Terrorist Bomb Plot: Three Men Convicted

[sister herb]

Salam alaykum

What even is ethic of the atheism? Do not kill like in religions? No? Wasn´t Stalin who killed millions an atheist? Or Hitler?

hew

 

[Urban Turban]

Los Angeles, January 30 – An FBI informer sent to infiltrate a California mosque was made the subject of a restraining order after scaring Muslim worshippers with demands for holy war.

Craig Monteilh was known to members of the Irvine Islamic Center as Farouk al-Aziz, an apparently devout and at times over-zealous Muslim.

But when he began speaking of jihad and plans to blow up buildings, senior figures at the mosque reported him to the FBI - the very people who sent him.

Now the FBI is facing criticism for its use of such stooges which have backfired in a number of cases. The law enforcement agency's problems have been confounded after Monteilh, a petty criminal with forgery convictions, went public with claims he received $177,000 tax free in 15 months for his work.

Shakeel Syed, of the Islamic Shura Council of Southern California which represents more than 75 mosques told the Washington Post: The community feels betrayed.

just google Craig Monteilh for source.

mg:

 

[Independent]

So said the people who destroyed Iraq

I fail to see how referring to the Iraq War proves that these guys are innocent.

If you accept that they are guilty (ie really planning to bomb) then it's relevant because it's a motive.

But you don't accept they're guilty. For some reason, you think the Iraq war means they're innocent. Please explain.

 

[Independent]

What even is ethic of the atheism? Do not kill like in religions? No? Wasn´t Stalin who killed millions an atheist? Or Hitler?

Sadly, there are killers in every religion, in every country, in every age. Muslims too.

I am not saying Muslims are the only killers, I'm not even saying they kill 'the most'.

All I'm saying is that these 3 guys look like they're guilty as hell and deserve to spend some time there (if I believed in it).

 

[Urban Turban]

I fail to see how referring to the Iraq War proves that these guys are innocent.

If you accept that they are guilty (ie really planning to bomb) then it's relevant because it's a motive.

But you don't accept they're guilty. For some reason, you think the Iraq war means they're innocent. Please explain.

Circles..

 

[Independent]

Circles..

Your default position is to blame each new situation on the 'kuffar'. Every situation, without exception. You no longer bother with evidence. You just refer to past incidents.

Effectively, your position is that Muslims cannot commit a terrorist crime.

And the flipside is, that 'kuffar' are all terminal liars and murderers who cannot ever be innocent if it involves Muslims.

You are fundamentally dividing the world into 'us and them'.

Looks like a kind of 'anti kuffar racism' to me.

 

[aamirsaab]

{snip}
We are left to depend on the media to deliver these situations to us, have you ever played the game of "telephone"? By the time the 4th person reaches the message its already diluted, imagine what kind of info we're being fed.

Did you even read the article? Their own defence admitted to the crime.

Yes, we should defend muslims and non muslims alike when they are being treated unjustly,but lets be real here. None of us are present at this location or personally involved, so how do you know ur on the right side? :hmm: Or if the situation/story being given is even accurate? We cannot go against our own brothers and sisters in Islam, unless we are 150% sure they are guilty and even then we don't just go against them like fools. We cannot accuse our brothers and sisters falsely, its a great sin to do that.

Rhetoric. This has nothing to do with sides. Don't play that game. And yes we can point out and grass on and report Muslims that are conspiring to kill innocent people and perform terrorist activities. You can and should do that for anyone regardless of their religion. This blind loyalty to Muslims is exactly the problem I spoke about in the very post you quoted! (hint: the very first sentence of said post).

Ultimately, this information is being given to us by kuffar sources, that alone should make a Muslim think.

I'll say it again since you aren't listening: their own defence admitted to carrying out all activities (the list is numerous and contained in the article)

 

[Urban Turban]

Your default position is to blame each new situation on the 'kuffar'. Every situation, without exception. You no longer bother with evidence. You just refer to past incidents.

Effectively, your position is that Muslims cannot commit a terrorist crime.

And the flipside is, that 'kuffar' are all terminal liars and murderers who cannot ever be innocent if it involves Muslims.

You are fundamentally dividing the world into 'us and them'.

Looks like a kind of 'anti kuffar racism' to me.

Squares..

 

[Independent]

Squares..

Have we interrupted your geometry homework?