TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Political Discussion / Debate
-- A new digusting act
Pages (4): « 1 2 [3] 4 »

If you can't think of any more reasons as to why they attacked the USA then the wool has well and truly been pulled over your eyes mate!!!

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley If you can't think of any more reasons as to why they attacked the USA then the wool has well and truly been pulled over your eyes mate!!!

Yes, I'm aware, we're the big evil empire. Just remember that your government in the UK and all the European nations are our allies in a loose sense of the word, so you'll be next.

I think we do some shitty things, but sometimes I wish our government would actually behave like these people profess that we already do, just to show them what it could be like. Cut all funding to everyone who doesn't kiss our asses. Let little kids die in the street from poverty, rather than giving aid. We'd be a lot stronger of a nation and a lot of others would be a lot weaker if we did. THAT would be evil in my eyes. Instead, we seem to waste a lot of money and effort trying to appease people.

Just out of curiousity, what do you consider to reasons why they attacked us besides the support of Israel?

quote:

Originally posted by Dj Alex (ISR) Those people AKA terorists are not looking for vengeance or fight back.. they just want to force you to beliave in Islam..

Excuse me, but what this whole war on terror is doing? Isnt it forcing its formula of 'Democracy' and 'Freedom' on these countries?

Isnt Bush on a Jihadic mission to spread its way governance on other countries, what it calls is 'freedom'.

Dont you want them to believe in your system?

quote:

Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan What's happened in Iraq cannot be changed. Weather you agree with it or not. I agree in some ways it would sway some moderate muslims into becoming more extreme in their views. It's been a hot bed waiting to happen for years George, face it quite a lot of Muslims hate us regardless of if you supported the Iraq war or not they wouldn't care about killing you they'd feel no remorse or guilt about it because your a westerner. Times are changing the younger generation of muslims in the UK are becoming more religious, their naive and gulliable this is what is leading them to become vulnerable to brainwashing radicals who slip underneath the radar due to relaxed immagration laws. As a whole the muslim community is becoming more segregated and isolated from the rest of British society.

To sum up:

Things are not looking good; situation has only detoriated and it keeps getting worst with every passing day. This whole 'war on terror' is not working at all.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley I've actually just thought of something... It seems irrelevant who is right or wrong, as you say that Iraq gave them an excuse, I say Iraq was the reason. So either way, if we stop such (unneccessary) actions in the future, they will have neither the excuse or the reason right? So the threat to my country would be reduced right?

There's a fundamental difference between reason and excuse, as you surely know. You eleminate the cause (=reason) you don't have the effect. And excuse, however, can be interchanged freely, since the root of the problem was not removed. It's nothing but a cover whereas a reason is causal for the outcome. Both the terrorists' rhetoric as well as the chronology of their massacres contradict your "reason" theory: Besides their constant references to recent political events, such as the Iraq/Afghan wars, they keep propagating their almost fascist idelogy of Islam world domination which inherently objects Western culture regardless of its concrete interventions in the Middle East. A perfect example would be the global mobilization of furious violent Muslims as a "reaction" for the Danish cartoons. Were those cartoons really the *reason* for such disappropiate anger or doesn't the fact that the ralleys and protests were perfectly orchestrated by Islamist leaders MONTHS after the actual publishing hint more towards and *excuse*?
Let's further examine the Terrorist "special" relationship with the Jewish people. Yes, Jewish, not Israeli: Only in the post 9-11 era have Islamists hit Synagoges in Istanbul, Jewish restaurants/clubs in Casablanca, another synagogue in Djerba, Tunisia and a Nigerian hotel crowded by Israeli/Jewish torusits. If you follow your "reason" theory you'd have to think of an "excuse" as to why Terrorists were apparently too lazy to distinguish between Israeli politics and people of the Jewish fate. Hearing Hamas and Hizballah leaders calling the Jews "the sons of pigs and apes" it feels like those murders are mainly motivated by idelology and perverted religios interpretations than a mere "political response".
Sept. 11th itself was a time in which Bush and the Us was about to return to a highly isolationist foreign policy. It followed years of ambitious effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by Clinton, years of ignorance of the rise of the Taliban and ongoing Hussein madness. Rarely before have the U.S. been so non-interferring in a negative sense - yet this massacre as a response with a "reason"? Could it be that the world-wide search for possible "reasons" was the very sparkle for further attacks which tried to test the limits more and more? After all, if we do all the job of "reason-finding" why not use this very nature of ours and keep operating under this disguise with the side-effect of gaining more and more supporters? We managed to find the vaguest links between a bombing in Bali(Indonesia!) and the Australian Iraq policy. We did our best to show up direct connections between Madrid's train bombings and those few hundred Spanish soldiers that were deployed in Iraq. With such creativity we'll even find the "reason" for a bombing of Luxemburg or Johannesburg or whatever little village somewhere in Peru.
The real challenge is not as you say, to stand "above emotions" and investigate the reasons. The real challenge is to stop for a moment and think outside the box of rational explanations - a fundamentally irrational ideology such as Islamism will simply not give you those answers.

And what is your solution to the war on terror?

As a pessismist I cant see one. The dilemma is perfectly illustrated in the current Lebanon war: Not responding or a diplomatic settlement with concessions is seen as a sign of weakness further motivating future attacks. Responding, however, mostly hits innocent which again leads to a radicalization of society. Unfortunately it's not (anymore) even a simple domestic problem of the Muslim world which fights corruption, poverty and lack of education - it seems as though the "disease" of Islamis was indeed developed there but is nowadays spread through the world into the midst of Europe and the US. Be it middle class neighbourhoods in Leeds or the Technical University of Hamburg. The cells and their leading idelogists have freed themselves form their Arabic/Pakistani/Iranian homebases both operatively and ideologically. Perhaps succesful modernist counter-movements within Muslim societies could trigger a chain reaction. I think a peacefull revolution against the Mullah regime in Iran would be a great signal and a major defeat to Islamist ideology.

Open your eyes just a little bit!

Iran is only the current enemy! Who gave a shit about Iran 3 years ago?!

I'm not even aware, outside of Lebanon (and encrouching into Iraq), of Iran even exporting any of their beliefs (especially in the West?)

Stop being swayed by what ever country America tells us we should be hating at the moment and ask yourself why America is not telling us to hate Pakistan or Saudi Arabia (which are the TRUE exporters of radical Islamist ideology). Reason? Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are our "friends" (ie they have something America wants)

Still, if you can't see a solution why even bother to debate it? My motivation is that my opinions might actually help erradicate this threat. Your opinion then, would merely to inform us of this threat (which we are all well aware of in the first place).

I've always said of the Israel/Palestine conflict - what if Israel allowed a Palestinian state (a proper one, not some two bit scrap of land with no economic vaibility) and they continued to be attacked anyway? Well then no-one would have any arguments against Israeli action would they? But at least we would have given it a chance to work. Same with my views on the war on terror. At least give it a chance, then we'll know our actions are justified...until then, I just don't think our actions are justified and only serve to increase the threat to our countries...

(PS, Beeston is NOT middle class, and I live in the other area of Leeds where the terrorists made their bombs, and altho I wish it was, that ain't middle class either!!!)

Re: Re: A new digusting act

quote:

Originally posted by LazFX Agree totally, you beat me to the posting so I deleted mine. But I am sure some on here will blame the UK, US, Bush and others rather than to blame these animals that do this in a name of some God? All that will become of this is more loss of liberties on both sides of the pond. Lets see how this will play out..

You nailed it my friend.

Here are the only things that can be blamed on the US government in particular:

-Dismantling core liberties and freedoms in the name of fighting terror.

-Using the threat of terror to score cheap political points by inciting fear into the rabble

-The sheer hypocrisy of decrying how ass backwards these radical Islamists are and then doing things like delaying Plan B approval for OTC sales when over 40 countries sell it over the counter, and merging fundamentalist christianity with the state among other things.

Fundamentalism is fundamentalism after all, and is at the core of the problem we face today.


Other than these issues, which I do of course take great issue with, I don't see how you can blame Western governments for what these people are trying to do. In fact I'd have to give the British government and Canadian government credit for stopping two large terrorist plots.

Obviously the Iraqi invasion has made the situation worse by starting a civil war and leading to greater instability in that region, but these terrorists would have been trying to blow up civilians on airliners, in buildings, in trains and subways regardless of whether Iraq was invaded or not. They've been at it since at least the early 80s when radical fundamentalist Islam began to sweep the Muslim world.

They have shown a craven attitude towards human life, and have even struck in non-Western countries such as India very recently.

So personally I consider the mind prison of inflexible dogma to be at the root of this crisis, and that always has been the root cause.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Open your eyes just a little bit! Iran is only the current enemy! Who gave a shit about Iran 3 years ago?! I'm not even aware, outside of Lebanon (and encrouching into Iraq), of Iran even exporting any of their beliefs (especially in the West?) Stop being swayed by what ever country America tells us we should be hating at the moment and ask yourself why America is not telling us to hate Pakistan or Saudi Arabia (which are the TRUE exporters of radical Islamist ideology). Reason? Pakistan and Saudi Arabia are our "friends" (ie they have something America wants)

You are kidding about Iran and no one giving a shit about them until 3 years ago, right??

Did you miss that part of history class when they dicussed Khomeini taking over for the Shah that ushered in this wave of Muslim-based rule? We've been having problems with them for over 25 years, not just the last 3. They took 60-some hostages from the US embassy in 1979. Hell, as a result, we started funding Iraq in their war against Iran in the 80s (though the whole Iran-Contra scandal threw that a little askew, talk about a major blight on American foreign policy)

The main escalation with the tension with Iran as of late came when Ahmadinejad came to power and started talking about getting nukes and wiping Israel off the face of the planet, but they've been far from even a neutral for over 25 years.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Does anybody want to answer my question as to why the UK has not been targetted before Iraq by the Islamists?

I cannot answer this, and I don't think anyone but terrorist organizations themselves could (although you obviously think you know the answer) - my best guess would be lack of resources combined with even more attractive targets connected to the US and Israel. However, I can point to several reasons why Arabs *should* be upset with you, even if you had stayed out of the Iraq war (which, coincidentally, I agree with you, was a mistake - and a bad one at that). Hint: Who decided how to split up the Middle East into the countries that are there today, and who gave Israel to the Jews?

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley There is SHIT loads we can do to win their 'hearts and minds' but we have done FUCK ALL, all we have done so far is blow a hole through their minds with missiles and made sure their heart is now permanently located about 3 foot to their left.

This is a damned lie, and you cannot even claim ignorance:

http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...goto=nextoldest

My claim "nobody has done more for Muslims than the West" was never refuted.

quote:

Originally posted by George Smiley Your example is irrelevant because it was not committed by Islamists. You might as well have used an IRA bombing as an example of Islamic terrorism against the UK before the Iraq War and it would have been just as irrelevant... If they are becoming more segregated it's as much to do with brainwashing as it is to do with attitudes like yours towards them from the wider British community. Still, you seem to be paying lip service to the fact that the Iraq War provoked these terrorists into attacking us and you have still to offer me an explanation as to why the UK (a Western society) has not been attacked before the Iraq War, when modern Political Islam has been active in the world for nearly a century...

Irrelevant Libya is a Muslim country who supported Islamic militants worldwide. Ok more examples 1997 Luxor Egypt 58 people shot dead at a busy tourist site by Islamic terrorist majority of them were western tourists 6 of them British. 2002 Bali bomb 26 British dead a further 176 on that figure majority of them Westerners.

My attitude might seem ignorant towards the Muslim community, I don't understand why they group togther and do not mix with other people. Why the rioting in Bradford, why the rioting in Birmingham? There is going to be severe problems if stuff like this keep happening because the BNP will use it as a propaganda tool.

The Iraq war did piss of a number of young British Muslims, another can be linked to the amount of high unemployment in areas where there is a big Muslim population, but there will always be an excuse and a reason.

Laxed immigration laws, well we read about Hamza and co for about two years in various newspapers about him spouting hate at the West, it took the government ages to actually do something about them, they should of put him on the first plane back to Egypt.

I do agree with your view on Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. Pakistan do not have control over regions of their country, It wouldn't suprise me if people in their security services actually work for the Islamic extermists.

Saudi Arabia there is Western intrests over there *Cough* Oil! *Cough*. Quite a lot of Western workers in the country have become targets, yet the Saudi Security Services rescue attempts have being blunderous to say the least. It wouldn't suprise me if a load of the people pulling the strings for these groups are based there. Plus a country which chops of peoples hands for stealing and lashes people with whips isn't a civilised one IMO.

quote:

These are the names of 19 suspects reportedly being held by the police after the foiled plot and whose assets the Treasury has sought to have frozen. Umir Hussain, 24, London E14 Muhammed Usman Saddique, 24, London E17 Waheed Zaman, 22, London E17 Assan Abdullah Khan, 22, London E17 Waseem Kayani, 28, High Wycombe Waheed Arafat Khan, 24, London E17 Cossor Ali, 24, London E17 Tayib Rauf, 21, Birmingham Ibrahim Savant, 26, London E17 Osman Adam Khatib, 20, London E17 Shamin Mohammed Uddin, 36, Stoke Newington Amin Asmin Tariq, 23, London E17 Shazad Khuram Ali, 27, High Wycombe Tanvir Hussain, 24, London E10 Umar Islam, 28, (born Brian Young) High Wycombe Assad Sarwar, 25, High Wycombe Abdullah Ali, 26, London E17 Abdul Muneem Patel, 17, London E5 Nabeel Hussain, 21, Waltham Forest

quote:

Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan Irrelevant Libya is a Muslim country who supported Islamic militants worldwide.

No Libya was a socialist pan-Arab nationalist state. The group that carried out the Lockerbie bombing were a socialist group. Nothing to do with Islam whatsoever.

quote:

Ok more examples 1997 Luxor Egypt 58 people shot dead at a busy tourist site by Islamic terrorist majority of them were western tourists 6 of them British. 2002 Bali bomb 26 British dead a further 176 on that figure majority of them Westerners.

None of them were against Britain. Try again...

quote:

My attitude might seem ignorant towards the Muslim community, I don't understand why they group togther and do not mix with other people. Why the rioting in Bradford, why the rioting in Birmingham? There is going to be severe problems if stuff like this keep happening because the BNP will use it as a propaganda tool.

They do mix! I live in an area full of Muslims and white people. Obviously your gonna get some that don't wanna blend in, but I'm not aure how you work out this is the norm? Maybe you should stop listening to what that idiot Griffin tells you?

quote:

The Iraq war did piss of a number of young British Muslims, another can be linked to the amount of high unemployment in areas where there is a big Muslim population, but there will always be an excuse and a reason.

Yet there was no Islamist threat before Iraq, so tell me how you can prove your point?

quote:

Laxed immigration laws, well we read about Hamza and co for about two years in various newspapers about him spouting hate at the West, it took the government ages to actually do something about them, they should of put him on the first plane back to Egypt.

There's a fine line between freedom of speech and promoting violence. For example, many socialists/anarchists believe in the overthrowing of the state by force - would you have them shipped off to Egypt? As for Hamza, there was direct evidence (imo) that he had had a hand (well it would only be one hand!!) in the deaths of people abroad. That makes him a criminal, not his beliefs.

quote:

Originally posted by trancaholic I cannot answer this, and I don't think anyone but terrorist organizations themselves could (although you obviously think you know the answer) - my best guess would be lack of resources combined with even more attractive targets connected to the US and Israel. However, I can point to several reasons why Arabs *should* be upset with you, even if you had stayed out of the Iraq war (which, coincidentally, I agree with you, was a mistake - and a bad one at that). Hint: Who decided how to split up the Middle East into the countries that are there today, and who gave Israel to the Jews?

Yes well your best guess is an attempt to dodge the blindingly obvious

quote:

This is a damned lie, and you cannot even claim ignorance: http://www.tranceaddict.com/forums/...goto=nextoldest My claim "nobody has done more for Muslims than the West" was never refuted.

Oh well if a bunch of TAs never refuted your point it must be true!

Kadafi didn't exactly do much to stop the growing number of terorists coming out of Libya during the 80s. Hell, Libya was notoriously known in the 80s for supporting terror even before Lockerbie. In one of the best movies ever made, Back To The Future (came out in 1985), Doctor Emmet Brown gets shot by a bunch of Libyans. They didn't just randomly pick that country

quote:

Originally posted by CHRles Kadafi didn't exactly do much to stop the growing number of terorists coming out of Libya during the 80s. Hell, Libya was notoriously known in the 80s for supporting terror even before Lockerbie. In one of the best movies ever made, Back To The Future (came out in 1985), Doctor Emmet Brown gets shot by a bunch of Libyans. They didn't just randomly pick that country

They weren't Islamic terrorists tho! That's the whole point! JESUS!

International terrorism during the 80s was part of the Cold War (and against Israel). The PLO factions were secular socialists and performed many operations with the European Red terrorist groups. Islam had nothing to do with their operations.

(Hell, the PLO groups used to go around vadalising Mosques and assaulting Muslims praying in them!!!)

Okay, well I'll admit that I could be wrong about how to define the terror of the 1980s.

You mentioned earlier though that the countries the West should really be worried about are Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, not Iraq.
First, if the West would have dealt better with the aforementioned countries wouldn't there be just as much of a threat in the UK and elsewhere from radical Islamists? Wouldn't their excuse be the same just in the name of different countries?

Second, Sadam was never a great leader that all Moslims respected. Kuwaitis hate him, Iranians hate him, and many of the Iraquis hate him too. He was far from being a champion for the "humantarian cause". Therefore, radical Islamists could have been just as persistent to blow up planes over the UK regardless of the UK's involvement in the war in Iraq, wouldn't they?

quote:

Originally posted by CHRles You mentioned earlier though that the countries the West should really be worried about are Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. First, if the West would have dealt better with the aforementioned countries wouldn't there be just as much of a threat in the UK and elsewhere from radical Islamists? Wouldn't their excuse be the same just in the name of different countries?

It depends how you go about it. Firstly it does not have to be military action and if it does, it does not have to be the West that does it.

quote:

Second, Sadam was never a great leader that all Moslims respected. Kuwaitis hate him, Iranians hate him, and many of the Iraquis hate him too. He was far from being a champion for the "humantarian cause". Therefore, radical Islamists could have been just as persistent to blow up planes over the UK regardless of the UK's involvement in the war in Iraq, wouldn't they?

Therefore?! I have no idea what your point is?

My point is that Iraq or no Iraq there's at least a decent chance you'd still have these terrorists plotting against the UK. After all, 9/11 happened (obviously) before the situation in Iraq. While it happened it New York it could have also happened in Chicago, London, Paris, Berlin, etc.

And you're right - Pakistan and Saudi Arabia don't have to be dealt with militarily. I don't understand though who you're suggesting would use military force against those countries if not the West.
After all, the Saudi rulers have very close ties with America's political leaders (Republicans and Democrats). So any country that were to attack the Saudis might also be waging war with America.

Pakistan has nuclear weapons, doesn't it? So who would go after it? India? Russia? Wouldn't they be just as afraid as the West to go there?

quote:

Originally posted by CHRles My point is that Iraq or no Iraq there's at least a decent chance you'd still have these terrorists plotting against the UK. After all, 9/11 happened (obviously) before the situation in Iraq. While it happened it New York it could have also happened in Chicago, London, Paris, Berlin, etc.

Sure it could have happened in Chicargo, but not London, Paris or Berlin (or even this Etc you talk of). You really have been affected by American TWAT (the war on terror) propaganda haven't you? America has a plan for the world, and if Americans thought that by carrying out that plan they got the 9/11 attacks, they might put pressure on their government to stop. And their government doesn't want that...

quote:

And you're right - Pakistan and Saudi Arabia don't have to be dealt with militarily. I don't understand though who you're suggesting would use military force against those countries if not the West.

Not against those countries! Against the Islamist elements in those countries (so those governments themselves should do it if anyone, take the heat off outside meddlers)

quote:

After all, the Saudi rulers have very close ties with America's political leaders (Republicans and Democrats). So any country that were to attack the Saudis might also be waging war with America.

Yes they would (hence the 1990 Gulf War). But that relationship with America is one of the causes of contention amongst Islamists (especially bin Laden)

quote:

Pakistan has nuclear weapons, doesn't it? So who would go after it? India? Russia? Wouldn't they be just as afraid as the West to go there?

Pakistan would "go after it"!!! It's just that their intelligence service used to run the Islamists in Afghanistan and therefore have stong links. Maybe we should be putting pressure on Pakistan to sort stuff like that out so they could really go after them?

Hey, I'm all for your ideas. If we can put enough pressure on Pakistan and Saudi Arabia to take care of the problems themselves great. But what if they can't and the problem gets bigger?

quote:

Originally posted by Dj O'Callaghan My attitude might seem ignorant towards the Muslim community, I don't understand why they group togther and do not mix with other people. Why the rioting in Bradford, why the rioting in Birmingham? There is going to be severe problems if stuff like this keep happening because the BNP will use it as a propaganda tool. .

Wasnt one of the main reasons for the Bradford riots due to increase popularity of the BNP?


You'd think with the British experience up North they would know what to do and not to do when trying to deal with terrorists who are being made to feel like dirt.

Time for the UK and the rest of Europe to stop treating these Muslims with gentle hands. Im sick of that shit they dont obey the rules, they protest on anything that goes against allah. They scream racism and un-fairness. Im tired of this

great job for stopping these pigs

thank God for racial profiling. Without it, these guys would've sneaked on by just like Michael Jackson



>JM<

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.