the truth to those currently being deceived?

Regards,
Grenville
Reply

Keltoi
04-30-2007, 04:33 PM
Originally Posted by Grenville
Hi Keltoi:

I do not believe that all suicide bombers are "young, outcasts, homeless, etc". Some (perhaps more than we think) are educated and well off.

As I attempted to explain in my article, martyrdom is an honour for Christians and Muslims. It is perhaps the most honourable way to die. I remember at the start of the war in Afghanistan that old men with WW1 vintage rifles were reportedly crossing the Pakistani border to fight in hopes of being martyred. Therefore, just as martyrdom is attractive to young, old, rich poor etc Christians, it is the same for Muslims. The article is linked below.

http://researching.wordpress.com/200...icide-bombers/

The issue then becomes: do suicide bombers actually qualify for martyrdom. This is not a subjective exercise in describing the offensiveness of the act. Martyrdom is an offensive act. Stephen was martyred, and it was very ugly - but an honour for him. Therefore simply describing the gruesomeness of the act will not dissuade anyone.

Suicide bombers do what they do because they BELIEVE that they will receive a martyr’s reward. An erroneous belief can only be broken when exposed to convincing truth. That truth for them must come from the Koran. The problem is: who will tell the truth to those currently being deceived?

Regards,
Grenville
Actually you are correct in the area of highly funded international terrorist cells. I think the suicide bombers in Iraq and Israel were on my mind at the time. It is well known that Atta and the others were fairly well off and educated. Those were the "true" believers I was referring to.

The fact we also have to deal with is that war will not stop the problem either. I am a patriotic American with strong ties to the military, but if an "insurgent" straps a bomb to themselves and blows up a checkpoint with soldiers standing around it doesn't make me feel morally outraged. These people don't stand a chance in a stand up fight of it, they tried that already. What causes my moral outrage are those suicide bombers whose only target are civilians. Which of course is the primary target of suicide bomers 9 out of 10 times. You are right, nothing will stop these acts of carnage unless those who do so are told repeatedly, by their families, clergy, friends, etc that such an act is a one way ticket to Hell.
Reply

Chechnya
04-30-2007, 09:53 PM
Actually you are correct in the area of highly funded international terrorist cells. I think the suicide bombers in Iraq and Israel were on my mind at the time. It is well known that Atta and the others were fairly well off and educated. Those were the "true" believers I was referring to.

The fact we also have to deal with is that war will not stop the problem either. I am a patriotic American with strong ties to the military, but if an "insurgent" straps a bomb to themselves and blows up a checkpoint with soldiers standing around it doesn't make me feel morally outraged. These people don't stand a chance in a stand up fight of it, they tried that already. What causes my moral outrage are those suicide bombers whose only target are civilians. Which of course is the primary target of suicide bomers 9 out of 10 times. You are right, nothing will stop these acts of carnage unless those who do so are told repeatedly, by their families, clergy, friends, etc that such an act is a one way ticket to Hell.
__________________
So you are not against the concept of such a weapon - only its misuse?

i think that would be the opinion of most people on weapons in general - whether the weapon in question happens to be a suicide bomb vest or a cluster bomb dropped from a jet.
Reply

yahia12
04-30-2007, 09:56 PM
Sentence the teorrists to death.

Usa should check every house in bagdad and capture them.

inshalla they be punished.
Reply

islamirama
04-30-2007, 09:58 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
Actually you are correct in the area of highly funded international terrorist cells. I think the suicide bombers in Iraq and Israel were on my mind at the time. It is well known that Atta and the others were fairly well off and educated. Those were the "true" believers I was referring to.

The fact we also have to deal with is that war will not stop the problem either. I am a patriotic American with strong ties to the military, but if an "insurgent" straps a bomb to themselves and blows up a checkpoint with soldiers standing around it doesn't make me feel morally outraged. These people don't stand a chance in a stand up fight of it, they tried that already. What causes my moral outrage are those suicide bombers whose only target are civilians. Which of course is the primary target of suicide bomers 9 out of 10 times. You are right, nothing will stop these acts of carnage unless those who do so are told repeatedly, by their families, clergy, friends, etc that such an act is a one way ticket to Hell.
Interesting Analysis – Whose bombing civilians in markets in Iraq?


“One young Iraqi man told us that he was trained by the Americans as a policeman in Baghdad and he spent 70 per cent of his time learning to drive and 30 per cent in weapons training. They said to him: ‘Come back in a week.’ When he went back, they gave him a mobile phone and told him to drive into a crowded area near a mosque and phone them. He waited in the car but couldn’t get the right mobile signal. So he got out of the car to where he received a better signal. Then his car blew up.

“There was another man, trained by the Americans for the police. He too was given a mobile and told to drive to an area where there was a crowd - maybe a protest - and to call them and tell them what was happening. Again, his new mobile was not working. So he went to a landline phone and called the Americans and told them: ‘Here I am, in the place you sent me and I can tell you what’s happening here.’ And at that moment there was a big explosion in his car.”

Source

Khadduri’s report went like this: “A few days ago, an American manned check point confiscated the driver license of a driver and told him to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license… we have forwarded your papers and license to al-Kadhimia police station for processing. …The driver did leave in a hurry, but was soon alarmed with a feeling that his car was driving as if carrying a heavy load, and he also became suspicious of a low flying helicopter that kept hovering overhead, as if trailing him. He stopped the car and inspected it carefully. He found nearly 100 kilograms of explosives hidden in the back seat and along the two back doors.

(2) On May 13, 2005, a 64 years old Iraqi farmer, Haj Haidar Abu Sijjad, took his tomato load in his pickup truck from Hilla to Baghdad, accompanied by Ali, his 11 years old grandson. They were stopped at an American check point and were asked to dismount. ….A minute later, his grandson told him that he saw one of the American soldiers putting a grey melon size object in the back among the tomato containers. “They intended it to explode in Baghdad …’.

Source
Reply

Chechnya
04-30-2007, 10:02 PM
Sentence the teorrists to death.

Usa should check every house in bagdad and capture them.

inshalla they be punished.
how old are you?
Reply

NoName55
04-30-2007, 10:09 PM
Originally Posted by Serdar
Sentence the teorrists to death.

Usa should check every house in bagdad and capture them.

inshalla they be punished.
does that include mushrikin leaders like Sadr, Nasralah and the Iranian chief clown?
Reply

yahia12
04-30-2007, 10:12 PM
Originally Posted by NoName55
does that include mushrikin leaders like Sadr, Nasralah and the Iranian chief clown?
YES,they support hamas, teorrorist organsation. And that irani chief is worse.

But i am more talking about terrorists in iraq. They need to be captured.

inshalla they will.
Reply

yahia12
04-30-2007, 10:13 PM
Originally Posted by Chechnya
how old are you?
Why? :D
Reply

NoName55
04-30-2007, 10:17 PM
Originally Posted by Serdar
Originally Posted by NoName55
does that include mushrikin leaders like Sadr, Nasralah and the Iranian chief clown?
YES,they support hamas, teorrorist organsation. And that irani chief is worse.

But i am more talking about terrorists in iraq. They need to be captured.

inshalla they will.
al-saud, bush and blair too?
Reply

Chechnya
04-30-2007, 10:17 PM
Why?
Its just that your logic seems to be...wierd - sorry to say :)

You think bursting into every house in Baghdad is gonna help and calm things down?

It will only create more anti-US hate - living under occupation is no joke
Reply

yahia12
04-30-2007, 10:23 PM
Originally Posted by NoName55
al-saud, bush and blair too?
hehe BUT they are no muslims. They dont blow them self up among market with childrens and women, al sadr do that and hamas, and the rest terrorist crew in iraq.:) what is your point?

inshalla God will punsih them.
Reply

MTAFFI
04-30-2007, 10:31 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Interesting Analysis – Whose bombing civilians in markets in Iraq?


“One young Iraqi man told us that he was trained by the Americans as a policeman in Baghdad and he spent 70 per cent of his time learning to drive and 30 per cent in weapons training. They said to him: ‘Come back in a week.’ When he went back, they gave him a mobile phone and told him to drive into a crowded area near a mosque and phone them. He waited in the car but couldn’t get the right mobile signal. So he got out of the car to where he received a better signal. Then his car blew up.

“There was another man, trained by the Americans for the police. He too was given a mobile and told to drive to an area where there was a crowd - maybe a protest - and to call them and tell them what was happening. Again, his new mobile was not working. So he went to a landline phone and called the Americans and told them: ‘Here I am, in the place you sent me and I can tell you what’s happening here.’ And at that moment there was a big explosion in his car.”

Source

Khadduri’s report went like this: “A few days ago, an American manned check point confiscated the driver license of a driver and told him to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license… we have forwarded your papers and license to al-Kadhimia police station for processing. …The driver did leave in a hurry, but was soon alarmed with a feeling that his car was driving as if carrying a heavy load, and he also became suspicious of a low flying helicopter that kept hovering overhead, as if trailing him. He stopped the car and inspected it carefully. He found nearly 100 kilograms of explosives hidden in the back seat and along the two back doors.

(2) On May 13, 2005, a 64 years old Iraqi farmer, Haj Haidar Abu Sijjad, took his tomato load in his pickup truck from Hilla to Baghdad, accompanied by Ali, his 11 years old grandson. They were stopped at an American check point and were asked to dismount. ….A minute later, his grandson told him that he saw one of the American soldiers putting a grey melon size object in the back among the tomato containers. “They intended it to explode in Baghdad …’.

Source

Now that is the biggest pile of garbage I have ever read
Reply

NoName55
04-30-2007, 10:34 PM
If not true, spreading the rumor as if fact makes the situation all the worse, for people we respond as if it is true.
Robert Fisk and a Uk Newspaper The Indepedent conspiring against USA? Not likely!
Reply

InToTheRain
05-01-2007, 08:44 AM
How to stop DA BOMBING?!?

well have we tried:

1) do not occupy Muslim land and do not support those that occupy them
2) do not invade them
3) do not meddle in their affairs

basically what im sayign is LEAVE THEM ALONE! simple innit? :)
Reply

KAding
05-01-2007, 10:02 AM
Originally Posted by WnbSlveOfAllah
How to stop DA BOMBING?!?

well have we tried:

1) do not occupy Muslim land and do not support those that occupy them
2) do not invade them
3) do not meddle in their affairs

basically what im sayign is LEAVE THEM ALONE! simple innit? :)
Except that suicide bombings also happen quite frequently in Egypt, Pakistan, Algeria, Morroco, Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, etc. Are any of these countries occcupied? Overall, there are 100 times as many Muslims dying from suicide bombing tactics by those who claim to be martyrs for Allah than 'kuffars'.

So it isn't 'simple' at all!
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
05-01-2007, 10:05 AM
Originally Posted by KAding
Except that suicide bombings also happen quite frequently in Egypt, Pakistan, Algeria, Morroco, Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, etc. Are any of these countries occcupied? Overall, there are 100 times as many Muslims dying from suicide bombing tactics by those who claim to be martyrs for Allah than 'kuffars'.

So it isn't 'simple' at all!

and im pretty sure it all started after occupation, when people first done it in defence and as a sign of "rebellion" thus starting a trend. people now have the wrong idea, education is the key.
Reply

KAding
05-01-2007, 10:17 AM
Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim
and im pretty sure it all started after occupation, when people first done it in defence and as a sign of "rebellion" thus starting a trend. people now have the wrong idea, education is the key.
I agree, that is exactly what happened in my view as well. Suicide bombings were not a standard tactic among muhajedeen or Muslims in general until very recently. During the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan suicide bombings were pretty much non-existent for example. IMHO it pretty much started in Lebanon and against Israel. Few within the Islamic world spoke out against these attacks against the Zionist enemy. The tactic gained even more popularity when it was aimed at targets within Israel itself.

And now the genie is out of the bottle. You can't get it back in and it is becoming a pest throughout the Muslim world, with the primary targets being fellow Muslims in Muslim countries. The self-proclaimed Muhajedeen are attempting to destabilize many Muslim countries, hoping to throw them in chaos and overthrow existing governments. Thats why they are blowing up hotels in Egypt and Jordan, banks and resorts in Turkey, oil installations in Saudi Arabia, cafes and restaurants in Morroco, Algeria and Indonesia. And that ignores Iraq and Pakistan where suicide bombings are frequently aimed at mosques as a tactic in the civil strife.

This will not help develop the Muslim world obviously, it will only cause destruction and even more poverty.
Reply

InToTheRain
05-01-2007, 10:22 AM
Originally Posted by KAding
Except that suicide bombings also happen quite frequently in Egypt, Pakistan, Algeria, Morroco, Indonesia, Bangladesh, India, etc. Are any of these countries occcupied? Overall, there are 100 times as many Muslims dying from suicide bombing tactics by those who claim to be martyrs for Allah than 'kuffars'.

So it isn't 'simple' at all!
True that I stand corrected :) just goes to show it is not an Islamic act but an act of desperation.

But even these countries have been meddled.
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-07-2007, 03:58 PM
Originally Posted by Chechnya
i think that would be the opinion of most people on weapons in general - whether the weapon in question happens to be a suicide bomb vest or a cluster bomb dropped from a jet.
Totally and completely agree. As I said before, it would be different if the U.S. made accusations it wasn't equally as guilty of itself, but they use stuff like white phosphorous and then complain about chlorine... it's just plain fruity!

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Walter
05-07-2007, 07:59 PM
Hi All:

My problem with the suicide bomber who believes that he is going to be martyred is that he may be deceived and may actually be on his way to hell. Therein lies the problem.

The soldier in combat, who chooses to be a suicide bomber against an aggressor, cannot be compared with a person being deceived into everlasting punishment.

Regards,
Grenville
Reply

Ninth_Scribe
05-09-2007, 06:29 PM
Originally Posted by Grenville
Hi All:

My problem with the suicide bomber who believes that he is going to be martyred is that he may be deceived and may actually be on his way to hell. Therein lies the problem.

The soldier in combat, who chooses to be a suicide bomber against an aggressor, cannot be compared with a person being deceived into everlasting punishment.

Regards,
Grenville
You know... you bring up a very interesting point. I don't mean to bring that dreaded term back because I know how much trouble it caused, but the bene Elohim were not considered as such until they were 40 years old. I've often wondered why, but your comment just shed some new light on the subject.

Men who are younger than 40 are still considered the responsibilty of their teachers. In other words, if they were taught something that was wrong and obeyed their teachers, they could plead ignorant and the guilt was passed to who ever it was who taught them. But when a man reaches age 40, he is supposed to be able to differentiate between good and evil to such a degree that he cannot be pursuaded by faulty teachings.

I still don't have enough information to decide on the issue of martyrdom, but I do feel that the younger these men are, the less harm will fall on them... in a spiritual sense.

In the meantime, I have to agree with WnbSlveOfAllah. The U.S. has been meddling, pot-stirring and profitting on weapons sales to the countries they've meddled with. From the most simplistic view I can come up with, it seems that the U.S. has a lot to gain if these countries do fight each other because America is the one who's handling most of the weapons sales. I keep trying to tell myself that no soul can be that black, but these figures are mind boggling!

The Ninth Scribe
Reply

Uthman
05-09-2007, 06:35 PM
Hi Grenville,

Originally Posted by Grenville
My problem with the suicide bomber who believes that he is going to be martyred is that he may be deceived and may actually be on his way to hell. Therein lies the problem.
That is why, in Islam, actions are judged by intention. :)

Regards
Reply

Zman
05-14-2007, 03:56 AM
Originally Posted by Grenville
Hi Everyone:

Every night I hear the depressing news of suicide bombers murdering innocent civilians. I thought that the following could stop this practise.

A well publicised and televised debate on one question: Do suicide bombers qualify for martyrdom.

The preservation of life is a strong emotional drive. However, it can be over ridden by a higher goal: martyrdom. I thought that the defence of one's family may override this emotional drive, but it does not, for even when trying to protect your family, you still want to live.

I believe that there will be a shortage of candidates for suicide missions if the candidates themselves did not believe that they would be martyrs.

Regards,
Grenville

The urge to live is very strong in all creatures. Believe it or not, that's also true for Muslims.

If it weren't, you'd see a huge spike in the amount of Muslims seeking matyrdom.

But, if you truly want to stop suicide bombings, martyrdom is not the ultimate reason.

You need to peel back the layers, until you find the root cause for suicide bombings.

The latest study shows (which lay people in the Third World have known for a while), is invasions, oppression, tyranny, puppet governments that were planted & nurtured by some Western powers.

The study also shows that the motivating factor for suicide bombings weren't religious reasons, but political/military.

I can post the study with the link, if it's ok with admin & the mods.

Also, I can post many articles and reports which show that suicide bombings aren't a Muslim phenomenon. That Christians and members of other faiths have practiced it, also.

I can also post that car bombings weren't introduced into the Middle East nor invented by Arabs nor Muslims.

I can also post that terrorism/bombings started with the Jewish terrorist groups in Palestine, before Israel's independence.

I can also post articles about the terrorism & bombings that afflicted Europe
in the 70's.

I can also post proof of European/American state sponsored terrorism against their own people and against Third World nations.

Again, with prior approval of admin/mods...
Reply

Keltoi
05-14-2007, 01:32 PM
Originally Posted by Zman

The urge to live is very strong in all creatures. Believe it or not, that's also true for Muslims.

If it weren't, you'd see a huge spike in the amount of Muslims seeking matyrdom.

But, if you truly want to stop suicide bombings, martyrdom is not the ultimate reason.

You need to peel back the layers, until you find the root cause for suicide bombings.

The latest study shows (which lay people in the Third World have known for a while), is invasions, oppression, tyranny, puppet governments that were planted & nurtured by some Western powers.

The study also shows that the motivating factor for suicide bombings weren't religious reasons, but political/military.

I can post the study with the link, if it's ok with admin & the mods.

Also, I can post many articles and reports which show that suicide bombings aren't a Muslim phenomenon. That Christians and members of other faiths have practiced it, also.

I can also post that car bombings weren't introduced into the Middle East nor invented by Arabs nor Muslims.

I can also post that terrorism/bombings started with the Jewish terrorist groups in Palestine, before Israel's independence.

I can also post articles about the terrorism & bombings that afflicted Europe
in the 70's.

I can also post proof of European/American state sponsored terrorism against their own people and against Third World nations.

Again, with prior approval of admin/mods...
The questions is, can you post something that has anything to do with dealing with suicide bombing in 2007? Or are you just interested in passing blame and justifying suicide terrorism?
Reply

islamirama
05-14-2007, 01:39 PM
On quick and easy soluation to stop suicide bombing, something unheard of till now in Muslim world...

All western powers get the hell out of Muslim lands, take their military bases, and puppet regimes. But we all know that won't happen as the westeners love oil and will do anything for it, even wage illegal was based on Weapons of Mass Deception.
Reply

Walter
05-14-2007, 02:16 PM
Hi Osman:

I asserted that persons may be deceived into hell by committing murder, thinking that they will receive a martyr’s reward.

You responded that “in Islam, people are judged by intention”.

Well it seems that the deceived actually “intend” to commit mass murder; but they “intend” to do it based on being convinced that they will receive a martyr’s reward, which they are highly unlikely to collect.

As Muslims continue to murder innocent civilians in Iraq, I am beginning to believe that those who are deceiving (either by teaching or active or passive encouragement) their fellow Muslims to kill them selves in this manner are robbing humanity of so much. They were born to contribute so much to humanity, and to our understanding of art, science, and how to please God.

The Koran expresses a similar statement found in the Bible – “It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of the living God.” All religious leaders should be careful to ensure that this verse does not apply to them.

Regards,
Grenville
Reply

Zman
05-14-2007, 03:34 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
The questions is, can you post something that has anything to do with dealing with suicide bombing in 2007? Or are you just interested in passing blame and justifying suicide terrorism?

By you insisting on 2007, then it is YOU who is intent on passing blame on Muslims, and Justifying the Judeo-Christian terrorism, and sweeping their bloody history in it's use of that tactic.

Why would you want to bypass your use of that deadly tactic?

Would you care to talk about the Tamils use of suicide bombings, this year?

They did afterall invent the suicide vest.

But, we should discuss the West's use of that tactic also. It IS still valid, even in 2007.

Always study the root cause, and stop cherry picking events & years. The history of suicide bombings & terrorism didn't Just materialize, now!

And, don't even try to play that vile debating tactic of "you're trying to Jusitfy suicide terrorism," on me.

Either sincerely & honorably debate, or if you're gonna start using Bill O'Really's dirty debating tactics, you might as well remain silent.

Because if you drop the gloves with me, I will reciprocate in kind.

So, keep it clean and on the up-and-up...
Reply

Zman
05-14-2007, 03:44 PM
:sl:

I believe everyone here is familiar with the capture of the 2 British SAS commandos, who were dressed as Arabs and drove a car full of weapons and explosives?

That's one side that is contributing to terrorism and car bombings in Iraq.

Another is the around-60,000 mercenaries (the "politically correct" terminology is: "contractors") who are running amok and killing without any fear of prosecution or reprisals. All those mericenaries are ex-special forces, from various nations around the globe...
Reply

Zman
05-14-2007, 04:40 PM
:sl:/Peace To All

Ulster on the Euphrates: The Anglo-American Dirty War In Iraq

Chris Floyd
Wednesday, February 14, 2007
t r u t h o u t

Paint It Black

Imagine a city torn by sectarian strife. Competing death squads roam the streets; terrorists stage horrific attacks. Local authority is distrusted and weak; local populations protect the extremists in their midst, out of loyalty or fear. A bristling military occupation exacerbates tensions at every turn, while offering prime targets for bombs and snipers. And behind the scenes, in a shadow world of double-cross and double-bluff, covert units of the occupying power run agents on both sides of the civil war, countenancing - and sometimes directing - assassinations, terrorist strikes, torture sessions, and ethnic cleansing.

Is this a portrait of Belfast during "The Troubles" in Northern Ireland? Or a picture of Baghdad today? It is both; and in both cases, one of Britain's most secret - and most criminally compromised - military units has plied its trade in the darkness, "turning" and controlling terrorist killers in a dangerous bid to wring actionable intelligence from blood and betrayal. And America's covert soldiers are right there with them, working side-by-side with their British comrades in the aptly named "Task Force Black," the UK's Sunday Telegraph reports.

Last week, the right-wing, pro-war paper published an early valentine to the "Joint Support Group," the covert unit whose bland name belies its dramatic role at the center of the Anglo-American "dirty war" in Iraq. In gushing, lavish, uncritical prose that could have been (and perhaps was) scripted by the unit itself, the Telegraph lauded the team of secret warriors as "one of the Coalition's most effective and deadly weapons in the fight against terror," running "dozens of Iraqi double-agents," including "members of terrorist groups."

What the story fails to mention is the fact that in its Ulster incarnation, the JSG - then known as the Force Research Unit (FRU) - actively colluded in the murder of at least 15 civilians by Loyalist deaths squads, and an untold number of victims were killed, maimed, and tortured by the many Irish Republican Army double-agents controlled by the unit. What's more, the man who commanded the FRU during the height of its depredations - Lt. Col. Gordon Kerr - is in Baghdad now, heading the hugger-mugger Special Reconnaissance Regiment (SRR), a large counter-terrorism force made up of unnamed "existing assets" from the glory days in Northern Ireland and elsewhere.

This despite the fact that a 10-year, $100 million investigation by Britain's top police officer, Lord Stevens, confirmed in 2003 that the Kerr-led FRU "sanctioned killings" through "institutionalized collusion" with both Protestant and Catholic militias during the 1980s and 1990s. Stevens sent dossiers of evidence against Kerr and 20 other security apparatchiks to the Blair government's Director of Public Prosecutions, in the expectation that the fiery Scotsman and the others would be put on trial.

But instead prosecuting Kerr, Blair promoted him: first to a plum assignment as British military attaché in Beijing - effectively the number two man in all of UK military intelligence, as Scotland's Sunday Herald notes, then, with the SRR posting to Baghdad, where Kerr and his former FRU mates now apply the "methods developed on the mean streets of Ulster during the Troubles," as the Telegraph breathlessly relates.

The Telegraph puff piece is naturally coy about revealing these methods, beyond the fact that, as in Ireland, the JSG uses "a variety of inducements ranging from blackmail to bribes" to turn Iraqi terrorists into Coalition agents. So, to get a better idea of the techniques employed by the group in Baghdad, we must return to those "mean streets of Ulster" and the unit's reign of terror and collusion there, which has been thoroughly documented not only by the exhaustive Stevens inquiries, but also in a remarkable series of investigative reports by the Sunday Herald's Neil Mackay, and in extensive stories by the BBC, the Guardian, the Independent, the Times and others.

We will also see how the operations of the JSG and "Task Force Black" dovetail with U.S. efforts to apply the lessons of its own dirty wars - such as the "Salvador Option" - to Iraq, as well as long-running Bush Administration initiatives to arm and fund "friendly" militias while infiltrating terrorist groups in order to "provoke them into action." It is indeed a picture painted in black, a glimpse at the dark muck that lies beneath the high-flown rhetoric about freedom and civilization forever issuing from the lips of the war leaders.

Whacking for the Peelers

Gregory Burns had a problem. He was one of Gordon Kerr's FRU informers planted deep inside the IRA, along with two of his friends, Johnny Dignam and Aidan Starrs. But as Mackay noted in a February 2003 story, the already-partnered Burns had acquired a girlfriend on the side, Margaret Perry, 26, a "civilian" Catholic with no paramilitary ties. Forbidden fruit is sweet, of course - but pillow talk is dangerous for an inside man. "Burns didn't keep his mouth shut and [Perry] found out he was working for British intelligence," an FRU officer told Mackay. "He tried to convince her he was a double-agent the IRA had planted in the [British] army - but she didn't buy it."

Burns called his FRU handlers and asked to come in from the cold. He'd been compromised, he said, and now he and his friends needed to get out, with new identities, relocation, good jobs - the usual payoff for trusted agents when the jig was up. But Kerr refused: "He said [Burns] should silence Perry," the FRU man told Mackay. Burns, panicking at thought of the IRA's horrific retributions against informers, insisted: he would have to kill the woman if they didn't bring him in, he told Kerr. Again Kerr refused.

And so Burns arranged a meeting with his lover, to "talk over" the situation. His friends, Aidan and Johnny, volunteered to drive her there: "On the way, they pulled into a forest, beat her to death and buried her in a shallow grave," Mackay notes. Two years later, when her body was found, the IRA put two and two together - and slowly tortured Burns and his two friends to death, after first extracting copious amounts of information about British intelligence operations in Ireland.

"In Kerr's eyes, Burns just wasn't important enough to resettle," the FRU source told the Sunday Herald. "So we ended up with four unnecessary deaths and the compromising of British army intelligence officers, which ultimately put soldiers' lives at risk. To Kerr, it was always a matter of the ends justifying the means."

Then again, Kerr could well afford to sacrifice a few informers here and there to the wrath of the IRA's dreaded "security unit" - because his own, prize double agent was the head of that security unit.

Codenamed "Stakeknife," Kerr's man presided over, and sometimes administered, the grisly torture-murders of up to 50 men during his tenure in the IRA's upper ranks. The victims included other British double agents who were sacrificed in order to protect Stakeknife's cover, as the Guardian and many other UK papers reported when the agent's work was revealed in 2003. ("Stakeknife" was later identified in the press as Alfredo Scappaticci - an Irishman despite the Italian name, although he continues to deny the charge.)

The FRU also "knowingly allowed soldiers, [police] officers and civilians to die at the hands of IRA bombers in order to protect republican double agents," the Sunday Herald's investigations found.

As Mackay reports: "FRU sources said around seven police and army personnel died as a result of military intelligence allowing IRA bombs to be placed during Kerr's time in command of the FRU. They estimate that three civilians also died this way, with casualties in the hundreds."

But some of the worst excesses came from the FRU's handling of operatives on the other side, in the fiercely pro-British Protestant militia the Ulster Defense Association (UDA). Here, among the Loyalists, Kerr's top double agent was Brian Nelson, who became head of intelligence for the UDA.

As John Ware put it in the Guardian: "Kerr regarded Nelson as his jewel in the crown ... For the next three years [from 1987], Nelson colluded with murder gangs to shoot IRA suspects. Month after month, armed and masked men crashed into homes. Sometimes they got the wrong address or shot the wrong person."

A wrong person like Gerald Slane, a 27-year-old Belfast man shot down in front of his three children. A gun had been found dumped on his property; this, and his Catholicism, was enough to get him assassinated at the order of Kerr's man Nelson. Afterwards, it was found that Slane had no IRA connections.

Another "wrong person" killed by the FRU's agents was the Belfast attorney Pat Finucane, who was shot 14 times in front of his wife and children. Finucane was a civil rights activist who had defended both Catholics and Protestants, but was considered an IRA sympathizer by Loyalists - and a thorn in the side by British authorities. He was killed at Nelson's order by a fellow FRU informer in the UDA, Ken Barrett, who was convicted of the murder but freed last year as part of an amnesty program in the Northern Ireland peace process. Barrett was unapologetic about his FRU "wetwork" on Finucane. "The peelers [authorities] wanted him whacked," he told a BBC documentary team after his release. "We whacked him and that is the end of the story."

Kerr gave Nelson packages of intelligence files to help facilitate the assassination of UDA targets, including at least four "civilians" with no IRA ties, the Stevens inquiry found. The FRU also obtained "restriction orders" from other British security and military units in Northern Ireland, whereby they would pull their forces from an area when Kerr's UDA agents were going to make a hit there, allowing the killers to get in and get out without hindrance, investigator Nick Davies reports.

Yet the FRU was wary of sharing its own intelligence with other security services - which was the ostensible reason for running the double-agents in the first place. Instead, Kerr engaged in fierce turf wars with other agencies, while "stovepiping" much of his intelligence to the top circles of the UK government, including the cabinet-level Intelligence Committee chaired by then-Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher. Indeed, when Nelson was finally exposed and brought to trial on five counts of conspiracy to commit murder, Kerr testified in his behalf, noting for the court that Nelson's intelligence "product and his reporting was passed through the intelligence community and at a high level, and from that point of view he has to be considered a very important agent."

As one FRU man told Mackay: "Under Kerr's command...the mindset was one of 'the right people would be allowed to live and wrong people should die.'"

This is the "mindset" now operating in the heart of the Green Zone in Baghdad, where the JSG is carrying out - as we are told in glowing terms - precisely the same mission it had in Ulster.

a unit which has allowed its agents to torture, murder and commit acts of terrorism, including actions that killed local civilians and the soldiers and intelligence operatives of their own country.

The White House Green Light

Of course, Kerr and his Baghdad black-op crew are not alone in the double-dealing world of Iraqi counterinsurgency. The Pentagon's ever-expanding secret armies are deeply enmeshed in such efforts as well.

As Sy Hersh has reported ("The Coming Wars," New Yorker, Jan. 24, 2005), after his re-election in 2004, George W. Bush signed a series of secret presidential directives that authorized the Pentagon to run virtually unrestricted covert operations, including a reprise of the American-backed, American-trained death squads employed by authoritarian regimes in Central and South America during the Reagan Administration, where so many of the Bush faction cut their teeth.

"Do you remember the right-wing execution squads in El Salvador?" a former high-level intelligence official said to Hersh. "We founded them and we financed them. The objective now is to recruit locals in any area we want. And we aren't going to tell Congress about it."

A Pentagon insider added: "We're going to be riding with the bad boys." Another role model for the expanded dirty war cited by Pentagon sources, said Hersh, was Britain's brutal repression of the Mau Mau in Kenya during the 1950s, when British forces set up concentration camps, created their own terrorist groups to confuse and discredit the insurgency, and killed thousands of innocent civilians in quashing the uprising.

Bush's formal greenlighting of the death-squad option built upon an already securely-established base, part of a larger effort to turn the world into a "global free-fire zone" for covert operatives, as one top Pentagon official told Hersh.

For example, in November 2002 a Pentagon plan to infiltrate terrorist groups and "stimulate" them into action was uncovered by William Arkin, then writing for the Los Angeles Times. The new unit, the "Proactive, Pre-emptive Operations Group," was described in the Pentagon documents as "a super-Intelligence Support Activity" that brings "together CIA and military covert action, information warfare, intelligence and cover and deception."

Later, in August 2004, then deputy Pentagon chief Paul Wolfowitz appeared before Congress to ask for $500 million to arm and train non-governmental "local militias" to serve as U.S. proxies for "counter-insurgency and "counterterrorist" operations in "ungoverned areas" and hot spots around the world, Agence France Presse (and virtually no one else) reported at the time.

These hired paramilitaries were to be employed in what Wolfowitz called an "arc of crisis" that just happened to stretch across the oil-bearing lands and strategic pipeline routes of Central Asia, the Middle East, Africa and South America.

By then, the Bush Administration had already begun laying the groundwork for an expanded covert war in the hot spot of Iraq. In November 2003, it created a "commando squad" drawn from the sectarian militias of five major Iraqi factions, as the Washington Post reported that year.

Armed, funded and trained by the American occupation forces, and supplied with a "state-of-the-art command, control and communications center" from the Pentagon, the new Iraqi commandos were loosed on the then-nascent Iraqi insurgency - despite the very prescient fears of some U.S. officials "that various Sunni or Shiite factions could eventually use the service to secretly undermine their political competitors," as the Post noted.

And indeed, in early 2005 - not long after Bush's directives loosed the "Salvador Option" on Iraq - the tide of death-squad activity began its long and bloody rise to the tsunami-like levels we see today.

Ironically, the first big spike of mass torture-murders, chiefly in Sunni areas at the time, coincided with "Operation Lightning," a much ballyhooed effort by American and Iraqi forces to "secure" Baghdad.

The operation featured a mass influx of extra troops into the capital; dividing the city into manageable sectors, then working through them one by one; imposing hundreds of checkpoints to lock down all insurgent movements; and establishing a 24-hour presence of security and military forces in troubled neighborhoods, the Associated Press reported in May 2005.

In other words, it was almost exactly the same plan now being offered as Bush's "New Way Forward," the controversial "surge."

But the "Lightning" fizzled in a matter of weeks, and the death squads grew even bolder.

Brazen daylight raids by "men dressed in uniforms" of Iraqi police or Iraqi commandos or other Iraqi security agencies swept up dozens of victims at a time.

For months, U.S. "advisers" to Iraqi security agencies - including veterans of the original "Salvador Option" - insisted that these were Sunni insurgents in stolen threads, although many of the victims were Sunni civilians.

Later, the line was changed: the chief culprits were now "rogue elements" of the various sectarian militias that had "infiltrated" Iraq's institutions.

But as investigative reporter Max Fuller has pointed out in his detailed examination of information buried in reams of mainstream news stories and public Pentagon documents, the vast majority of atrocities then attributed to "rogue" Shiite and Sunni militias were in fact the work of government-controlled commandos and "special forces," trained by Americans, "advised" by Americans and run largely by former CIA agents.

As Fuller puts it: "If there are militias in the Ministry of Interior, you can be sure that they are militias that stand to attention whenever a U.S. colonel enters the room." And perhaps a British lieutenant colonel as well.

With the Anglo-American coalition so deeply embedded in dirty war - infiltrating terrorist groups, "stimulating" them into action," protecting "crown jewel" double-agents no matter what the cost, "riding with the bad boys," greenlighting the "Salvador Option" - it is simply impossible to determine the genuine origin of almost any particular terrorist outrage or death squad atrocity in Iraq.

All of these operations take place in the shadow world, where terrorists are sometimes government operatives and vice versa, and where security agencies and terrorist groups interpenetrate in murky thickets of collusion and duplicity.

This moral chaos leaves "a kind of blot/to mark the full-fraught man and best indued/With some suspicion," as Shakespeare's Henry V says.

What's more, the "intelligence" churned out by this system is inevitably tainted by the self-interest, mixed motives, fear and criminality of those who provide it.

The ineffectiveness of this approach can be seen in the ever-increasing, many-sided civil war that is tearing Iraq apart.

If these covert operations really are intended to quell the violence, they clearly have had the opposite effect.

If they have some other intention, the pious defenders of civilization - who approve these activities with promotions, green lights and unlimited budgets - aren't telling.

Source:
http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/021307J.shtml
Reply

Keltoi
05-14-2007, 06:13 PM
Great sources...There's nothing like the smell of "independent journalism" in the morning.
Reply

Keltoi
05-14-2007, 06:21 PM
Originally Posted by Zman

By you insisting on 2007, then it is YOU who is intent on passing blame on Muslims, and Justifying the Judeo-Christian terrorism, and sweeping their bloody history in it's use of that tactic.

Why would you want to bypass your use of that deadly tactic?

Would you care to talk about the Tamils use of suicide bombings, this year?

They did afterall invent the suicide vest.

But, we should discuss the West's use of that tactic also. It IS still valid, even in 2007.

Always study the root cause, and stop cherry picking events & years. The history of suicide bombings & terrorism didn't Just materialize, now!

And, don't even try to play that vile debating tactic of "you're trying to Jusitfy suicide terrorism," on me.

Either sincerely & honorably debate, or if you're gonna start using Bill O'Really's dirty debating tactics, you might as well remain silent.

Because if you drop the gloves with me, I will reciprocate in kind.

So, keep it clean and on the up-and-up...
What particular "Judeo-Christian" terrorism are you referring to? I gather the IRA? Great, you found an Irish terrorist group. That isn't really the point though. The point of this thread was to explore ways to limit or stop altogether the act of suicide bombing, the average case involving someone with a bomb belt or vest blowing themselves up in a crowded public area, but of course including car bombing and other tactics. The fact that other groups also carry out these kind of attacks doesn't overshadow the reality that the vast majority of suicide bombers in the world happen to be Muslim. Are the roots of suicide terrorism political moreso than religious? Probably, I have no problem with that conclusion. That still leaves the problem of religion playing such an overwhelming role in the preparation and justification of suicide terrorism. How would you deal with that issue?
Reply

Kashnowe
05-15-2007, 02:25 AM
What particular "Judeo-Christian" terrorism are you referring to? I gather the IRA? Great, you found an Irish terrorist group. That isn't really the point though. The point of this thread was to explore ways to limit or stop altogether the act of suicide bombing, the average case involving someone with a bomb belt or vest blowing themselves up in a crowded public area, but of course including car bombing and other tactics. The fact that other groups also carry out these kind of attacks doesn't overshadow the reality that the vast majority of suicide bombers in the world happen to be Muslim. Are the roots of suicide terrorism political moreso than religious? Probably, I have no problem with that conclusion. That still leaves the problem of religion playing such an overwhelming role in the preparation and justification of suicide terrorism. How would you deal with that issue?
i think democracy is the answer. the problem is religion plays too much of a rold in politics in many islamic countries. people in general are easily swayed. our minds are easily manipulated, hypnotized, brain washed, reality is easily distorted with constant propaganda......remember the holocaust?

yea yea yea people are all accountable for their own actions but it is the duty of the strong to help the weak. and in many of these countries the strong have way too much hunger for power and personal glory t hat it seems to have had a domino effect.

nothing going on now in the world is unique. its all been done before.
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 03:01 AM
Originally Posted by cooloonka
i think democracy is the answer. the problem is religion plays too much of a rold in politics in many islamic countries. people in general are easily swayed. our minds are easily manipulated, hypnotized, brain washed, reality is easily distorted with constant propaganda......remember the holocaust?

yea yea yea people are all accountable for their own actions but it is the duty of the strong to help the weak. and in many of these countries the strong have way too much hunger for power and personal glory t hat it seems to have had a domino effect.

nothing going on now in the world is unique. its all been done before.

Originally Posted by islamirama
On quick and easy soluation to stop suicide bombing, something unheard of till now in Muslim world...

All western powers get the hell out of Muslim lands, take their military bases, and puppet regimes. But we all know that won't happen as the westeners love oil and will do anything for it, even wage illegal wars based on Weapons of Mass Deception.

"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."

- Samuel P. Huntington

"They have come to take your land and your resources; they have come to shame your women and disgraceyourculture; they have come to humiliate you in front of your children and heap ignominy on your religion." -
Reply

Kashnowe
05-15-2007, 03:08 AM
"The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."


- Samuel P. Huntington


"They have come to take your land and your resources; they have come to shame your women and disgraceyourculture; they have come to humiliate you in front of your children and heap ignominy on your religion." -
who the heck is samuel p. huntington anyways (sounds like a westerner...hrm)? sheesh. who the heck said the west won the world? thats a little far fetched.

i really don't like how this hints that the 'west' is the definite caause of all of the problems in the world today. thats rubbish.

like i said nothing going on in the foreign policies in this world right now is unique. all of this has happened time and time again way before there even was a 'west'
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 03:40 AM
Originally Posted by cooloonka
who the heck is samuel p. huntington anyways (sounds like a westerner...hrm)? sheesh. who the heck said the west won the world? thats a little far fetched.

i really don't like how this hints that the 'west' is the definite caause of all of the problems in the world today. thats rubbish.

like i said nothing going on in the foreign policies in this world right now is unique. all of this has happened time and time again way before there even was a 'west'

Samuel Phillips Huntington (born April 18, 1927) is a controversial US political scientist known for his analysis of the relationship between the military and the civil government, his investigation of coups d'etat, his thesis (inspired by Polish scientist Feliks Koneczny) that the central political actors of the 21st century will be civilizations rather than nation-states and, most recently, for his views on US immigration. He graduated from Yale and received his Ph.D. from Harvard. As an advisor to Lyndon Johnson and in an influential 1968 article, he justified heavy bombardment of the countryside of South Vietnam as a means to drive the peasants and supporters of the Viet Cong into urban areas. Huntington also served as co-author on the report, "The Governability of Democracies", that was issued by the Trilateral Commission in 1976. More recently, he garnered widespread attention for his analysis of threats posed to the United States by modern-day immigration. He is a professor at Harvard University. Huntington came to prominence as a scholar in the 1960s with the publication of Political Order in Changing Societies, a work that challenged the conventional view of modernization theorists that economic and social progress would bring about stable democracies in recently decolonized countries.

  • "The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact, non-Westerners never do."
  • Hypocrisy, double standards, and "but nots" are the price of universalist pretensions. Democracy is promoted but not if it brings Islamic fundamentalists to power; nonproliferation is preached for Iran and Iraq but not for Israel; free trade is the elixir of economic growth but not for agriculture; human rights are an issue for China but not with Saudi Arabia; aggression against oil-owning Kuwaitis is massively repulsed but not against non-oil-owning Bosnians. Double standards in practice are the unavoidable price of universal standards of principle. (The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, p. 184)
  • "In the emerging world of ethnic conflict and civilizational clash, Western belief in the universality of Western culture suffers three problems: it is false; it is immoral; and it is dangerous...Imperialism is the necessary logical consequence of universalism." (The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order, p. 310)

The points he made above seems to ring true if you look around us.
Reply

Kashnowe
05-15-2007, 03:55 AM
Hypocrisy, double standards, and "but nots" are the price of universalist pretensions. Democracy is promoted but not if it brings Islamic fundamentalists to power; nonproliferation is preached for Iran and Iraq but not for Israel
democracy doesn't leave room for 'but nots' if so then it is something else by another name. logically speaking i'm sure the 'west' didn't intend for a chrisitian leader to rise in a democratic iraq....its pretty much a given that the leader will be muslim.....yep......what we have seen in most predominately muslim countries is leaders who may be muslim but do not act muslim or rule in a just way.

and to be fair. what we see in most western countries is not hardly christian values. but there is a much larger understanding of basic human rights which is comepletely logical and should be considered so by any intelligent, educated, God-fearing person on this earth.

we are all equally guilty.

organized violence is how almost all countires gained ther land....

i'm semi convinced that the term organized violence is an oxy moron. ;)
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 04:04 AM
Originally Posted by cooloonka
democracy doesn't leave room for 'but nots' if so then it is something else by another name. logically speaking i'm sure the 'west' didn't intend for a chrisitian leader to rise in a democratic iraq....its pretty much a given that the leader will be muslim.....yep......what we have seen in most predominately muslim countries is leaders who may be muslim but do not act muslim or rule in a just way.

and to be fair. what we see in most western countries is not hardly christian values. but there is a much larger understanding of basic human rights which is comepletely logical and should be considered so by any intelligent, educated, God-fearing person on this earth.

we are all equally guilty.

organized violence is how almost all countires gained ther land....

i'm semi convinced that the term organized violence is an oxy moron. ;)

Most leaders in muslim countries are protecting their own throne and don't care about their people, and most of those leaders also suck up to US if they are not puppet regimes like khazai of afghan and new gov't of iraq. US puts friendly puppet regimes up to serve it's national interest. which is why Most muslims hate their leaders and the west becuase they both are in the same bed.

It's true many christians don't follow christian values, but you have neo-cons that are running the show, not these christians who don't follow their faith but still try to be good. Bush himself said he talks to God and he is a devout christian and he will bring crusade to the middle east. He is not only making the the world, and esp. muslims, hate him and the west but he is also making unsafe for americans in the world as well. and this is said none other than experts in the west who criticise him and his blundering ways.
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-15-2007, 12:48 PM
Can I inject a question into the middle of this discussion, please?



This question is to those who believe that the west, in particular the USA, has at least sme culpability in the violence that has produced suicide bombings: Do you even want to stop the present suicide bombings?


I ask that as a serious question. I used to think that of course the answer would be "yes". "We hate the suicide bombings." "Suicide bombings make no sense." "Suicide bombings only kill innocent people." "Suicide bombings are not indicative of true Islam."

But after reading some of the responses on this thread, I seems that some would justify the use of suicide bombings as a means to an end. And that is what gives rises to my question. I wonder if maybe there are some here who see them as actually a good weapon of attack, or at least a necessary evil that cannot be/should not be stopped?
Reply

Muslim Knight
05-15-2007, 12:53 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Do you even want to stop the present suicide bombings?
You have been sometime with us here at LI. Do you see anyone advocating suicide bombing? When you go through the Basic of Islam section, do you even read the slightest mention of God's command for the Muslims to go blow themselves up at the first chance they get?

Tell us your experience with us here so far.
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-15-2007, 01:33 PM
Originally Posted by Muslim Knight
You have been sometime with us here at LI. Do you see anyone advocating suicide bombing? When you go through the Basic of Islam section, do you even read the slightest mention of God's command for the Muslims to go blow themselves up at the first chance they get?

Tell us your experience with us here so far.

As I said in asking the question. I would have thought that the answer would be a resounding NO to suicide bombings. But in reading this thread I see some (by no means all, but some) who seem to be attempting to justify them.

When the quesiton is asked, how to stop them and the answer is, its the USA's fault that they are going on, that may be true, but it doesn't answer the question. And it makes me wonder if some don't want to answer the question, because they feel that they are indeed justified and do not need to be stopped.
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 02:07 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Can I inject a question into the middle of this discussion, please?



This question is to those who believe that the west, in particular the USA, has at least sme culpability in the violence that has produced suicide bombings: Do you even want to stop the present suicide bombings?


I ask that as a serious question. I used to think that of course the answer would be "yes". "We hate the suicide bombings." "Suicide bombings make no sense." "Suicide bombings only kill innocent people." "Suicide bombings are not indicative of true Islam."

But after reading some of the responses on this thread, I seems that some would justify the use of suicide bombings as a means to an end. And that is what gives rises to my question. I wonder if maybe there are some here who see them as actually a good weapon of attack, or at least a necessary evil that cannot be/should not be stopped?
I know many non-muslims on here may disagree with me but then again i don't expect much since their source of information is the US media which btw is under gov't control at times of war.

1. suicide bombing is bad should not be done.
2. US engages in this act as well, but uses locals as guine pigs (See here)
3. when you brutially oppress people, rape, torture, murder, etc (abu gharib just one example), and leave little room for them to breathe then this is the result. This is the result under occupation when the oppressed have no other means to fight back, "give me liberty or give me death"?
4. Despite what you or i may think or say, those people over there don't give dam cuz they don't have the luxury we have and they will do what they deem right as a desperate attempt to free themselves.
Reply

Kashnowe
05-15-2007, 02:27 PM
well before the us occupied iraq there was sadam hussein who killed, raped and tortured whomever he pleased for any and no rerason at all. people are supposed to look up to their leaders. and children who were during the first gulf war are now in their 20s and 30s all they have seen in their country from their leadership is hate and violence. it only makes sense that they a re now suicide bombers. hate breeds hate. and america is not to blame for any suicide bombers. people are responisble for their own twisted fates. unfortunately the reality is so distorted for some that they honstly can not see any other way.

to me that is extremely say and unfortunate.

and i feel offended when you speak of the west so broadly. speak about bush fine. or cheney fine. but unfortunately half of america didn't even vote at all and once we do vote an official into office theres little we can do if they decide to run amuck and invoke policy we as a people don't like. all i can do is pray that americans who didn't vote can see that their vote might* really make a difference and this time around we weill have a greater turnout at the elections.

i'm sure you are aware that the majority of americans are not pleased with bush and by no means are pleased with the war.
Reply

wafa islam
05-15-2007, 02:40 PM
Asalamu alaykum

Suicide and killing civilians is forbidden in Islam. Many scholars have made their views on this very clear. No one who kills him self will enter Jannah (Paradise).

Salam
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 02:44 PM
Originally Posted by cooloonka
well before the us occupied iraq there was sadam hussein who killed, raped and tortured whomever he pleased for any and no rerason at all. people are supposed to look up to their leaders. and children who were during the first gulf war are now in their 20s and 30s all they have seen in their country from their leadership is hate and violence. it only makes sense that they a re now suicide bombers. hate breeds hate. and america is not to blame for any suicide bombers. people are responisble for their own twisted fates. unfortunately the reality is so distorted for some that they honstly can not see any other way.

to me that is extremely say and unfortunate.

and i feel offended when you speak of the west so broadly. speak about bush fine. or cheney fine. but unfortunately half of america didn't even vote at all and once we do vote an official into office theres little we can do if they decide to run amuck and invoke policy we as a people don't like. all i can do is pray that americans who didn't vote can see that their vote might* really make a difference and this time around we weill have a greater turnout at the elections.

i'm sure you are aware that the majority of americans are not pleased with bush and by no means are pleased with the war.
Here's news flash for you buddy,

saddam killed 250,000 in 20years and Bush killed 655,000 in 3yrs!

Madeline albright on national tv said it was worth it, when asked if 1million kids starved to death do to sanctions was worth it.

It's easy to take out a leader, assasination has always been popular among the CIA. But they wanted to weaken iraq for this day, not kill saddam. Iraq had the most advance and biggest army in the Middle East. You don't attack a country like that without sanctions for 10yrs to weaken it and everything else you can do to starve a nation to death and then blow the hell out of it and then go occupy it. And then to cry about suicide bombers ? i agree with you, reality is very distorted and hardt to see the facts. Especially if you live in the US and your main source of news is US media. Canadians are more aware of whats going on the world then Americans.

You are right, not all americans are the same. Many did not vote for bush, but they should have so we all don't have to see these days. But then again it really doesn't matter if you vote or not, electorial votes count only and even they were rigged. As for what can be done, impreachment is on the table and many americans out there are pushing for it. Heck we impreached presidents who had done less than what he is doing.
Reply

Keltoi
05-15-2007, 02:55 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Here's news flash for you buddy,

saddam killed 250,000 in 20years and Bush killed 655,000 in 3yrs!

Madeline albright on national tv said it was worth it, when asked if 1million kids starved to death do to sanctions was worth it.

It's easy to take out a leader, assasination has always been popular among the CIA. But they wanted to weaken iraq for this day, not kill saddam. Iraq had the most advance and biggest army in the Middle East. You don't attack a country like that without sanctions for 10yrs to weaken it and everything else you can do to starve a nation to death and then blow the hell out of it and then go occupy it. And then to cry about suicide bombers ? i agree with you, reality is very distorted and hardt to see the facts. Especially if you live in the US and your main source of news is US media. Canadians are more aware of whats going on the world then Americans.

You are right, not all americans are the same. Many did not vote for bush, but they should have so we all don't have to see these days. But then again it really doesn't matter if you vote or not, electorial votes count only and even they were rigged. As for what can be done, impreachment is on the table and many americans out there are pushing for it. Heck we impreached presidents who had done less than what he is doing.
Americans have the same media choices as Canada or the U.K., the only difference is that Americans are culturally and politically more conservative than others in the West. People like to think one media is better than another, and in some cases that is true. What I've found though, is that the more media choices there are, the more people will pick and choose which source to believe, depending on their politics. No media is completely unbiased. That is why I explore a current event by reading various news sources, and finding the facts that can be documented, and discarding those that are simply conjecture or propoganda.

I also notice a tendency on this forum for people to post articles from opinion "journalists" and presenting it as a factual news story.
Reply

MTAFFI
05-15-2007, 03:01 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
saddam killed 250,000 in 20years and Bush killed 655,000 in 3yrs!
Bush killed this many or Muslims killed this many?

Originally Posted by islamirama
It's easy to take out a leader, assasination has always been popular among the CIA. But they wanted to weaken iraq for this day, not kill saddam. Iraq had the most advance and biggest army in the Middle East. You don't attack a country like that without sanctions for 10yrs to weaken it and everything else you can do to starve a nation to death and then blow the hell out of it and then go occupy it.
Were they not sanctioned for good reason? Saddam made threat after threat, do you expect someone to just be able to threaten the security of the world but then be able to trade freely and recieve aid at the same time, sorry buddy it doesnt work that way

Originally Posted by islamirama
And then to cry about suicide bombers ? i agree with you, reality is very distorted and hardt to see the facts. Especially if you live in the US and your main source of news is US media. Canadians are more aware of whats going on the world then Americans.
Suicide bombers are a joke, they have killed many times more civilians than US forces. About the media, the US is presented with the widest range of media of anywhere in the world. It is the Muslim countries that censor media, not the US, how else would people like you recieve all the credible information from Michael Moore and prisonplanet?LOL
Originally Posted by islamirama
You are right, not all americans are the same. Many did not vote for bush, but they should have so we all don't have to see these days. But then again it really doesn't matter if you vote or not, electorial votes count only and even they were rigged. As for what can be done, impreachment is on the table and many americans out there are pushing for it. Heck we impreached presidents who had done less than what he is doing.
Now the votes are rigged...lol.. Is there anything that isnt to you? Do you think everything is a lie and is set up for the demise for the general public. Take a look at your suggestions, they are ridiculous+o(
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 03:02 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
Americans have the same media choices as Canada or the U.K., the only difference is that Americans are culturally and politically more conservative than others in the West. People like to think one media is better than another, and in some cases that is true. What I've found though, is that the more media choices there are, the more people will pick and choose which source to believe, depending on their politics. No media is completely unbiased. That is why I explore a current event by reading various news sources, and finding the facts that can be documented, and discarding those that are simply conjecture or propoganda.

I also notice a tendency on this forum for people to post articles from opinion "journalists" and presenting it as a factual news story.
Only news americans have is FOX, CNN, ABC and all 3 are right wing neo-con news outlets. There are americans who subscribe to BBC, al-jazeera, and few other international news chanels to get a better view of the world. I've met such people, including a former Univ. political professor, and they all don't have much positive to say about US what the average american knows.

why don't you try www.counterpunch.com, a good dose for those that watch CNN, ABC, and FOX for a good balance. Speaking of fox, check this out...

Reporters Blow Whistle on FOX News

MORE FOX News Whistleblowers Fess Up

That's the news source Mtaffi listens to, no wonder he goes on a defending spree against anything he reads on here....
Reply

MTAFFI
05-15-2007, 03:02 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
I also notice a tendency on this forum for people to post articles from opinion "journalists" and presenting it as a factual news story.
all to often
Reply

Woodrow
05-15-2007, 03:02 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Here's news flash for you buddy,

saddam killed 250,000 in 20years and Bush killed 655,000 in 3yrs!

Madeline albright on national tv said it was worth it, when asked if 1million kids starved to death do to sanctions was worth it.

It's easy to take out a leader, assasination has always been popular among the CIA. But they wanted to weaken iraq for this day, not kill saddam. Iraq had the most advance and biggest army in the Middle East. You don't attack a country like that without sanctions for 10yrs to weaken it and everything else you can do to starve a nation to death and then blow the hell out of it and then go occupy it. And then to cry about suicide bombers ? i agree with you, reality is very distorted and hardt to see the facts. Especially if you live in the US and your main source of news is US media. Canadians are more aware of whats going on the world then Americans.

You are right, not all americans are the same. Many did not vote for bush, but they should have so we all don't have to see these days. But then again it really doesn't matter if you vote or not, electorial votes count only and even they were rigged. As for what can be done, impreachment is on the table and many americans out there are pushing for it. Heck we impreached presidents who had done less than what he is doing.
Just curious. Do you know how many presidents have been impeached?



Two U.S. presidents have been impeached: Andrew Johnson, the seventeenth chief executive, and William J. Clinton, the forty-second
Neither were convicted and both were acquitted by the Senate.

Source: http://www.infoplease.com/spot/impeach.html
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
05-15-2007, 03:02 PM
MTAFFI i got a simple question

are you a bush loveR? :-\
Reply

Keltoi
05-15-2007, 03:08 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Only news americans have is FOX, CNN, ABC and all 3 are right wing neo-con news outlets. There are americans who subscribe to BBC, al-jazeera, and few other international news chanels to get a better view of the world. I've met such people, including a former Univ. political professor, and they all don't have much positive to say about US what the average american knows.

why don't you try www.counterpunch.com, a good dose for those that watch CNN, ABC, and FOX for a good balance. Speaking of fox, check this out...

Reporters Blow Whistle on FOX News

MORE FOX News Whistleblowers Fess Up

That's the news source Mtaffi listens to, no wonder he goes on a defending spree against anything he reads on here....
I'm sure the right-wing conservatives would be quite shocked to learn that ABC, NBC, and CBS are right-wing media outlets. That is also news to me.

I've met a political science professor too, what is your point?

Aww..yes...the evil of FOX news. Now that we've gotten that out of the way, let us return to some semblance of the topic.
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 03:09 PM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
Just curious. Do you know how many presidents have been impeached?



Neither were convicted and both were acquitted by the Senate.

Source: http://www.infoplease.com/spot/impeach.html
Of thirty-five attempts at impeachment, only nine have come to trial. Because it cripples Congress with a lengthy trial, impeachment is infrequent. Many officials, seeing the writing on the wall, resign rather than face the ignominy of a public trial.


The most famous of these cases is of course that of President Richard Nixon, a Republican. After five men hired by Nixon's reelection committee were caught burglarizing Democratic party headquarters at the Watergate Complex on June 17, 1972, President Nixon's subsequent behavior—his cover-up of the burglary and refusal to turn over evidence—led the House Judiciary Committee to issue three articles of impeachment on July 30, 1974. The document also indicted Nixon for illegal wiretapping, misuse of the CIA, perjury, bribery, obstruction of justice, and other abuses of executive power. "In all of this," the Articles of Impeachment summarize, "Richard M. Nixon has acted in a manner contrary to his trust as president and subversive of constitutional government, to the great prejudice of the cause of law and justice, and to the manifest injury of the people of the United States." Impeachment appeared inevitable, and Nixon resigned on Aug. 9, 1974. The Articles of Impeachment, which can be viewed at http://watergate.info/, leave no doubt that these charges qualify as "high crimes and misdemeanors," justifying impeachment.


-------


Bush qualifies by the above accounts and so many other like War Crimes
Reply

MTAFFI
05-15-2007, 03:13 PM
Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim
MTAFFI i got a simple question

are you a bush loveR? :-\
no, I am not

are you?LOL
Reply

Keltoi
05-15-2007, 03:13 PM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI
no, I am not

are you?LOL
Bush lover?...what does that mean? I voted for him, but I don't love him.
Reply

Woodrow
05-15-2007, 03:20 PM
I will agree that Bush should be impeached. But, the liklihood of it happening is close to non-existent. It will be faster to allow his term to end than to attempt to remove him by impeachment.
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 03:28 PM
Originally Posted by Woodrow
I will agree that Bush should be impeached. But, the liklihood of it happening is close to non-existent. It will be faster to allow his term to end than to attempt to remove him by impeachment.
I'm surprised no one made assasination attempts on him either, despite him being less popular than previous presidents.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
05-15-2007, 03:29 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
I'm surprised no one made assasination attempts on him either, despite him being less popular than previous presidents.
i've thought about this and you see its because his simply a puppet, his not worth assassinating. he has power over nothing.
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 03:31 PM
Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim
i've thought about this and you see its because his simply a puppet, his not worth assassinating. he has power over nothing.
perhaps bro, but even puppets need their strings pulled sometimes :)
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
05-15-2007, 03:36 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
perhaps bro, but even puppets need their strings pulled sometimes :)
puppets come in millions, puppet masters are non-renawable


if bush dies another dumb man will come to take the chair... theres no point akhee.

sometimes it feels like its qadr that the west keeps getting manipulated so that its filled with ignorance and corruption for when dajjal comes...


audhubillah, we seek refuge in Allah from him and his fitnah!
Reply

MTAFFI
05-15-2007, 03:40 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
That's the news source Mtaffi listens to, no wonder he goes on a defending spree against anything he reads on here....
I actually rarely watch fox, I prefer CNN, BBC, MSNBC and ESPN(LOL), thanks for that though
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 03:40 PM
Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim
puppets come in millions, puppet masters are non-renawable


if bush dies another dumb man will come to take the chair... theres no point akhee.

sometimes it feels like its qadr that the west keeps getting manipulated so that its filled with ignorance and corruption for when dajjal comes...


audhubillah, we seek refuge in Allah from him and his fitnah!
bro that defeated outlook doesn't suit a Muslim. Allah says enjoin good and forbid evil. prophet *saws* said to plant a tree today even if you know tomorrow world will end.

A man was going and saw another man sitting down by a puddle. He was pulling a scorpian out and the scorpian would bite him and he would drop the critter back in the puddle. The passer by said why do you insist, let the critter drown and kill himself. The man replied just becuase he doesn't stop from doing bad (biting) doesn't mean i should stop by good (saving him).

lastly, Allah commands to wage jihad against those who invade your land, kill your people and oppress you. So we must do what we can against injustice inshallah, whether it's their leader or the leader's troops we're dealing with.
Reply

IbnAbdulHakim
05-15-2007, 03:42 PM
^ jazakAllah khair bro for a beautiful reminder, may Allah grant you good in abundance :)
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 03:44 PM
Originally Posted by IbnAbdulHakim
^ jazakAllah khair bro for a beautiful reminder, may Allah grant you good in abundance :)
and you the same bro, inshallah.
Reply

Walter
05-15-2007, 05:12 PM
Hi Cooloonka:

I do not think that Democracy is the answer to suicide bombings. People appear to resort to terrorism for principally political reasons. It is usually the minority who want political power, but have too few members to win at the ballot, therefore a section of them terrorise.

It is one thing for a person to decide to make a personal sacrifice in order to aid a cause that he believes in. It is another to intentionally deceive such persons to kill them selves. I am sure that if those committing murder by suicide knew that they would not receive a martyr's reward (but instead would receive certain punishment), that they would not decide to carryout the misdeed.

Regards,
Grenville
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 05:21 PM
Originally Posted by Grenville
Hi Cooloonka:

I do not think that Democracy is the answer to suicide bombings. People appear to resort to terrorism for principally political reasons. It is usually the minority who want political power, but have too few members to win at the ballot, therefore a section of them terrorise.

It is one thing for a person to decide to make a personal sacrifice in order to aid a cause that he believes in. It is another to intentionally deceive such persons to kill them selves. I am sure that if those committing murder by suicide knew that they would not receive a martyr's reward (but instead would receive certain punishment), that they would not decide to carryout the misdeed.

Regards,
Grenville
or maybe if the heathens leave the land they occupy and stop making the place look worse than hell, it'll solve all problems.
Reply

Amadeus85
05-15-2007, 05:44 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
or maybe if the heathens leave the land they occupy and stop making the place look worse than hell, it'll solve all problems.
If you refer to christians and jews, they are not called heathens by muslims, they are called as people of the book. Heathens are politheists.

And i dont agree with your words, for example in Algeria, Egypt,Morroco, Pakistan "heathens" dont occupy anybody but suicide bombings and terrorism happens.
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 05:52 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
If you refer to christians and jews, they are not called heathens by muslims, they are called as people of the book. Heathens are politheists.

And i dont agree with your words, for example in Algeria, Egypt,Morroco, Pakistan "heathens" dont occupy anybody but suicide bombings and terrorism happens.

i was refering to christians only, but hooligans will do. Algeria, egtyp, morroco, paksitan and other muslim countries either got US puppet regimes or US friendly corrupt throne loving tyrants. And US presence is there that causes such turmoil in that land as well. why did it all start now, why wasn't it there before?
Reply

Kashnowe
05-15-2007, 06:22 PM
Here's news flash for you buddy,

saddam killed 250,000 in 20years and Bush killed 655,000 in 3yrs!
i am a ware of this yes. i didn't defend bush ever . not once.

sadam's tactics were on a whim.
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 06:29 PM
Originally Posted by cooloonka
i am a ware of this yes. i didn't defend bush ever . not once.

sadam's tactics were on a whim.
US troops aren't the only animals there. Mossad is there as well, training these barbarians the israeli way of raping women and suppressing a nation you illegaly occupy.

check out this video

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...17324327988215
Reply

Kashnowe
05-15-2007, 06:31 PM
Hi Cooloonka:

I do not think that Democracy is the answer to suicide bombings. People appear to resort to terrorism for principally political reasons. It is usually the minority who want political power, but have too few members to win at the ballot, therefore a section of them terrorise.

It is one thing for a person to decide to make a personal sacrifice in order to aid a cause that he believes in. It is another to intentionally deceive such persons to kill them selves. I am sure that if those committing murder by suicide knew that they would not receive a martyr's reward (but instead would receive certain punishment), that they would not decide to carryout the misdeed.

Regards,
Grenville
suicide bombers are ignorami that want glory for themselves and their families. theyare purely selfish i ntheir actions and most of all WRONG. a democracy would project the views of all the people in the land and send a message that suicide bombing is not acceptable. and woth that message children will grow up with and UN-BIASED UN HATEFUL MEDIA and they will learn right from wrong. it will take several generations for all of the un-truths to disappear from families and communities. but democracy is the only way. because the fact is the majority of people are for love and that will shine though. that won't happen when money/power/glory hungry dictators run these countries. the VOTE is the key.

these people are deciding to make a sacrifice because they have been fed evil/wrong informatio ntheir whole lives from their government!!!!!

a way to stop suicide bombers is for muslims to stand up and unite and demand that these people stop doing this in the name of islam. you say prrof is part of your religion well then prove it to everyone that this is in fact forbidden in islam!!
instead i think most are scared and keep quiet. why? because they live in a land where dictators rule with an iron fist.

p.s. with the internet you have access to news all over the world so stop complaining. most americans now get their news on the internet. and if you are still not pleased start your own news program on public access or your own web site and advertise your program as the only true un-biased news you will find. and if people like it the word will spread like wildfire and before you know it you will have your own cable channel for the whole world to see. its that simple :)
,
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-15-2007, 06:33 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
US troops aren't the only animals there. Mossad is there as well, training these barbarians the israeli way of raping women and suppressing a nation you illegaly occupy.

check out this video

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...17324327988215

What do you mean "YOU illegally occupy"? I see your location listed as "USA", that would include you just as much as anyone else. Unless you are not a legal resident of the USA, you should say, "WE are illegally occupying."


Now, how do WE (you and me) stop the suicide bombings?
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 06:39 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
What do you mean "YOU illegally occupy"? I see your location listed as "USA", that would include you just as much as anyone else. Unless you are not a legal resident of the USA, you should say, "WE are illegally occupying."


Now, how do WE (you and me) stop the suicide bombings?
By you i mean the US Troops and nation that occupy Iraq. The war with iraq ended the day saddam fell from power, it has been an occupation since then not a war. Any fighting in there is for freedom from this occupation. If you want to stop any bombings, then stop this occupation and oppression of that nation and it's people, get a hint and leave from where your NOT wanted.

heck even your strongest allies disagree with you now.

Insurgents in Iraq are right to try to force US troops out of the country, a former British army commander has said.
Reply

MTAFFI
05-15-2007, 06:44 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
By you i mean the US Troops and nation that occupy Iraq. The war with iraq ended the day saddam fell from power, it has been an occupation since then not a war. Any fighting in there is for freedom from this occupation. If you want to stop any bombings, then stop this occupation and oppression of that nation and it's people, get a hint and leave from where your NOT wanted.

heck even your strongest allies disagree with you now.

Insurgents in Iraq are right to try to force US troops out of the country, a former British army commander has said.
God knows I am going to have a field day on this forum when the US pulls out of Iraq and the killings continue. I will thoroughly enjoy quoting you and many others. Believe me the day is coming....
Reply

Kashnowe
05-15-2007, 06:44 PM
so you think we should have taken sadam and then just leave immediately , a completely broken land, so terrorists can take over the country and rule and rape and pillage?
Reply

Kashnowe
05-15-2007, 06:46 PM
maybe you should go back and read some world history.

so in that sense during world war 2 we should ahve just taken mr. head nazi and left ther germans to figure out the rest?
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-15-2007, 06:47 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
By you i mean the US Troops and nation that occupy Iraq. The war with iraq ended the day saddam fell from power, it has been an occupation since then not a war. Any fighting in there is for freedom from this occupation. If you want to stop any bombings, then stop this occupation and oppression of that nation and it's people, get a hint and leave from where your NOT wanted.

heck even your strongest allies disagree with you now.

Insurgents in Iraq are right to try to force US troops out of the country, a former British army commander has said.

I disagree with the war too. That wasn't my question. I'm just noting that you indicate you live within the USA, but point the finger away from you and at others. Example:
heck even your strongest allies disagree with you now
As one who also lives in the USA, it would be more appropriate for you to write: "heck, even our strongest allies disagree with us now."


We who live here cannot divest ourselves of some accountability. If we don't share in it, what sense does it make for others to be angry with us?
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 06:58 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
I disagree with the war too. That wasn't my question. I'm just noting that you indicate you live within the USA, but point the finger away from you and at others. Example: As one who also lives in the USA, it would be more appropriate for you to write: "heck, even our strongest allies disagree with us now."


We who live here cannot divest ourselves of some accountability. If we don't share in it, what sense does it make for others to be angry with us?
when i say you, i mean you americans, US government, supporters of war, of you as in your people.

why not include myself in it? becuase i'm not an american and i'm not one of you and will never be. You americans do a pretty good job of reminding anyone who is not black or white to remember that from middle school to real life. And if it was up to my i would not pay my taxes to be funded for illegal wars based on lies.

Originally Posted by MTAFFI
God knows I am going to have a field day on this forum when the US pulls out of Iraq and the killings continue. I will thoroughly enjoy quoting you and many others. Believe me the day is coming....
What are you doing to help pull these war criminals out? all you have done so far is defend them and their war crimes.
Reply

MTAFFI
05-15-2007, 07:10 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
What are you doing to help pull these war criminals out? all you have done so far is defend them and their war crimes.
I defend the truth, you seem to be the one who is sucked into the lies. More than half the things you have posted on here is nonsense, or from some conspiracy theory site. The posts that you actually quoted legitimate objections to the war, I did not condone or defend. You are obviously a young kid who cannot dicern between real news and news that is made up for people to make a dollar. There will always be a market for people like you with prisonplanet and infowar and michael moore and so on, and that is why that information is published. I am not in a position to do anything to help our country out of Iraq right now, however I am a die hard republican but I did vote for some democrats in this last mid term election, which was big for me since I typically vote a straight republican ticket. What are you doing to help your people out of this mess, other than making sure that all blame is put on everyone else? You need to realize that your people are not blameless and entirely innocent, in fact they are the cause we are in the middle east right now
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-15-2007, 07:11 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
when i say you, i mean you americans, US government, supporters of war, of you as in your people.

why not include myself in it? becuase i'm not an american and i'm not one of you and will never be. You americans do a pretty good job of reminding anyone who is not black or white to remember that from middle school to real life. And if it was up to my i would not pay my taxes to be funded for illegal wars based on lies.
Well, a lot of "us" Americans would like to figure out ways to not pay taxes to fund lots of things. You say you are not an American, I suppose that means you were not born here. But if you are here legally, then you are still part of the system. And because you are part of the system, you can be part of the solution to such problems also. If we (yes, you and me) don't work iin appropriate ways to resolve the problem then we are as guilty of perpetuating it as those that you point fingers at for causing it in the first place.

I actually have some ideas as to how YOU could help stop the suiciide bombings (and the rest of the war), but it won't work if all you are interested in is pointing fingers at other people.
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 07:27 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Well, a lot of "us" Americans would like to figure out ways to not pay taxes to fund lots of things. You say you are not an American, I suppose that means you were not born here. But if you are here legally, then you are still part of the system. And because you are part of the system, you can be part of the solution to such problems also. If we (yes, you and me) don't work iin appropriate ways to resolve the problem then we are as guilty of perpetuating it as those that you point fingers at for causing it in the first place.

I actually have some ideas as to how YOU could help stop the suiciide bombings (and the rest of the war), but it won't work if all you are interested in is pointing fingers at other people.
Whether i'm born here, raised here or just moved here. I'm not american now will I ever be even if i say i am. Post 9-11 proved that fact to many Arabs and Asians who thougth they were nothing but americans.

I'm doing my part to end this occupation, what are you doing on your part? If you want the bombings stopped, pull the troops out and end this illegal occupation waged on lies and faulty intelligence reports. i'm making aware of the atrocities and war crimes these soldiers are committing, even if closeminded people like mtaffi will not listen and defend the actions of his troops no matther how wrong they are.
Reply

MTAFFI
05-15-2007, 07:37 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
even if closeminded people like mtaffi will not listen and defend the actions of his troops no matther how wrong they are.
Really I am close minded??? OK here is one example of many where I have condemned illegal actions by my country and our troops, it can be found in teh Al Qaida in Iraq thread:


I dont deny any of those articles, yes there have been cases of torture, yes civilians have been mistreated, yes war is a disgusting travesty created by human kind and horrible things happen when it takes its course. I do not doubt or hesitate to agree that the US has done some injustices to the Iraqi people, I do not believe that it is right. I also dont doubt that the insurgency is also trying to remove troops but do no doubt for a second that they are doing a much better job at killing innocents and other insurgents than they are at killing our soldiers. I believe that if you could "poll" (since you have such an interest in such useless things) Iraqis, they would rather have US troops than the indiscriminate insurgents who blow up schools, mosques, and markets, full of women and children. The only thing that the US can say for these soldiers is that we are sorry for their mistakes. But it is war, and a war where you dont know if a civilian is in fact the enemy until he shoots at you.

I do not wish to antagonize you or irritate you islamarama I just wish to help you to see that your views are one sided and you can gain no true knowledge of anything unless you take in from an unbiased point of view. For each article you have posted above I could post one that shows different. Polls are garbage, dont waste your time. Look at every news agency, look at a biased toward muslim and look at a biased toward the US, then try and find one in the middle. Take all the information put it together swirl it around in your coffee and somewhere in there you will find the truth.


PLease lets see a post where your views are different, open minded or condemn the mindless killing of civilians in Iraq by insurgents... I would bet you cant find one
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 08:19 PM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI

I do not wish to antagonize you or irritate you islamarama I just wish to help you to see that your views are one sided and you can gain no true knowledge of anything unless you take in from an unbiased point of view. For each article you have posted above I could post one that shows different. Polls are garbage, dont waste your time. Look at every news agency, look at a biased toward muslim and look at a biased toward the US, then try and find one in the middle. Take all the information put it together swirl it around in your coffee and somewhere in there you will find the truth.
if by true knowledge you mean see the world thru your eyes then no thanks,i already can see fine from my own eyes. Polls are not garbage, polls show the opinions and believes of the people. If muslims in 25 countries think it's an illegal war, do you think you can convince them it's ok to invade iran also?

PLease lets see a post where your views are different, open minded or condemn the mindless killing of civilians in Iraq by insurgents... I would bet you cant find one
see there we have a problem, insurgents don't kill civilians. And you are combining more than one group together like your leaders. We have shias, sunnis and secterian violence. Secterian violence people are killing innocents, shia are taking revenge on sunnis for thier oppression under saddam. And sunni mujahideens are the ones fighting the kuffar troops who wan't to come back in body bags only.

It's use less to give you any videos or links, you probably didn't even bother looking at the long link of massacres in iraq i gave you. I don't expect much discussion with you as it's quite pointless.
Reply

MTAFFI
05-15-2007, 09:11 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
if by true knowledge you mean see the world thru your eyes then no thanks,i already can see fine from my own eyes. Polls are not garbage, polls show the opinions and believes of the people. If muslims in 25 countries think it's an illegal war, do you think you can convince them it's ok to invade iran also?
Not thru my eyes but through both of your own, instead of just one that focuses only on the bad of the US and the "good" of your iraqi fighters


Originally Posted by islamirama
see there we have a problem, insurgents don't kill civilians. And you are combining more than one group together like your leaders. We have shias, sunnis and secterian violence. Secterian violence people are killing innocents, shia are taking revenge on sunnis for thier oppression under saddam. And sunni mujahideens are the ones fighting the kuffar troops who wan't to come back in body bags only.
Right right, they have not killed a single civilian, that is why many of the tribes in Iraq are teaming with the US to take down the Islamic state of Iraq and the Al Qaeda in Iraq. That is why there are civilian deaths everyday claimed and caused by these groups. Please open that other eye

[QUOTE=islamirama;738602
It's use less to give you any videos or links, you probably didn't even bother looking at the long link of massacres in iraq i gave you. I don't expect much discussion with you as it's quite pointless.[/QUOTE]

If you provide a good video or link, then I will respond appropriately, all you bring are conspiracy and videos showing the rear windows of cars with american music played over them. Come on man, it is stupid. Would you like a list of all the Muslim injustices done in the world today?
Reply

islamirama
05-15-2007, 09:24 PM
Inside the Mind of a ‘Suicide’ Bomber
Part I
2005-08-10, Yamin Zakaria, London UK
International Institute of Peace

“Terrorism is a reaction to STATE TERROR.” States keep pushing the people, until the people join and push back. Hamas was born after 1948, Hezbollah was born after 1982 and Al-Qaeda was born after 1991, undoubtedly effect always follows the primary

Human instinct leads us to find fault in others before we admit to our own; this is particularly true between two conflicting parties. Likewise we tend to exhibit envy and greed when looking at those who are more fortunate than us, instead of feeling grateful by reflecting on those who are less fortunate. Prophets of God throughout human history have provided guidance to channel and control human instincts, by inculcating higher ideals. The battle between these ideals and the debased desires of Kings, Pharaohs and other forms of tyrants, are narrated all the way through the Old Testament (Torah), the New Testament (Injeel) to the final revelation - the Holy Quran.

However, we live in a peculiar age where the tyrants present themselves as Prophets. They advocate instinct-based-behaviour, wrapped with words like ‘freedom’ and ‘free market’, as higher forms of ideals. They promote libertarian sexual practises, to resemble the beasts in the jungle; this is espoused as an expression of ‘freedom’. Similarly, instead of judiciously nurturing the human desire to generate and distribute wealth fairly, they encourage the society to operate on individualism, i.e. sheer greed; by creating the profit-maximising free-market economy, where individual human desire is paramount.

The tyrants continue the deception by obfuscating the merits of other civilisations with a thin layer of International law (as long as it serves them) and military aggression. A militarily powerful nation such as a superpower does not automatically possess the qualities of being a leading civilisation. Such powerful nations often impose an order through use of brute force, hypocrisy, and arrogance, rather than by projecting and applying higher ideals consistently. This is why modern day tyrants and their accomplices hypocritically pour scorn on the weapon (‘suicide’ bombings or martyrdom operations) of the weaker party fighting for survival – knowing that the weaker party does not have access to regular high-tech weapons.

When the armies of the tyrants pulverise humans and houses, with their missiles and bombs, it is called hunting ‘terrorists’ with an undeclared level of collateral damage, another word for dead women and children. When the oppressed retaliate with martyrdom operations, it is called terrorism. Exactly who is terrorising whom? Who lives in fear and terror - the inhabitants in Iraq, Palestine and Afghanistan or those in the US, UK, Italy and Australia? Who is delivering more terror, those dropping daisy cutters, cluster bombs and Napalm, or those shooting with outdated RPGs? Not only do the tyrants attempt to portray themselves as Prophets, full of virtue but the most powerful ones go even further, as they expect the world to see them as innocent victims, while in reality they kill hundreds of thousands, rape and plunder distant lands and litter the world with their military bases, and they are the innocent ones?

Then, the invading tyrants have the audacity to question the morality and the courage of the martyrs (cowardly, weak etc), who died defending their homes and families. How is it that invading soldiers, protected in their tanks and high-altitude planes, are absurdly portrayed as upright and courageous heroes? How is that courageous label reconciled when they are killing women and children, from inside armoured vehicles or 2 miles up in the cockpit of a $40 million jet fighter? The oppressors, from a safe distance, are using far more powerful (500lb, 1000lb etc) bombs, that are just as indiscriminate, as the little bombs (10lb, 30lb) used by the ‘suicide’ bombers? It is the masses in the West that are being brainwashed to believe it is morally acceptable to kill women and children with cluster bombs from F16’s, calling it collateral damage, yet it’s outrageous and immoral when death visits in a ‘suicide’ bombing?

Most certainly, there is an intense drive to project ‘suicide’ bombings as anything but retaliation; otherwise the West is in danger of confessing their crimes. Hence, they have resorted to a two pronged strategy; the first of which is to hire Muslim moderates who will issue some kind of dubious legal opinions (will be covered in Part III) with one track condemnation of martyrdom operations, secondly, they attribute martyrdom operations as entirely an internal phenomenon, totally unconnected to resisting foreign occupiers. Thus, they raise the following questions, to misdirect the public from the real causes of martyrdom operations, in an attempt to escape their own guilt:

1) Which Imam was responsible for brainwashing the bombers?
Many are accusing the Imams of brainwashing youth to undertake martyrdom missions. So ridiculous is this hysteria, you would think that they are confusing the Imams, with the mythical characters from fairytales, possessing magical lamps and flying carpets with the ability to hypnotise people! Imams are the most apolitical group in the Muslim community. They do not even refer to local political matters, let alone international affairs. If anything it is the mafia like Mosque committees, who have the power and persuasion; they function to stifle open discussions, many Mosques carry the usual sign “no political discussion or meeting without authorisation”, unless of course you happen to be a government representative on an election campaign wondering into the place.

Rationally, it is difficult for anyone to lecture others to engage in a martyrdom mission, as it is reasonable to suppose that the candidate must ask themselves why this person is not leading by example. Also, the sacrificing of ones life has such a complete finality, that it will always be an individual’s decision, therefore it can only be conducted by those who volunteer willingly.

2) Is it due to alienation?
People who are alienated do not blow themselves up along with others. It is the majority community that has deliberately constructed the problem of alienation to aid the assimilation of minority communities. The Muslims and the mainstream society will be alienated from each other, since the two communities adhere to different values and norms. This is mutual alienation is natural and expected. In any case, the idea that alienation would drive anyone to commit martyrdom operations is overly simplistic, defies human nature and commonsense. However, the sly, Machiavellian politicians and journalists are peddling this in desperation, again, to avoid discussing the real causes behind martyrdom operations.

3) Is it due to the promised virgins (‘Houris’)?
If a man wants to satisfy his carnal desires he is more likely to engage in self-indulgence rather than self-destruction. For a devout Muslim, this means getting married rather than get himself fitted for an explosive belt. There is no shortage of virgins in the Islamic world, where it is a virtue and not, as it is in the west, a source of shame. The point being that Muslim youth do not need to become martyrs to find virgins. Furthermore, translation of the word Houris is not the virgin women on earth, pleasures of heaven are described in the worldly language: nobody knows how literal or metaphorical these are. These are promised to all who enter paradise and martyrdom is not the only route to acquire these pleasures.

Such distortion of the terms and the facts by vicious Western media is also partly due to envy, as they cannot find virgins in their own community. It also shows the subconscious problem with their own sexuality, as according to their own religious beliefs sex is a necessary sin, but their desire is to practice it in excess, showing an ongoing internal conflict. So in describing Islam, they have transformed the Harems into brothels, Houris into lustful virgins. They see the four wives only in terms of sexual pleasures, ignoring the legal responsibility that comes with it, reflecting their sexually obsessed mindset, everything has to be analysed for its sexual utility. Also, making such accusations helps them to hide a collective guilt, as hypocrisy through adultery and pre-marital sex is rife, as monogamous man, like virgins, are a rarity.

4) Is it due to the indoctrination of hate?
Any physical resistance is terrorism and any intellectual resistance is now classified by another one of those politically charged terms, that are loosely defined - hate. As if the West was full of love and mercy, with their genocidal sanctions (1/2 million dead Iraqi babies) to the “shock and awe” campaign against a nation who had done no harm to them.

Let us be more precise, Muslims exhibit anger but not hatred, in contrast it is the West that exhibits hatred but not anger. Anger will always be expressed by the victims, and will be absent in the aggressor. What else does the West expect from those who they have orphaned, widowed or made childless? Such anger is a moral virtue; it is an outcry against, injustice and the initial aggression by the real mass murderers.

In contrast, hate is the result of inculcating ideas that are rooted in for example one group’s racial identity, and not a reaction to any political events. Societies built along racial identities lead to Xenophobia, Nationalism, Nazism, Racism and Fascism. This is why the foreigners are always hated, and it is this deep rooted hate, that caused the extermination of other races, something that was, and continues to be integral to the colonial West. Just ask the Aboriginals and the natives of South, Central and North America for verification of this truth. Ask the South Africans, who until recently, were under the yoke of White racial superiority, from Europeans and their descendents. And it is this hatred for others that caused the unprovoked abuse and torture in Abu-Ghraib and other US-run prisons.

Even as the bombs drop in the Islamic world, you do not see the Muslims resorting to using the equivalent pejorative terms like “sand-******s”, “towel heads”, “rag heads” to demonise an entire community or civilisation, because, their anger exists only against the criminal aggressors. Like Osama Bin Laden said: “why do we not attack Sweden”.

Of course anger will at times lead to retaliation, but that will be focused in terms of the time and place. We did not see martyrdom operations in the Islamic world 100 years ago, nor is there any kind of operation in the most densely populated Muslim countries like Bangladesh, Nigeria, and Indonesia at present. This is clear proof that martyrdom actions are not the product of the intrinsic values or teachings of Islam even if it is permitted by Islamic law.

The real reasons
Martyrdom missions by their nature are the weapons of the weaker party in the conflict, and the last resort, as the basic human instinct dictates that we preserve life! Therefore, in most cases martyrdom is used in defence/retaliation against the stronger enemy. It has to be defence/retaliation, because a martyrdom operation, at most, may halt a stronger advancing enemy. Martyrdom is not a tactic of an offensive group, as you cannot conduct an offensive conquest while sacrificing your soldiers, as you would soon run out of volunteers, and eventually will have no soldiers to maintain the conquered territories.

Some martyrs may have drawn inspiration from Islamic texts, to commit brave acts of retaliation against the aggressor. However, this inspiration sets in, only if, the prevalent political conditions provide the impetus to retaliate. I also use the word brave, not so much in terms of praise, but as a description of courage, after all you would have to have some level of courage to sacrifice your own life. Anyone doubting this really lacks intellect and this is exactly the point that Robert Fisk made, when the 9/11 pilots were described by Bush as cowards.

Most conveniently, what many people forget is some of the people who engaged in martyrdom operations, were not inspired by religion, but were in fact subscribers of secular ideologies, so this is not exclusively a religious phenomenon. One of the recent, but well-known Palestinian ‘suicide’ bombers was not a religiously devout woman. As an ambulance worker she had first hand experience of seeing Israeli aggression, which led her to commit a retaliatory action. The Syrian Socialist Party, a purely secular group, conducted ‘suicide’ attacks against the Israeli occupiers of Lebanon, as did the Tamil Tigers, in Sri Lanka, against the Sinhalese majority. All of this emphasises ‘martyrdom’ operations, are not the reserve of any specific religion, race or nation.

What impact images from Iraq, Afghanistan, and Palestine have on individuals, no one can accurately predict, every individual has their own tolerance threshold; once crossed, this can drive people to retaliate. In denial, the politicians and journalists are trying to build another ‘missing-link,’ to mythical radical Imam as the instigators of martyrdom operations, just like the missing-link found in Blair’s ‘dodgy dossier,’ the 45 minute threat and the Niger link, confirming Iraq’s mythical WMD’s prior to the war! Asif Hanif from the UK, who carried out the martyrdom mission in occupied Palestine, was not involved with any radical group and had no radical Imam lecturing him.

The real solution lies in addressing the primary cause, which is State Terrorism of the colonial west. It is euphemistically hidden behind terms like ‘foreign policy’. These states unashamedly use their position and media spin, to label the mass murder of hundreds of thousands of innocents, as just - “foreign policy”! Unfortunately many of the headless Muslim moderates, have also adopted such terms like ‘foreign policy’ blindly, to describe the slaughtering of Muslims, while they resort to terms like murder for the 52 killed in the London bombings; Is murder in a uniform not murder? Are all human beings not equal?
.................................................. ...................................
Part II

Lies breed more lies; projecting falsehood as truth necessitates the creation of more lies. For example, to support the primary lie of Iraq ’s WMD capabilities, layers of false information were generated by the Anglo-US government. Similarly, to conceal their culpability - the British, US and Israeli governments have tried to divert their publics from the real reasons that shape the minds of ‘suicide’ bombers, through propaganda and blatant lies. I exposed most of those well-known, lies and propaganda in the previous article [Part 1]. In this article, I will analyse the more credible argument used against the ‘suicide’ bombers: the indiscriminate targeting of civilians.

While, the actions of ‘suicide’ bombers are made gratuitously violent by deliberately amputating them from their political and historical context; concurrently, the actions of state terrorists are sanitised by amplifying political and historical context, whilst marginalising the sufferings inflicted upon their victims. Consequently this helps their population to maintain their ‘conviction’ of innocence; and helps to project ‘suicide’ bombers as mindless terrorists, ‘cannot be negotiated with’, are ‘Islamo-Fascists’ etc. and state terrorism is justified as simply a reaction to that.

Accordingly, when the British, Israelis or Americans are killed by ‘suicide’ bombers, they are ‘innocent’ victims of terrorism. The killings of much larger numbers of civilians by an organised army in occupied Palestine , Iraq and Afghanistan are simply ‘defensive’ measures; their innocence is irrelevant, so shedding of their blood needs no justification, no matter how many hundreds of thousands die. This illusion created by the media is the exact opposite of reality because ‘suicide’ (martyrdom) operations in almost all cases are a response to the imposed wars and occupation by a more powerful enemy.

People understand that ‘suicide’ operations, by its nature are a retaliatory measure of last resort, simply due to its finality. Thus, the best efforts of the media and politicians have not been successful in projecting ‘suicide’ bombings as an act of naked aggression. Instead, the media has focused in demonising it for its usage against civilians instead of confining it to military targets. Let us begin to analyse the ‘suicide’ operations in the context of war.

Suicide’ Bombings are Indiscriminate

This is an irrational argument, as all bombs are indiscriminate; in fact the more powerful the bombs are, the more indiscriminate they are, ergo the nation that has dropped more bombs than any other in history, the US , is by definition the greatest indiscriminate killer. Bombs and missiles dropped from planes have the explosive power of hundreds or thousands of suicide bombers. Using ones body or a fighter plane to deliver the bombs are just different delivery means, and there is no inherent logic that dictates one method as more immoral than the other. However, the masses are swallowing the logic that, the methods of the ‘suicide’ bombers are immoral even though they may be only detonating a 50lb bomb in comparison to the ‘moral’ methods of using planes, dropping 1,000lb plus bombs on people! This is how absurd the propaganda machine has become.

Even if the dubious claims of using precision or smart bombs were true, it would still be immaterial, because the pilots are usually neither precise nor smart, when they unleash their bombs over Baghdad and Kabul as shown by frequent reports of bombs falling on wedding parties, families, civilian markets etc. They simply do not care and behave as if they are playing a video game. One of the ‘achievements’ of using high-tech weapons is that the soldiers are desensitised, being at a distant as they do not see the sufferings inflicted on their victims. If you desensitise soldiers who are already violent and xenophobic, the consequence is likely to be horrific. Such a mindset that is far more indiscriminate and insensitive to killings, at the wheel of a main battle tank, piloting a fighter bomber or manning a machine gun at a checkpoint, and is certain to be far more destructive than ‘suicide’ bombers!

We witnessed this murderous mindset during the 1991 Gulf War. The allied soldiers resorted to an orgy of killings on the road to Basra ; they even fought each other to take pot shots at the retreating Iraqi civilians and soldiers, who were complying with the UN resolutions. Also in the recent war in Iraq and Afghanistan , frequent reports of coalition forces wiping out entire families at check points, in their homes or wedding parties, etc. But anyway, who cares, we are not in the business of counting bodies, as has been said by a US General. The disgusting brutality of the Anglo-US forces in Abu-Ghraib and other prisons underline that indiscriminate mindset.

‘Suicide’ bombers mainly target innocent civilians.

Those who are constantly lecturing others about targeting civilians use powerful munitions that are bound to have high civilian casualties! Hence, there is very little merit in the claim by the Anglo-US-Israeli axis that they do not target civilians intentionally, while they continue using powerful indiscriminate bombs, that have resulted in the killing of tens of thousands more civilians than all of the suicide bombers combined. Indeed, such claims are not only laughable but one of the greatest hoaxes of this age! If avoiding or minimising civilian casualties was a genuine concern, nations would rush to prohibit the production, development and usage of the most powerful and indiscriminate bombs e.g. Nukes, Daisy Cutters, mini-Nukes, JDAMS and their equivalent, but they do not.

The Western and Israeli forces kill civilians using their long range weapons with ease, whereas the ‘suicide’ bombers cannot retaliate in the same manner, lacking the weapons and resources. Since the two opponents are not equal, the weaker party will be forced to be opportunistic, seeking a variety of targets with variable results, including unfortunately civilian casualties. The weaker and more resource hungry party must do this for its survival, as the only other choice it has is capitulation. So the methods of the ‘suicide’ bombers may seem to be more directed towards civilians, but this is a consequence of their lack of resources and not their intent, whereas the armies of the State Terrorists have an abundance of resources, intelligence and weapons, yet inflict far greater civilian casualties, by simple logic this imbalance leads us to a truth about the murderous nature of these states and who is the real culprit that targets civilians.

In fact, historically, the indiscriminate killing of civilians en masse was introduced with the arrival of Air Forces, by the Western powers. The needless destruction of civilian cities like Dresden , Cologne , Hiroshima , and Nagasaki are some prominent examples. All the suicide bombers combined, could not even match a fraction of the track record of the Westerns powers. If anyone is guilty of targeting civilians and by the quantitative measurement of the actual number of civilian victims, it is the West and its client states like Israel , that are infinitely guiltier than all the ‘suicide’ bombers combined, and that is FACT.

What constitutes military targets?

Now let us examine the distinction between military and civilian (non-combatant) targets. Why should the armed forces be exclusively targeted when it was the political establishment (civilians) in collusion with the mass media that usually initiates and authorises war? Even within the military forces, there are the soldiers sitting in their barracks or on holiday, are like non-combatants. What about the non-combat military personnel like doctors, cooks, cleaners, accountants and nurses? What about the commercial firms that supplies the lethal arms?

Therefore, the distinction between combatants and non-combatants is blurred in the context of warfare, as substantial sections of civilian life contribute to the war machine. Indeed, this was the conclusion of Sir Arthur “Bomber” Harris (Dresden, Cologne, Hamburg etc), and Harry Truman (Hiroshima, Nagasaki and Tokyo Raids) both targeted civilians en masse to sap the front line enemy forces effectiveness and would shorten the war, so this is very much a lesson learnt from the West.

It could be argued further, that if the legitimate political authority can become target then so can the source of that authority. This is especially true for democracy, as when it goes to war, that must be by the definition of democracy be the ‘peoples’ choice and hence responsibility. However, when the consequences of this choice visit upon the democracy, there is an immediate divorce between the people and the decision to go to war; suddenly the people are ‘innocent’.

In war, the entire nation is a legitimate target as they wage a war collectively as a nation. However, civilians or non-combatants are off limits only due to the nations accepting this convention during war. Armies would only target combatants in the battlefields in the past, away from cities and towns. That has clearly changed over the years especially with the invention of air raids from the First World War (WW1). Ironically the very nations that invented and practiced the targeting of civilians, as part of their war strategies, are now lecturing others about targeting civilians, of course that tends to surface only when their own civilians have been targeted, as Iraqi’s, Afghan’ etc do not count in their estimation!

Final argument for excluding civilians as a whole is that many of them are opposed to the war. However, the same could be said for those who serve in the armed forces, who are also opposed to the war. Thus, the armed forces as a whole should also be excluded by the same argument then you might as well surrender. Furthermore, why ignore those civilians who side with the war and helped to prop up the democratically elected governments who chose war. Could one not equally argue using the same logic of including the whole based on some? So the right to target all the civilians based on some who supported the war and re-elected the same leader of war. When a bomb is dropped by an allied Plane, does the bomb ask whether those underneath it are for or against the invasion, and separate the respondents? Such absurdity is not entertained by the West and neither is it entertained by those that resist them.


Are Civilians Innocent or Guilty?

It is argued that non-combatants in war should be avoided because they are innocent. This is not true; civilians are only excluded by mutual agreement between nations, like an international convention observed by nations. Warfare by its nature is reciprocal, one nation cannot unilaterally adhere to certain standards regardless of what the other one does, especially a war that is fought in self-defence.

Even, the usage of the term innocent or guilty is misleading, because, innocent and guilty is decided by certain laws that one is subject to. If any citizen committed a crime, then only the criminal could be punished not his entire family or tribe. In contrast, international relationships between nations are dictated by mutual agreement and conduct, not by any external laws. The use of the term “international laws” is also misleading, as often these so-called laws flow in one direction; used by stronger nations to subjugate the weaker nations. Otherwise, the US and its partners would have been tried for war crimes in Iraq by the UN.

Likewise on battlefield there is no principle that you seek the GUILTY soldiers only, i.e. those who have killed your troops. If an army approaches, you can pre-empt an attack by laying an ambush, kill all the soldiers without giving them an opportunity and/or take them prisoner. They can then be dealt with according to the prevalent international tradition and/or interests of the nation;the entire army is liable to attack anytime. The issue of innocence or guilt does not come into play, in war. Each nation sees the other nation in its entirety as the culprit, just as the allies did in WW2, the army is just the executive tool of war; both nations are fighting collectively as a nation and collectively they are a target, unless they have agreed to exclude a certain section of their societies.

No doubt, a nation is like a legal entity, as it forms treaties and contracts with other nations. Acts of the head of any state are binding upon the nation. As the heads of nations wage war or sign contracts, the entire nation are responsible collectively, it has nothing to do with individual innocence or guilt. Responsibility is collective in war and peace. Every citizen of a nation and every citizen of a member of an alliance is equally responsible and liable for the acts of the collective (nation or alliance), even if he was not involved directly or did not act personally. Only those who object strongly and separate themselves clearly are excluded from the collective responsibility.

Of course morally speaking, civilians and non-combatants should be off limits, but those who are lecturing on this issue are the worst violators, just examine their track record of civilian deaths! There is a simple solution, if you do not want your own women and children to be targeted, then don’t kill the women and children of other nations. It is the nation who attacks the civilian population first that puts its own civilians at risk, by making them a target of their victims. Clearly, it is the British and the US governments that targeted the civilians in Iraq first. As have the Zionists in occupied Palestine , and they still continue to arrive from Russia , Europe and the US with a license from ‘God’ to aid the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. When its most needed, that precious International ‘Law’ seems to have been misplaced, conveniently for the West, law is sidelined when it comes to the mighty oppressing the weak.

[1] http://www.americandaily.com/article/8664

Copyright © 2004 by Yamin Zakaria (06 September 2005)
Reply

KAding
05-15-2007, 10:10 PM
Again. 95% of the victims of the tactic of terrorism by Muslims groups are fellow Muslims. It is certainly interesting to discuss the US regarding this matter, but the problem is much much wider.
Reply

Keltoi
05-15-2007, 11:16 PM
Originally Posted by KAding
Again. 95% of the victims of the tactic of terrorism by Muslims groups are fellow Muslims. It is certainly interesting to discuss the US regarding this matter, but the problem is much much wider.
True. The overwhelming majority of suicide bomb victims are Muslim. So there is something going on there that isn't so easily explained by pointing fingers at the U.S. or the U.K. Obviously the Western powers have their share of the blame for the present situation, but it is also obvious that there is something else at play here.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 12:40 AM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
True. The overwhelming majority of suicide bomb victims are Muslim. So there is something going on there that isn't so easily explained by pointing fingers at the U.S. or the U.K. Obviously the Western powers have their share of the blame for the present situation, but it is also obvious that there is something else at play here.
Yea, we know what exactly is going on even when kuffard deny it!


"One young Iraqi man told us that he was trained by the Americans as a policeman in Baghdad and he spent 70 per cent of his time learning to drive and 30 per cent in weapons training. They said to him: 'Come back in a week.' When he went back, they gave him a mobile phone and told him to drive into a crowded area near a mosque and phone them. He waited in the car but couldn't get the right mobile signal. So he got out of the car to where he received a better signal. Then his car blew up.

"There was another man, trained by the Americans for the police. He too was given a mobile and told to drive to an area where there was a crowd - maybe a protest - and to call them and tell them what was happening. Again, his new mobile was not working. So he went to a landline phone and called the Americans and told them: 'Here I am, in the place you sent me and I can tell you what's happening here.' And at that moment there was a big explosion in his car."


Source

Khadduri's report went like this: "A few days ago, an American manned check point confiscated the driver license of a driver and told him to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license… we have forwarded your papers and license to al-Kadhimia police station for processing. …The driver did leave in a hurry, but was soon alarmed with a feeling that his car was driving as if carrying a heavy load, and he also became suspicious of a low flying helicopter that kept hovering overhead, as if trailing him. He stopped the car and inspected it carefully. He found nearly 100 kilograms of explosives hidden in the back seat and along the two back doors.

(2) On May 13, 2005, a 64 years old Iraqi farmer, Haj Haidar Abu Sijjad, took his tomato load in his pickup truck from Hilla to Baghdad, accompanied by Ali, his 11 years old grandson. They were stopped at an American check point and were asked to dismount. ….A minute later, his grandson told him that he saw one of the American soldiers putting a grey melon size object in the back among the tomato containers. "They intended it to explode in Baghdad …'.


Source
Reply

MTAFFI
05-16-2007, 12:48 AM
islamirama

I started to read the article and again after about 3 minutes of reading I see that you again submit a post that is totally bias to the situation. It is truly sad to see that you are so lost, to prove my point here is a truly objective article as to what is truly going on in the mind of a suicide bomber


Inside the Mind of an Iraqi Suicide Bomber

In a rare interview, a "terrorist" in training reveals chilling secrets about the insurgency's deadliest weapon

By APARISIM GHOSH / BAGHDAD

06/28/05 "Time" - - One day soon, this somber young man plans to offer up a final prayer and then blow himself up along with as many U.S. or Iraqi soldiers as he can reach. Marwan Abu Ubeida says he has been training for months to carry out a suicide mission. He doesn't know when or where he will be ordered to climb into a bomb-laden vehicle or strap on an explosives-filled vest but says he is eager for the moment to come. While he waits, he spends much of his time rehearsing that last prayer. "First I will ask Allah to bless my mission with a high rate of casualties among the Americans," he says, speaking softly in a matter-of-fact monotone, as if dictating a shopping list. "Then I will ask him to purify my soul so I am fit to see him, and I will ask to see my mujahedin brothers who are already with him." He pauses to run the list through his mind again, then resumes: "The most important thing is that he should let me kill many Americans."

At 20, Marwan is already a battle-hardened insurgent, a jihadi foot soldier in Abu Mousab al-Zarqawi's terrorist group, al-Qaeda in Iraq. Like the bulk of insurgents, he is a Sunni Muslim from the former ruling minority community. In his hometown, Fallujah, he is known for his ferociousness in battle and deep religiosity. Marwan asked his commander to consider him for a suicide mission last fall but had to wait until the beginning of April for his name to be put on the list of volunteers. "When he finally agreed," Marwan recalls, "it was the happiest day of my life." There are, he says, scores of names on that list, and it can be months before a volunteer is assigned an operation. But at the current high rate of attacks, Marwan hopes he will be called up soon. "I can't wait," he says, rubbing his thumbs with his fingers in nervous energy. "I am ready to die now."

Among the embittered population of Iraq, it's not hard to find young men who talk the terrorist talk, boasting of their willingness to serve as human bombs. It's hard to judge the speakers' sincerity. But the latest surge of suicide operations proves there is no scarcity of volunteers to become the most lethal weapon Iraq's insurgents have. Since May 1, Iraq has witnessed at least 129 suicide attacks, accounting for several of the estimated 150 U.S. fatalities during this period, including as many as six soldiers killed in an attack of their convoy near Fallujah last week. Most of the 1,200 Iraqis killed by insurgents since May 1 have died in suicide bombings. And yet, despite the frequency and deadliness of their attacks, almost nothing is known about individual bombers. Their identities have rarely been revealed and then only posthumously, on jihadist websites or carefully edited videotapes aimed at promoting the insurgent cause and attracting fresh recruits. Among the few who have been named, most are foreigners, many from Saudi Arabia.

While some suicide bombers in Iraq have left behind videotaped testimony, Marwan is the first to tell his story before carrying out such a mission. He spoke to TIME in Baghdad on orders from his commander. The interview was the result of weeks of reporting on such insurgents in the hope of learning more about the identities and motivations of those behind the scourge of terrorism in Iraq. A jihadist group passed word that it would send one of its recruits to meet with us. Marwan was unaccompanied; we were not provided with any information about where he lives, works or trains. And out of concern for the safety of TIME's staff, no attempt was made to track his whereabouts after he left. During a three-hour interview, he talked freely of his motivations but did not divulge any specifics about a prospective strike. He seemed articulate and candid, though he insisted on being photographed wearing a mask over his face to conceal his identity and chose a pseudonym, using the common Iraqi name Marwan and a historical one, that of Abu Ubeida al-Jarrah, a 7th century general who conquered Syria for Islam. The sincerity of his desire to make himself a "martyr" was attested to by several figures-- a member of his organization, al-Qaeda in Iraq; a Baghdad-area commander of an insurgent unit that provides logistical support for al-Qaeda bombers; and a Sunni imam who is sometimes brought in to counsel bombers during their premission spiritual "purification"--whom TIME consulted through Iraqis with contacts inside the insurgency. His account provides a rare glimpse into the mind-set and preparation of one aspiring suicide bomber.

Short, scrawny, his chin covered with wispy facial hair that makes him look younger than his age, Marwan doesn't stand out in the streets of Iraq. Few would notice his one distinguishing feature: outsize hands, heavily callused from use of his favorite weapon, the Russian-made PKC machine gun. Even his distinctive Fallujah accent is not uncommon amid the din of the Iraqi capital, where suicide bombings are most frequent. According to an informant close to several insurgent groups and a U.S. official familiar with rebel operations, small and nondescript fighters like Marwan are considered ideal bombers, since they can slip into crowds without attracting attention. He came to the meeting with TIME wearing a black short-sleeved shirt hanging over black trousers--a style favored by many Shi'ite Muslims--to blend in with the majority of Iraq's population.

Homegrown bombers remain rare, but U.S. and Iraqi military officials are backing away from previous claims that suicide operations are the exclusive preserve of foreign jihadis. "I won't be surprised if there are Iraqis out there who are following the example of foreigners," says Colonel Adnan al-Juboori, a spokesman for the Interior Ministry. Marwan claims he knows of 15 Iraqis who have blown themselves up this year, and he believes there are "hundreds of others" like him who are waiting for the opportunity. Last week al-Zarqawi's group announced that it had set up a separate brigade for Iraqi suicide bombers.

BIRTH OF A JIHADI Marwan's journey toward suicide murderer began just a few weeks after the fall of Saddam Hussein. Before the war, he had been one of Fallujah's privileged young men: his father's successful business earned enough--even during the difficult years when the West imposed economic sanctions on Iraq--to provide a good life for Marwan and his six brothers and four sisters. In high school, he was an average student but excelled in Koranic studies at the local mosque.

Unlike many other Sunnis in Fallujah, Marwan had little love for Saddam's Sunni-led regime. Yet once the dictator fell, he turned against the Americans. "We expected them to bring Saddam down and then leave," he says. "But they stayed and stayed." Insurgents approached disaffected Fallujis like Marwan and urged them to join the resistance against the Americans. Many signed up, including one of Marwan's older brothers. Marwan joined the insurgency in April 2003 when U.S. soldiers fired on a crowd of demonstrators at a school, killing 12 and wounding many more. Marwan, who took part in the protest, escaped unharmed, but the event proved decisive. He says that a few days later, he and a few friends collected grenades and small arms from a military site abandoned by the Iraqi army and mounted an attack on a building occupied by U.S. soldiers. "They shot back but couldn't hit any of us," he recalls. "It was my first taste of victory against the Americans."

Over the next year, Marwan says, he participated in dozens of assaults on U.S. troops who were struggling to subdue the city. Marwan says he became expert with machine guns, a skill that brought him to the attention of al-Zarqawi's group, then called Attawhid wal Jihad. Marwan's piety apparently impressed the foreign-led jihadis as well: in April 2004 he was approached by Attawhid's spiritual guide, Palestinian-born Abu Anas al-Shami. Marwan says al-Shami, reputed to be a powerful orator and motivator, had a deep impact on him. (Al-Shami was killed in a rocket attack by U.S. forces near Fallujah in late 2004.)

Like other Iraqis who have joined extremist religious groups during the insurgency, Marwan severed connections with his family when he joined up. He says he will call them once before his suicide mission to say goodbye. Even though one of his brothers fights for another insurgent group and other siblings help the rebels with money and shelter, he says they all believe he has gone too far. "My family are not happy with my choice," he says. "But they know they can't change my path."

For the deeply pious Marwan, his colleagues in Attawhid are now closer to his heart than his family or former friends. "The jihadis are more religious people," he says. "You ask them anything--anything--and they can instantly quote a relevant section from the Koran." Like them, Marwan works Koranic allusions into his speech. He has also embraced the jihadist worldview of one global Islamic state where there is, in Marwan's words, "no alcohol, no music and no Western influences." He concedes that he has not thought deeply about what life might be like in such a state; after all, he doesn't expect to live long enough to experience it. Besides, he says, he fights first for Islam, second to become a "martyr" and win acceptance into heaven, and only third for control of his country. "The first step is to remove the Americans from Iraq," he says. "After we have achieved that, we can work out the other details."

FROM WARRIOR TO "MARTYR" Marwan says waiting is the hardest aspect of a jihadi's transformation into a suicide bomber. Volunteers have to undergo a program to discipline the mind and cleanse the soul. The training, supervised by field commanders and Sunni clerics sympathetic to the insurgency, is mainly psychological and spiritual. Besides the Koran, he says, "I read about the history of jihad, about great martyrs who have gone before me. These things strengthen my will." One popular source of inspiration for suicide bombers is The Lover of Angels, by Abdullah Azzam, one of Osama bin Laden's spiritual mentors, which tells stories of jihadis who died fighting Soviet occupying troops in Afghanistan. And Marwan is listening to taped speeches that address subjects like the rewards that await warriors in heaven. In recent months, jihadist groups have also begun showing recruits lurid videos of successful suicide hits. A U.S. official in Baghdad who studies suicide terrorism says some volunteers even visit the sites of previous bombings for inspiration.

Marwan says would-be "martyrs" may use their waiting time to take care of business--paying off debts, resolving family matters, saying farewells. Some destroy any photographs of themselves; extremist Islamists regard pictures as a sign of vanity and therefore taboo. Others compile lists of the 70 people Islamic tradition says a "martyr" can guarantee a place in paradise. "I haven't got my 70 names yet--I don't think I know that many people," Marwan says, allowing himself a rare smile. Some dig graves for themselves and leave instructions on the way they should be buried--generally with simple headstones. Marwan says he won't need a grave: "If I am lucky, my body will be vaporized. There won't be anything left of me to bury."

When Marwan gets the call-up, he expects the final stage of his training to be far more rigorous. He anticipates spending his last days in near seclusion, probably holed up in a safe house with a few other bombers-to-be. For non-Iraqis, the isolation can serve a practical purpose, ensuring that they keep a low profile and avoid arousing suspicion with their foreign accents. But all the suicide candidates, he says, are expected to immerse themselves in spiritual contemplation and prayer, to free their minds of negative thoughts toward their fellow men--except Americans and their Iraqi "infidel" supporters. There will be no TV or music, says Marwan, who will have to give up his one addiction, cigarettes. In many ways, these steps mirror the self-purification that devout Muslims undergo before embarking on the pilgrimage to Mecca. "You give up your previous life," he says, "and start a new one."

According to TIME's contacts close to insurgent groups, the bombers have little or no say in planning their operations. The logistics--choosing targets, checking out the site, preparing the bomb-laden vehicles or vests--are left to field commanders and explosives specialists. It is not unusual for a bomber to be told about the details of a mission mere minutes before launching the attack. Marwan says he thought he was going on his operation when his commander sent him to meet TIME. Iraqi Interior Ministry officials claim they have evidence showing that many of the bombers are drafted involuntarily. They say their investigations of car bombings have discovered that some of the vehicles were rigged to be detonated by remote control, indicating that the drivers may not have been aware that they were about to be blown up. "In a majority of cases, you find hands chained to the steering column, so these were not volunteers," says al-Juboori, the Interior Ministry spokesman. But U.S. investigators who have looked into scores of cases believe coercion is rare. Navy Commander Fred Gaghan, head of the Combined Explosives Exploitation Cell, which has investigated more than 60 bombings in the past five months, has not found any evidence of fetters. "They don't need them, because they have plenty of volunteers who will do it willingly," he says.

Marwan says the occasional bomber may ask to be chained to the wheel to make sure he doesn't flinch at the last moment. "If you have any little doubt in your mind about your own ability to carry out the mission, you do that to make sure you don't lose your courage," he says. He scoffs at reports that some suicide bombers are intoxicated. "Those who go on these missions know that they are about to see their Creator," he says. "Do you think we would meet Allah in a state of drunkenness or drugged? It is unthinkable."

Toward the end of the cleansing period, a bomber may ask a fellow jihadi, one better versed in religious doctrine, to help with the final spiritual preparation. Marwan says he was asked to mentor a friend intent on martyrdom earlier this year. He expects his final weeks to be a period of euphoria rather than penance. "My friend was happier than I had ever seen him," Marwan says. "He felt he was close to the end of his journey to heaven." (The friend, he says, blew himself up two months ago at a checkpoint manned by Iraqi soldiers near Ramadi, capital of the turbulent Anbar province, and six were killed. "We made a pact that we would meet in heaven," Marwan says.)

"I AM A TERRORIST" Marwan seems certain he is on a "pure" path. Unlike many other insurgents, who reject the terrorist label and call themselves freedom fighters or holy warriors, Marwan embraces it. "Yes, I am a terrorist," he says. "Write that down: I admit I am a terrorist. [The Koran] says it is the duty of Muslims to bring terror to the enemy, so being a terrorist makes me a good Muslim." He quotes lines from the surah known as Al-Anfal, or the Spoils of War: "Against them make ready your strength to the utmost of your power, including steeds of war, to strike terror into the enemy of Allah and your enemy."

Then, as if embarrassed by his emotional outburst, he slumps back in his chair. He would like to understand Americans better, he says. He was arrested by U.S. patrols twice and detained for short spells, but because he speaks no English, he was unable to communicate with his captors. But this is a small regret, he says, of the kind he is determined to put out of his mind. "When you get ready for the final mission," he says almost to himself, "you can't think about the past. You only think about your future in heaven." But there is at least one aspect of the immediate future that Marwan does not want to contemplate: the collateral damage he may cause to fellow Iraqis. In the recent spate of bombings, many of the victims have been harmless bystanders. "I pray no innocent people are killed in my mission," he says. "But if some are, I know when they arrive in heaven, Allah will ask them to forgive me."

If he could choose, Marwan would like his operation to be a car bombing targeting U.S. soldiers or Iraqi security forces far from any civilians. But if he is ordered to strap on explosives and walk to his target on a downtown street, he will do so. "We don't get to choose the mission," he says. "That is up to Allah." In fact, the decision will be made by a field commander of al-Zarqawi's group. Marwan hopes he will be chosen for a high-profile hit, the dramatic, headline-grabbing kind that al-Zarqawi is said to direct personally. Although Marwan has never met the terrorist mastermind, he reveres him as a great Islamic hero.

Marwan says he doesn't think about his legacy or how others might regard him when he is gone. Unlike their Palestinian counterparts, Iraq's self-immolating terrorists are not celebrated and memorialized by family and friends. At best, Marwan might be profiled on one of the jihadist websites, but even there, his identity would be concealed to spare his family harassment by Iraqi authorities. "It doesn't matter whether people know what I did," he says. "The only person who matters is Allah--and the only question he will ask me is 'How many infidels did you kill?'"

From the Jul. 04, 2005 issue of TIME magazine

http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle9327.htm
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 01:00 AM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI
islamirama

I started to read the article and again after about 3 minutes of reading I see that you again submit a post that is totally bias to the situation. It is truly sad to see that you are so lost, to prove my point here is a truly objective article as to what is truly going on in the mind of a suicide bomber

do you honestly think i would read anyting you bring forth after seeing you defend your soldier's atrocities so blindly?
Reply

Kashnowe
05-16-2007, 01:10 AM
islamarama why are you living in usa if you are so disgusted? go back home if you hate 'us' so much.

recognize that every penny you spend here is taxed (unless you live in delaware :))and taxes go right to the government you are so opposed to.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 01:13 AM
Originally Posted by cooloonka
islamarama why are you living in usa if you are so disgusted? go back home if you hate 'us' so much.

recognize that every penny you spend here is taxed (unless you live in delaware :))and taxes go right to the government you are so opposed to.
why are you living in usa, go back to where you came from. This land belongs to the natives your ancestor killed in a genocide beyond scale. I laugh at the dumb americans who think they own this land and tell other's to go back home.

Every penny i make gov't takes some share, and there isn't even a law that says you have to pay taxes. That is out of my hand.
Reply

Kashnowe
05-16-2007, 01:25 AM
why are you living in usa, go back to where you came from. This land belongs to the natives your ancestor killed in a genocide beyond scale. I laugh at the dumb americans who think they own this land and tell other's to go back home.

Every penny i make gov't takes some share, and there isn't even a law that says you have to pay taxes. That is out of my hand.
i appologize if my comment came across harsh. i did not mean it that way its difficult sometimes to set a tone when you are typing not speaking face to face. it was an honest question. i am curious as to why someone would be here if hey hated it so much. people who are born here don't fit that argument. you willfully boarded a plane and came here. so..........thats like if i got on a plane to egypt today to go live there and then spent the nex t5 years complaining about how much i hate it there......silly. just buy a ticket and go somewhere you are happy.

by the way i was born here in the usa so when you tell me to go home i will be going nowhere because i am home. makes sense huh. and i love my country and my freedom and i am proud to be an american. thank you very much.

and furthermore NOT ONE of my ancestors had anything to do with any genocide in this country. my great grandparents on both sides came to the usa from italy into ellis island around the turn of the century.

aaaand there most certainly is a law that says you must pay taxes.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 02:32 AM
Originally Posted by cooloonka
i appologize if my comment came across harsh. i did not mean it that way its difficult sometimes to set a tone when you are typing not speaking face to face. it was an honest question. i am curious as to why someone would be here if hey hated it so much. people who are born here don't fit that argument. you willfully boarded a plane and came here. so..........thats like if i got on a plane to egypt today to go live there and then spent the nex t5 years complaining about how much i hate it there......silly. just buy a ticket and go somewhere you are happy.

by the way i was born here in the usa so when you tell me to go home i will be going nowhere because i am home. makes sense huh. and i love my country and my freedom and i am proud to be an american. thank you very much.

and furthermore NOT ONE of my ancestors had anything to do with any genocide in this country. my great grandparents on both sides came to the usa from italy into ellis island around the turn of the century.

aaaand there most certainly is a law that says you must pay taxes.
it's alright, it is hard to sense a tone when talking online. But I"m sure you can understand my position as well for someone who grew up here and yet continuously being remind to "go back home" rather then being accepted as an 'american'. Like i said to someone else on here, i'll never be an american even if i'm born here. The arabs and asians who thought of themselves more american than anything found that out post 9-11.

As for my choice, a child doestn' have much of a choice as to where their parents take him. But don't worry, I can't wait to get out of this prison at first opportunity I get. And also like someone said, if the Americans get their behinds out of Muslim land, stop supporting the tyrants and protecting them, remove their military bases, and stop meddling in Muslim affairs, then Muslims won't see the need to come live here. As the saying goes "destory my home and i'll move in you", and we know very well US has too much love for oil to let go of all that.

Lastly, there is no law that states you have to pay taxes and in fact it is against the constitution to tax people. Check out this videos, they are quite an eye opener.

IRS Tax Is Illegal - No Tax Law Exists!!

No Law for US Income Tax (1/2)

No Law for US Income Tax (2/2)

The Secret of the Federal Reserve

Truth about Federal Reserve

Money Matters
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-16-2007, 02:45 AM
islamirama if you have read my posts, I have never dissed anyone for being from some other country than the USA. I have never dissed anyone for being of a different ethnic background than me. I have never dissed anyone for being of a different belief than me. I have never even dissed anyone for being of a different value system than me or for disagreeing with me.

I am a descendant of people who came here as immigrants. I have children who are immigrants, children who are native born, and chidlren who live scattered in countries on 3 other continants. So, I welcome all, and I welcome you.

But I will diss people for approvinig of wanton, unrestricted violence -- that includes both my own government and others.

And I will question why people come and stay some place that they hate as much as you appear to hate the USA. So, why are you here? Were you born here, or made to move here by your parents? Did you come here to work or study in school? Have you immigrated here as a refugee? Have you always hated the USA, or is this something you've more recently come to feel?
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 04:14 AM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
islamirama if you have read my posts, I have never dissed anyone for being from some other country than the USA. I have never dissed anyone for being of a different ethnic background than me. I have never dissed anyone for being of a different belief than me. I have never even dissed anyone for being of a different value system than me or for disagreeing with me.

I am a descendant of people who came here as immigrants. I have children who are immigrants, children who are native born, and chidlren who live scattered in countries on 3 other continants. So, I welcome all, and I welcome you.

But I will diss people for approvinig of wanton, unrestricted violence -- that includes both my own government and others.

And I will question why people come and stay some place that they hate as much as you appear to hate the USA. So, why are you here? Were you born here, or made to move here by your parents? Did you come here to work or study in school? Have you immigrated here as a refugee? Have you always hated the USA, or is this something you've more recently come to feel?
I never said you were among those who people that say such things.

Most of my resentment towads US is of recent years and that is mostly based US actions against Muslims at home and in other countries. Don't think I hate all Americans becuase i don't. I dislike all those that preach hate and islamiphobia notions like jerrfy farrel and pat robertson and your average narrow minded ignorant bigts. Like you, i too do not like uncalled for violence. 9-11 was a sad tragedy and lot of innocent people died in that, but i will not play the apology game and accept guilt for something Muslims didn't do. Let's just say that i'm a product of this society, I am what this society made me as you are what it made you.
Reply

Amadeus85
05-16-2007, 10:25 AM
Originally Posted by islamirama
I never said you were among those who people that say such things.

. 9-11 was a sad tragedy and lot of innocent people died in that, but i will not play the apology game and accept guilt for something Muslims didn't do. .
Even islamic web sites like IslamOnline admits that 9-11 attacks were commited by muslim terrorists.
Hatred blinds you islamirama. You only see what you want to see.
Reply

abdil han
05-16-2007, 10:50 AM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Even islamic web sites like IslamOnline admits that 9-11 attacks were commited by muslim terrorists.
Hatred blinds you islamirama. You only see what you want to see.
the truth never changes just becoz of many people declare it or not...

by the way ,if you care those 3000 innocent people who died in 9/11(i m sorry for them too),try to sorry for 655 000 people who died in irak n still dying,n for 100 000 boshniak muslim people which was killed by christian serbians 13 years ago...

dont seperate people as muslim,christian,jew or whatever...try to see them as human beings...

and to stop suicide bombs; non muslim invaders have to go back to their own lands from irak,palestine,chechenya,afganistan,azarbaycan and some more muslim countries.....

peace all...
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 01:23 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Even islamic web sites like IslamOnline admits that 9-11 attacks were commited by muslim terrorists.
Hatred blinds you islamirama. You only see what you want to see.
More like blind followering of you guys is sickening. Check the polls again, more than 1/2 americans no longer believe that BS and many are demanding the truth. Why would dumsfield and bushroot call of any inquiry into 9-11 and make pathetic excuses like "its waste of time" just so they can hurry to go to iraq.

adil,

not 70,000 but rather more than 655,000 dead in iraq in 3yrs, that's more than saddam killed (250,000) in 20yrs!
Reply

MTAFFI
05-16-2007, 01:41 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
do you honestly think i would read anyting you bring forth after seeing you defend your soldier's atrocities so blindly?
dont read it, I dont care, it is a completely unbiased piece by TIME magazine, and doesnt preach hatred towards Muslims or the US. It is a good article, but I just realized that you are just a kid, I dont know why I didnt figure it out before, but that definitely explains your immaturity and lack of reasoning. So OK islamirama whatever you say, keep reading your conspiracy sites and putting money into those crooks pockets, hopefully one day you can grow up and actually look at things from a legitimate perspective. Also let me again point out to you I absolutely do not condone or defend any atrocity or any act for that matter that does not line up with what this country stands for, I dont know how many times I have to tell you that, you must have a very thick head
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 01:46 PM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI
dont read it, I dont care, it is a completely unbiased piece by TIME magazine, and doesnt preach hatred towards Muslims or the US. It is a good article, but I just realized that you are just a kid, I dont know why I didnt figure it out before, but that definitely explains your immaturity and lack of reasoning. So OK islamirama whatever you say, keep reading your conspiracy sites and putting money into those crooks pockets, hopefully one day you can grow up and actually look at things from a legitimate perspective. Also let me again point out to you I absolutely do not condone or defend any atrocity or any act for that matter that does not line up with what this country stands for, I dont know how many times I have to tell you that, you must have a very thick head
Interesting that you label me "kid" and "immature" just because i don't see it your ways. Only crooks here are those who did 9-11, waged an illegal war, and riping in billions from the oil they are stealing. But hey what do i know, right? enjoy your gov't fed reality ...
Reply

Amadeus85
05-16-2007, 02:22 PM
So i see that it is impossible to stop suicide bombings. In my opinion it is more muslim's case to stop them, not our case. Simply because suicide terrorists mostly kill muslim civilians, in Iraq, Algeria, Egypt, Pakistan, Afghanistan.
I think that firstly people's mentality must be changed, untill then suicide bombers will hurt both muslims and non-muslims.
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-16-2007, 02:46 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
I never said you were among those who people that say such things.

Most of my resentment towads US is of recent years and that is mostly based US actions against Muslims at home and in other countries. Don't think I hate all Americans becuase i don't. I dislike all those that preach hate and islamiphobia notions like jerrfy farrel and pat robertson and your average narrow minded ignorant bigts. Like you, i too do not like uncalled for violence. 9-11 was a sad tragedy and lot of innocent people died in that, but i will not play the apology game and accept guilt for something Muslims didn't do. Let's just say that i'm a product of this society, I am what this society made me as you are what it made you.

Something for your consideration:

None of us can completely escape the culture into which we are born and raised. It does indeed effect how we preceive the world around us, from who we trust for information, to preconceptions of others as either being for or against us.

However, I would hope that you are not a fatalist. I would hope that you don't believe that who you and and what you shall become is predetermined for you. I certainly don't. If that were true, then the whole world is on an unchangeable course to some final destinationt that we cannot only not control, but cannot even effect. Whether we find peace or misery in life, whether we find love or hatred, these are all things predetermined for us from the moment of our birth. And I just don't buy that. I think that though the world influeces us, we still have the power to choose. I choose whether I am going to hate those who hate me, or I choose to try to understand, love them anyway, and perhaps even convert and enemy to a friend. And I believe you have the power to make similar choices.

Think abou it. If I am right, you will get the world that you choose to live in. If I am wrong, you will get what you will get and it won't have done any harm to have tried to effect the world for good.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 02:58 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Something for your consideration:

None of us can completely escape the culture into which we are born and raised. It does indeed effect how we preceive the world around us, from who we trust for information, to preconceptions of others as either being for or against us.

However, I would hope that you are not a fatalist. I would hope that you don't believe that who you and and what you shall become is predetermined for you. I certainly don't. If that were true, then the whole world is on an unchangeable course to some final destinationt that we cannot only not control, but cannot even effect. Whether we find peace or misery in life, whether we find love or hatred, these are all things predetermined for us from the moment of our birth. And I just don't buy that. I think that though the world influeces us, we still have the power to choose. I choose whether I am going to hate those who hate me, or I choose to try to understand, love them anyway, and perhaps even convert and enemy to a friend. And I believe you have the power to make similar choices.

Think abou it. If I am right, you will get the world that you choose to live in. If I am wrong, you will get what you will get and it won't have done any harm to have tried to effect the world for good.
I'm not a fatalist. The world does influence and we we too have the power to choose. I choose not to be influenced by US Media and be like your average american who thinks they are the best people in the world, most right, and everone else needs to learn from them. I don't believe the lies the US media feeds its' people. I see the stuff happening in the world and base my views on that. US is an open enemy to Islam, it is a war on Islam and not any "terror" as bushroot claims. 25 Muslim countries believe that as well as many who have not been polled. i choose to hate those that hate me and my religion, wage wars against us, glame us for crimes they and glame on us.

As someone here said, no one in canada believes what the US media says. No one there believes Muslims are terrorists or anything remotely close. Why? becuase there is lot of multicultralism there and people are lot more sense.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 03:00 PM
FBI says, "No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11"


Watch this video of BBC reporting the collapse of WTC even while it is still perfectly intact:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gbc
Reply

abdil han
05-16-2007, 03:40 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
abdil,

not 70,000 but rather more than 655,000 dead in iraq in 3yrs, that's more than saddam killed (250,000) in 20yrs!
shukran bro,

i corrected it..

salam
Reply

Keltoi
05-16-2007, 04:33 PM
Isn't there some forum rule against posting conspiracy theories? Just curious.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 04:37 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
Isn't there some forum rule against posting conspiracy theories? Just curious.
That's what they are to close minded people who refuse to even listen and judge based on that. If you come your mind made up for you by the bush administration then not much can be done about that.


George W. Bush and his lying friends

Bush Caught Lying About September 11th

NYPD Officer Testimony- 911
Reply

Keltoi
05-16-2007, 04:44 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
That's what they are to close minded people who refuse to even listen and judge based on that. If you come your mind made up for you by the bush administration then not much can be done about that.


It is a conspiracy theory. It is absurd and very insulting to have this same juvenile conspiracy theory posted over and over again on every subject known to mankind. If you think the Jews did it, fine. If you think the evil Mr. Bush planned it, fine. We get the point. It isn't necessary to keep posting articles from prisonplanet or infowars. It isn't like you are the only person on the planet that ever heard of this conspiracy.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 04:51 PM
Originally Posted by Keltoi
It is a conspiracy theory. It is absurd and very insulting to have this same juvenile conspiracy theory posted over and over again on every subject known to mankind. If you think the Jews did it, fine. If you think the evil Mr. Bush planned it, fine. We get the point. It isn't necessary to keep posting articles from prisonplanet or infowars. It isn't like you are the only person on the planet that ever heard of this conspiracy.
Then you must know how we feel with lies blaming Muslims for everything repeated over and over and over again.

the links i just gave you are news clips from your media, posted on youtube. Listen from the horse's own mouth. But you don't even want to do that. What else can one say to such a close minded person?
Reply

Keltoi
05-16-2007, 04:53 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Then you must know how we feel with lies blaming Muslims for everything repeated over and over and over again.

the links i just gave you are news clips from your media, posted on youtube. Listen from the horse's own mouth. But you don't even want to do that. What else can one say to such a close minded person?
Sorry to break it to you, but "George Bush and his Lying Friends by Wam250" is not part of "our" media.
Reply

KAding
05-16-2007, 04:55 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Yea, we know what exactly is going on even when kuffard deny it!


"One young Iraqi man told us that he was trained by the Americans as a policeman in Baghdad and he spent 70 per cent of his time learning to drive and 30 per cent in weapons training. They said to him: 'Come back in a week.' When he went back, they gave him a mobile phone and told him to drive into a crowded area near a mosque and phone them. He waited in the car but couldn't get the right mobile signal. So he got out of the car to where he received a better signal. Then his car blew up.

"There was another man, trained by the Americans for the police. He too was given a mobile and told to drive to an area where there was a crowd - maybe a protest - and to call them and tell them what was happening. Again, his new mobile was not working. So he went to a landline phone and called the Americans and told them: 'Here I am, in the place you sent me and I can tell you what's happening here.' And at that moment there was a big explosion in his car."


Source

Khadduri's report went like this: "A few days ago, an American manned check point confiscated the driver license of a driver and told him to report to an American military camp near Baghdad airport for interrogation and in order to retrieve his license… we have forwarded your papers and license to al-Kadhimia police station for processing. …The driver did leave in a hurry, but was soon alarmed with a feeling that his car was driving as if carrying a heavy load, and he also became suspicious of a low flying helicopter that kept hovering overhead, as if trailing him. He stopped the car and inspected it carefully. He found nearly 100 kilograms of explosives hidden in the back seat and along the two back doors.

(2) On May 13, 2005, a 64 years old Iraqi farmer, Haj Haidar Abu Sijjad, took his tomato load in his pickup truck from Hilla to Baghdad, accompanied by Ali, his 11 years old grandson. They were stopped at an American check point and were asked to dismount. ….A minute later, his grandson told him that he saw one of the American soldiers putting a grey melon size object in the back among the tomato containers. "They intended it to explode in Baghdad …'.
Source
Wait, what are you saying exactly here? Clearly that the suicide and car bombs in Iraq are perpetrated by the US. But why stop there? What about the terrorist attacks in Afghanistan? Same story no doubt? And in Morrocco. Americans as well? The attacks in Bali. Americans? In Algiers. Americans? And Sharm-al-sheik? In Kashmir? In India? In Turkey? In Saudi Arabia? In Jordan? What about the Madrid train bombings? The London tube bombings? Heck what about the attacks in Israel? Etc etc etc...

Where does American complicity stop and where do Muslim groups come into play? Could you provide some clarity on that?
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 05:02 PM
Originally Posted by KAding
Wait, what are you saying exactly here? Clearly that the suicide and car bombs in Iraq are perpetrated by the US. But why stop there? What about the terrorist attacks in Afghanistan? Same story no doubt? And in Morrocco. Americans as well? The attacks in Bali. Americans? In Algiers. Americans? And Sharm-al-sheik? In Kashmir? In India? In Turkey? In Saudi Arabia? In Jordan? What about the Madrid train bombings? The London tube bombings? Heck what about the attacks in Israel? Etc etc etc...

Where does American complicity stop and where do Muslim groups come into play? Could you provide some clarity on that?
That's just the problem, every bombing in the world is blamed on Muslims. Like muslims are the only ones with such capabilities. Only people blowing religious places and markets are these invaders. Divide and conquer is their oldest strategy, make the shia and sunni fight each other and then they can pick out the fighters from both side. Here what Iraqis have to say to the bush Democracy ch. - iraq

Other bombings all have some or no connections with Muslims. Either they are done by CIA or other cover't agents to start trouble there or they are done by Muslims and done as REaction to something done first. There's bombings in these areas (In Kashmir? In India? In Turkey? In Saudi Arabia? In Jordan? Algiers? Bali?) Not suicide bombings, get your facts straight.

as for lond bombing, here's the video they keep showing to the world. Not a very convincing video if you ask me.

London 7/7
Reply

MTAFFI
05-16-2007, 05:08 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Interesting that you label me "kid" and "immature" just because i don't see it your ways. Only crooks here are those who did 9-11, waged an illegal war, and riping in billions from the oil they are stealing. But hey what do i know, right? enjoy your gov't fed reality ...
not because you dont see views my way, but because you only see things from one way. When you post you seem like some sort of backwoods crack pot fanatic, who has no clue about world affairs or anything other than what is reported on conspiracy sites, and hand pick news reports that suit your opinions. It really doesnt matter everyone is entitled to their own opinion, and there will always be people like you, and that is why Michael Moore will get to continue making money. The things you present as fact are utterly ridiculous and everyone know it, that is why other than a handful of people no one else is even responding to you. The US did not do 9/11 it is fact and has been claimed by bin Laden many times. The people who did it even left testimony to that fact, but you seem to not want to bring that up. The oil you speak of is also a joke, show me one drop of stolen or free oil. Give me one ounce of solid proof... It is just a very ignorant thought process that you have, and you are obviously not very well versed or educated on these matters and it shine through your posts like the sun on a hot summer day. So go ahead, the more I see of your conspiracy posts, I am not responding to any of them anymore, and neither should anyone else for that matter. You are hopeless, instead of trying to help you to look at things from more than one perspective I will just start reporting your posts as the conspiracies that they are, and since conspiracy is against the rules on this forum, they will surely be deleted. Good luck in your endeavors to prove the the free world that Muslims are free of any guilt or actions that are taken around the world and that the evil US is responsible for all of it. The only people that will listen are the other goof balls.

PEACE
Reply

Kashnowe
05-16-2007, 05:30 PM
and to stop suicide bombs; non muslim invaders have to go back to their own lands from irak,palestine,chechenya,afganistan,azarbaycan and some more muslim countries.....
this will not get rid of the idea that suicide bombers go straight t o paradise a s martyrs......

there will still be people who disagree with someone muslim or not muslim and blow themselves up. look at what is happening now. they are killing eachother, muslims blowing themselves up and harming other muslims and WORST OF ALL CHILDREN!!
Reply

Suomipoika
05-16-2007, 08:02 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
FBI says, "No hard evidence connecting Bin Laden to 9/11"


Watch this video of BBC reporting the collapse of WTC even while it is still perfectly intact:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C7SwOT29gbc
I love conspiracy theories. The following is my absolute favorite and I recommend it for all conspiracy theory lovers. Stop being close minded and stop coming your mind made up. :D

http://www.debunking911.com/questions.htm



Oh yea, in reply to the BBC video, I noticed the following article on the same site with the previous masterwork. The videos referred to, and the hole article, can be found at the link below.

http://www.debunking911.com/pull.htm#reporter

----------

With the lack of even the smallest amount of hard evidence supporting their stories, conspiracy theorists have become more desperate to find anything which could be twisted to support them. Case in point: The WTC 7 was seen in the background of a BBC report while the reporter said the building had already collapsed. The story is that the reporters were given a "script" to say and these reporters stupidly read the lines before the building fell. Plain old common sense can dispatch this conspiracy story.



Why do they choose to believe the more unlikely conspiracy story which suggests that at least some reporters of some news organizations were given a script? Especially when, much more logically, miscommunication could easily explain the video.

Why in the WORLD would they need to give the reporters a head's up??? Why wouldn't they just blow the building up and let them report the collapse as they would have normally?

What most likely, logically happened: While investigating and updating information on the collapse of the towers, someone at the BBC was given a report/press release that building 7 was going to collapse. [Edit: we now know they were monitoring the news from different outlets and that's where they learned of building 7.] According to the fire department, by 2:00PM they knew the building would soon collapse. Reporters KNEW this well before the collapse because there are videos of reporters talking about it before it happened. So we KNOW reporters were given information on WTC 7's imminent demise. We can conclude from this evidence that the fire department relayed information to reporters that the building was going to collapse. By the time the report reached the reporter at the BBC, it may have simply been miscommunicated from "About to collapse" to "Has collapsed". She even starts out by saying "Details are very, very sketchy". That alone should put this to rest. She didn't say 'Sketchy'. She didn't say 'very sketchy'. She said "very, very sketchy".
It wouldn't be the first time reporters got something so completely wrong. They said it was a small plane at first, remember? They said Kerry choose Gephardt for VP, remember? They told the family members of trapped mine workers that their 13 loved ones were alive, all but one, when it was the other way around. Those are just a few glaring examples. I could go on... Reporters rush to be the first one with the news and often do a poor job of getting the facts straight. History is littered with examples of this. Even your average knuckle dragging, cave dwelling Neanderthal knows this. (My sincerest apologies Geico's Neanderthal man...)

Listen to Aaron Brown from CNN say the building collapsed or is collapsing with the building in the background.



I have had on this site since I started it (just under the 12 things we know for sure on this very page) the link to a video with someone from MSNBC saying “What we’ve been fearing all afternoon has finally happened.” As the building collapses. That makes CNN, BBC and MSNBC who knew the building was going to collapse. I searched for the MSNBC video because I remembered the media saying the building would collapse before it did. Here is that video again...

How many people knew that building was Building 7 before that day? It is unreasonable and unrealistic to expect every reporter to know the names of all the buildings in the World Trade Center. For all they may have known, building 7 could have been one of the smaller buildings which were also on fire.

The downright absurd conspiracy story: The government told many reporters to report something they would have reported anyway after the building collapsed.

A little critical thinking is all that's needed to debunk this nonsense. Why in the world would they make an already unbelievably massive conspiracy into one involving reporters who would LOVE a scoop like that? "Sept. 9, 2001 - EXCLUSIVE BREAKING NEWS! Government about to murder thousands for oil! We have the script!" Can you imagine the job offerings after a scoop like that? Can you say Pulitzer prize? What a hero! Who would pass that up to help a shadowy government commit the mass murder of Americans? This would be MUCH bigger than Watergate! Or maybe this was a planed gaffe to expose this plot? Are we to believe this gaffe is the only way she could have told us? A method which could easily be dismissed as typical poor reporting?

And here is the kicker... Did they really need even MORE people involved? What was the reason they absolutely needed to tell the reporters this? Why haven't any of the other reporters talked? Are most reporters part of a mass murder scheme? How much can conspiracy theorists swallow?

At best, this is an attempt to take your minds off the real issue. Why did the media know the WTC 7 was going to collapse if there were just a few small fires? This is another part of the conspiracy story they don't want you to think about.

Do the conspiracy theorist leaders have one shred of REAL evidence of explosives or anything else which could take down the buildings? Air samples with trace explosive chemicals in it? A memo like the Downing Street memo? A whistleblower who was in on the planning maybe? None of that involves the so called "whisked away steel". They have nothing. They're left to scour the internet for the slightest mistake made by anyone on that horrific, chaotic day. They're left destroying peoples' lives by suggesting innocent people are involved in mass murders.

BBC's response...

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditor...onspiracy.html

I smell a deliberate attempt to quiet the media. It is not lost on me that the BBC recently created a story which casts the conspiracy leaders in a bad light. What media will want to expose the misinformation and deception of these conspiracy leaders if they incur the wrath of a few fringe lunatics? Apparently, Alex Jones, Fetzer and Co. would like their own shadowy, loose knit government based on fear. B@@!

Another update:

It seems I wasn't far off from what the BBC suspects happened. They even reference the CNN video above.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/theeditor...spiracy_2.html

Update:

Here is a first responder with Building 7 in the background during an interview. Note the frustration in his voice because he can't do anything for the building.



First responder: "You see where the white smoke is? You see this thing leaning like this? It's definitely coming down. There's no way to stop it. Cause you have to go up in there to put it out and it already - the structural integrity is just not there in the building. It's tough, it's.. it's.. You know we can handle just about anything, this is beyond...

This new video explains how the building caught fire and may have weakened the building well before the initiation of the collapse.



Thanks to ScottS and David B. Benson for their contributions.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 08:09 PM
Originally Posted by Suomipoika
I love conspiracy theories. The following is my absolute favorite and I recommend it for all conspiracy theory lovers. Stop being close minded and stop coming your mind made up. :D .
yes you will find many gov't (undercover) sites that call this "conspiracy theories" and try to pull them apart. Only conspiracy theory is the myth of 9-11 and the forceful fed of lies around it. Listen to the testimonies of the NYP officer on ground zero and watch the video yourself. No debunking gona help explain how the building towards the bottom started exploding outward when the plane barely touched the top of the building.
Reply

Suomipoika
05-16-2007, 08:17 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
yes you will find many gov't (undercover) sites that call this "conspiracy theories" and try to pull them apart. Only conspiracy theory is the myth of 9-11 and the forceful fed of lies around it. Listen to the testimonies of the NYP officer on ground zero and watch the video yourself. No debunking gona help explain how the building towards the bottom started exploding outward when the plane barely touched the top of the building.
Yes, ofcourse no debunking is going to explain it because you are close minded and have already made up your mind. :)

I also noticed how you didnt even bother to explain any of the points raised in the article about the BBC video you linked with bolded letters.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 08:18 PM
Originally Posted by Suomipoika
Yes, ofcourse no debunking is going to explain it because you are close minded and have already made up your mind. :)

I also noticed how you didnt even bother to explain any of the points raised in the article about the BBC video you linked with bolded letters.
why don't go back and watch the testimony of the NYPD officer first then we'll continue.

anyways, we are waay off topic here.
Reply

MTAFFI
05-16-2007, 08:20 PM
^^You are arguing with a child.... A child does not have the same intelligence as an adult, there is no point in arguing this with him, he is a true blue conspiracy theorist. I am sure he even holds the "chicken wire" experiment meant to replicate the WTC to high standards
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 08:25 PM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI
^^You are arguing with a child.... A child does not have the same intelligence as an adult, there is no point in arguing this with him, he is a true blue conspiracy theorist. I am sure he even holds the "chicken wire" experiment meant to replicate the WTC to high standards
Just becuase you are in denial does not mean rest of the world is also...
Reply

MTAFFI
05-16-2007, 08:28 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
Just becuase you are in denial does not mean rest of the world is also...

I think it is the other way around
Reply

Suomipoika
05-16-2007, 08:30 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
why don't go back and watch the testimony of the NYPD officer first then we'll continue.

anyways, we are waay off topic here.
I cant seem to get the NYPD officer video work for me. Does it explain the importance of BBC video and why they were reporting the collapse of WTC even while it is still perfectly intact?
Reply

Grace Seeker
05-16-2007, 08:33 PM
Hey, I know a great way to stop suicide bombings. Fill the internet with conspiracy theory websites and let the would be bombers spend their day reading them.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 08:40 PM
Originally Posted by Grace Seeker
Hey, I know a great way to stop suicide bombings. Fill the internet with conspiracy theory websites and let the would be bombers spend their day reading them.
why don't you give your american soldiers laptops so they can surf for porn rather then rape, and play games rather then kill innocents. It's a great way to end war fast, i mean OCCUPATION
Reply

Amadeus85
05-16-2007, 08:45 PM
Islamirama with his conspiracy theories is quite funny i think.
But most muslims worldwide agree with him.
And this is not so funny anymore.
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 08:50 PM
Originally Posted by Aaron85
Islamirama with his conspiracy theories is quite funny i think.
But most muslims worldwide agree with him.
And this is not so funny anymore.
makes you wonder, is this "conspiracy theory" real or the lies of Bush Administration ...

Bush Caught Lying About September 11th
Reply

MTAFFI
05-16-2007, 08:52 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
makes you wonder, is this "conspiracy theory" real or the lies of Bush Administration ...

Bush Caught Lying About September 11th
really it makes you wonder about the intelligence of those Muslims, especially since most of the world knows and laughs at these sort of things
Reply

islamirama
05-16-2007, 08:55 PM
Originally Posted by MTAFFI
really it makes you wonder about the intelligence of those Muslims, especially since most of the world knows and laughs at these sort of things
why did bush lie then?
Reply

MTAFFI
05-16-2007, 09:08 PM
Originally Posted by islamirama
why did bush lie then?
I guess he couldnt have made the error in saying that he actually saw it rather than heard of it crashing and saw the aftermath of it on the television. It was all over the news almost immediately. Perhaps he saw the building smoking after the jet hit it... did you ever consider that?
Reply

Woodrow
05-16-2007, 09:14 PM
I am not going to try to sort this mess out. When something gets this far off topic and it becomes simply a place to argue, the thread no longer serves any purpose.:threadclo
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: 4
    Last Post: 08-28-2009, 02:23 AM
  2. Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-21-2008, 02:59 PM
  3. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 04-13-2006, 05:42 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-10-2006, 12:21 PM

IslamicBoard

Experience a richer experience on our mobile app!